Reply to Discretionary spending in the House Budget resolution -- what am I missing?

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "Discretionary spending in the House Budget resolution -- what am I missing?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Someone had to bring the suit first. There have been SC decisions already halting what DOGE is doing in some cases, are those being followed? [/quote]

Roberts froze the order in the USAID funding suit which required the government to pay for work that has ALREADY been performed.

OP, this is already happening. They don’t care what’s in the budget for XYZ agency. They’re going to cut half the staff and the statutory mission anyway.

Did you see what they said about CFPB? They intended to cut it to “five men in a room with a phone.” Do you think any agency can perform its function with five people? That’s what they think of agencies. [/quote]

Again, CFPB is not subject to Congressional approps. USAID is a contractual issue. They would only have impounded funds if and when there are funds left over at the end of the fiscal year. Even the NIH issue is dubious -- councils have started meeting and funds are going out if VERY slowly. Most of the Medicaid/Head start and other funds frozen in Jan are back on.[/quote]

I know this about CFPB because I worked there. My point is this: They are already refusing to pay out on contracts for work performed. Roberts has already stepped in, temporarily, to prevent the government from being ordered to pay out on these contracts. They are also ignoring a TRO related to EPA funding. The courts cannot keep up.

And finally, their intention is to dismantle many agencies so that they exist in name only, with a fraction of the staff. USAID and CFPB are test cases. Whatever Congress appropriates will not matter. CFPB is especially in danger given that the director requests funding and the current acting asked for $0. They’re also trying to bring it under appropriations. But it doesn’t matter if an agency is appropriated; they will still gut the staff, probably by 50% at most.

I wish I shared your optimism about scotus but as already seen, they can do massive damage by kind of pretending but actually flat out ignoring court orders. [/quote]

I think Roberts is trying to delay as long as possible issuing a ruling that orders the Trump administration to do something (ie, spend appropriated funds) which Trump will then ignore.

Because then what? [/quote]

No, Roberts is not slow walking this.  He picked up both the USAID payment issue and the OSC firing issue very quickly, he could have legitimately waited on both of these for weeks or longer but instead moved quickly to take them up.

I anticipate he'll try to find some way to thread the needle and find some middle route - but on the other hand, Republican actions are not going well with the public right now.  All of Congress is getting buried by angry constituents, the budget deal looks disastrous, the Ukraine meeting was a debacle, and the economy is crashing.  Etc.  Trump is a figurehead for Project 2025 but he is not the architect and he can abandon it at any time, when he starts to get in real trouble.  From a purely political calculus, the administration is looking less and less strong and untouchable.  [/quote]

On the one hand I agree with this analysis in a sane world and a sane administration.

On the other, they don't seem to be acting like 2026 and future elections are a factor.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics