Ahmed Kamel – Egypt Daily News
In a controversial move that could upend long-standing norms in Washington, former U.S. President Donald Trump has informed House Speaker Mike Johnson that he will freeze $4.9 billion in foreign aid funds that were already approved by Congress. The decision, effectively a unilateral budget cut, bypasses the legislative branch and raises new questions about the scope of presidential authority in shaping national spending priorities.
The announcement was delivered through a formal letter sent by Trump to Speaker Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, invoking a rarely used budgetary mechanism known as a “rescission.” This procedure allows the president to request that Congress withhold previously approved funding late in the fiscal year, which in the U.S. ends on September 30.
Under the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, once a rescission is proposed, the affected funds are frozen for up to 45 days while Congress decides whether or not to act. If no action is taken, the funds remain unspent.
This marks the first time in nearly five decades that a U.S. president has employed this tactic at such scale, highlighting a broader trend within Trump’s administration of asserting stronger executive control over federal governance.
The rescinded funds were designated for the U.S. State Department and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)two of the primary agencies responsible for implementing American foreign aid. The move aligns with Trump’s longstanding skepticism toward international assistance, a policy stance he emphasized throughout his presidency as part of his “America First” doctrine.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) at the White House published Trump’s letter on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), making the decision public. While technically legal under the existing budget framework, the maneuver has sparked concern among lawmakers who view it as a backdoor method to slash funding without legislative oversight.
If allowed to proceed without pushback, the move would significantly disrupt the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches. It also risks derailing ongoing negotiations in both the House and Senate aimed at passing a comprehensive spending package for the upcoming fiscal year, which begins in October.
Beyond its immediate budgetary implications, Trump’s decision reflects a broader pattern of executive overreach observed during his administration. In multiple instances, Trump sought to centralize authority within the White House, often at the expense of long-standing federal institutions. From imposing unprecedented tariffs without congressional approval to sidelining federal employees and challenging the authority of agencies like the Federal Reserve and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Trump’s governing style has repeatedly tested the boundaries of presidential power.
Critics argue that such actions erode democratic checks and balances, placing excessive control in the hands of the executive branch. Supporters, however, view them as necessary steps to streamline governance and counter what they see as an entrenched bureaucratic establishment resistant to reform.
With the upcoming fiscal year looming and the political climate already highly polarized, Trump’s latest move adds another layer of complexity to the already contentious budget negotiations on Capitol Hill. Whether Congress will choose to challenge the rescission or allow the funds to lapse remains to be seen, but the implications of this decision are likely to resonate well beyond the current budget cycle.
