[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},"mediaId",6183306,"mediaKeyId","5098190-5e5ca880df1b5c4a17b018a6f69e8281","parentId",5098190,"title","Senate Appropriations hearing pits OMB rescissions plan against concerns about congressional authority and local impacts","audioSeconds",10230,"startMs",986000,"endMs",11216000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5098190-5e5ca880df1b5c4a17b018a6f69e8281&start=986&end=11216","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5098190-5e5ca880df1b5c4a17b018a6f69e8281/thumbnail_986000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6183306/Senate-Appropriations-hearing-pits-OMB-rescissions-plan-against-concerns-about-congressional-authority-and-local-impacts","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6183306-26d289d22180a12f753223a79f832378/orig.mp4?Expires=1770815540&Signature=bwuKFqTa1P6nnMRhiDWUNLbQXELUqIUc3x-qkWdKdxWkRwWHkHwrFi4rxnN7RgkEeK8fshFH8Q0Hvv~RUI7TQvLJlixMWh9n4k2Lm7SSz6PJaLauNTPviuUbr252qqF5nkUafPee4GvwmKaJqlyEWFKaHi-cM3~yiR2bdZrK-7c3nvddE8E0LfMrd3TzMPknYGf-7V9HTH5Scwo7LriVoGI4eL9s7eshnb2aYC2mu3mCnqv-tsBHAkGKJ1UcYu~qg9RbWWZz6RzWwKUugZaTKqDavFCjji4H8YZV~Ay5QPcctXMsx50znzu4-YRWYVN~vCHONaeZMf4QYYc7W2Z0kA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations","date","2025-06-25T00:00:00Z","article","The Senate Appropriations Committee held a hearing on a special message transmitted June 3 asking Congress to rescind $9.4 billion in previously appropriated funds under the Impoundment Control Act, a process that requires congressional action to cancel the money.

The package, presented by Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, would rescind about $1.1 billion in advanced appropriations for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and about $8.3 billion in foreign assistance accounts, including specified amounts from global health and economic assistance accounts. The hearing featured sharp exchanges over both the substance of the proposed cuts and the process the administration has used to implement them.

Why it matters: senators on both sides said the request raises questions about the balance of spending authority. Supporters called the rescissions a necessary review of waste and a step toward reducing federal spending; opponents said the package is insufficiently specific, risks undoing bipartisan appropriations bargains and could jeopardize programs that deliver emergency services at the local level.

Committee leaders framed the stakes in contrasting terms. Chair Susan Collins opened the hearing by describing the package and asking OMB to clarify program-level impacts. Vice Chair Patty Murray urged the committee to defend Congress’s “power of the purse,” calling the package a partisan effort that could undermine bipartisan appropriations work. Senator Eric Schmitt, sponsor of the Senate rescissions legislation, and Senator Brian Schatz, who argued against the package, also testified.

Director Vought said the administration’s rescissions were targeted toward “waste, fraud and abuse” and pointed to specific examples he said illustrated misuse of funds. He told the committee that the rescissions are meant to align spending with the administration’s priorities and that the package preserves funding the administration considers life-saving, such as most PEPFAR treatment funding.

Opponents pressed for more detail. Multiple senators said the proposal lists large account-level reductions but does not specify which line items or grant recipients would be cut, leaving chairmen and appropriators unsure which district or program priorities would be affected. Senators repeatedly asked whether particular programs — from global health programs to local public broadcasting stations and emergency-alert services — would be reduced.

The hearing also included extensive legal and process debate. Senators asked whether the administration would pursue additional rescission requests, whether the executive branch might use end‑of‑year tactics such as “pocket rescissions” or deferrals, and whether OMB had complied with statutory requirements such as publishing apportionment information. Director Vought said some tools remain “on the table” and that no further decisions had been made.

The record remained open for questions for one week. No formal congressional vote or committee decision occurred at the hearing; senators said they will consider the package in the committee’s regular oversight and appropriations process.

Provenance:
First related transcript segment: \"The hearing of the Senate Appropriations Committee will come to order. We convene today to review the special message transmitted on June 3 by the president under the Impoundment Control Act... Testifying on this measure will be the director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russ Vogt.\" (Transcript block starting at 986.765).

Last related transcript segment: \"The hearing record will remain open for 1 week for senators who wish to submit additional questions or other statements for the record... This hearing is now adjourned.\" (Transcript block starting at 11179.439).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Full Committee Hearing: A Review of the President’s Special Message of June 3, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Senate Appropriations Committee held a hearing on a special message transmitted June 3 asking Congress to rescind $9.4 billion in previously appropriated funds under the Impoundment Control Act, a process that requires congressional action to cancel the money.","taxTitle","Appropriations: Senate Committee, Standing Committees - House & Senate, Congressional Hearings Compilation, Legislative, Federal","taxId",1986,"location","","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6183293,"Committee presses OMB on pocket rescissions, deferrals and statutory limits under ICA",83,4243000,4326000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5098190-5e5ca880df1b5c4a17b018a6f69e8281&start=4243&end=4326","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5098190-5e5ca880df1b5c4a17b018a6f69e8281/thumbnail_4243000.jpg","/articles/6183293/Committee-presses-OMB-on-pocket-rescissions-deferrals-and-statutory-limits-under-ICA","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6183293-adbc2c5ddeaeb450bd95da188ef15a8c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770815540&Signature=PAz8H6rLl6EtLJtFQAokhWXqco6tXalVclUh~ZLJ1Pl5u5NLbYmd1VBwtUUrSnh5bKy6feAkGbWIXSAkzeum13-8z9nVFLCRmbNZM-qLbmIQ~edA78eN6hL2DudsaJxP6EISgStmBhvwjFEg3rPBnPJILdbiyHRpuAH05RbvJ9hO95mXHV46p0f9rHWH1qCJGRLltmZ7fU912XH4lb7w9LlZ~ann7NayBulq5qKy8eSvkHm-OTIrgVhfrmBThIBz2W6f0JkaBap610EHh21EiT6yFgbwOzEVM16TtMXxCxIz3WsglQHbuNaSsQnlyDyUQ-2SQ3PF94PK7w1sRpwoSQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A central thread of the Appropriations Committee hearing was whether the administration's rescissions package and related practices would erode Congress’s constitutional appropriations authority.

Vice Chair Patty Murray and others repeatedly warned that the special message could set a precedent for partisan rescissions that undo bipartisan appropriations granted by large, multipartisan packages. Murray said the committee should \"reject this package outright\" if it would allow rescissions to be used to rip up bipartisan agreements.

Several senators asked Director Russell Vought to commit that the administration would not pursue so‑called \"pocket rescissions\" — attempts to rescind funds near the end of the fiscal year and then impound them if Congress fails to act. Vought declined to make a categorical commitment. \"We certainly are aware of the deferral provisions in the Impoundment Control Act…there are specific statutory requirements there…they are certainly on the table, but again, we have made no decisions,\" he said.

Other witnesses raised compliance questions. Senator Chris Van Hollen noted GAO guidance and Supreme Court precedent (Clinton v. City of New York) and asked why OMB had terminated public apportionment reporting that some senators said is required by statute. Vought's office told the committee that OMB's general counsel and the Justice Department had advised that publishing certain predecisional materials raised constitutional concerns.

Senators also cited agency actions that they described as impoundments or freezes — for example, a January review that led to program pauses — and alleged those actions disrupted delivery of previously authorized programs. Several senators pressing those questions framed them as both legal and practical: they said agencies must follow appropriations law and that chronic use of end‑of‑year tools would make Congress's appropriations work much harder.

Why it matters: The debate centers on separation of powers and practical legislative effects. A congressional majority might choose to accept rescissions; senators said the larger concern is whether the executive branch will use timing, deferrals, or administrative reviews to achieve policy outcomes without explicit congressional authorization.

Provenance:
First related transcript excerpt: references to pocket rescissions and legal concerns (transcript block starting at 4183.58).

Last related transcript excerpt: Director Vought discussing deferrals and that no decisions had been made (transcript block starting at 4260.315).","Senators questioned whether the administration's rescissions plan and other OMB actions risked circumventing Congress’s appropriations authority, focusing on potential pocket rescissions, deferrals and the administration’s withholding of apportionment data.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6183298,"Lawmakers warn proposed CPB rescission could threaten rural and tribal public‑media emergency services",6709,1365000,8074000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5098190-5e5ca880df1b5c4a17b018a6f69e8281&start=1365&end=8074","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5098190-5e5ca880df1b5c4a17b018a6f69e8281/thumbnail_1365000.jpg","/articles/6183298/Lawmakers-warn-proposed-CPB-rescission-could-threaten-rural-and-tribal-publicmedia-emergency-services","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6183298-ca6dd7d6515e799b33110c77ff558315/orig.mp4?Expires=1770815540&Signature=AwgWZtzCTVXtAyf2RCOqft4j3obmwNKkWcY4U8mYfLkv6FPQT2PH5rBImxd6t4Va-UccW-l~~iVhHBYEJNKr4yoz2v2PCkIhH-r041VRL41ngQeolSizUxoMNzfrroyKkr60ZuaDealjDRhdyXjdiip6I2TxTuJgPm8YgRbAXXijDMgGlvKQuBkEvxRyoIgFuDXBgxJm8UYGXvr4CJGjSKVqvjPK9AvS9uoep6~Mzp3cLwkEmzxJ7J20y~Xl-T9JNsM2bsGmlo1PucPjVO9yDgusT~cvSzNrtEMBAyTejhxCndfU9dC9b~L~x1ZSGFzLIHfACvTXMA1hUR6fgoXYjg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senators from both parties raised alarm about the administration's proposed $1.1 billion rescission of advanced appropriations to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, arguing that many rural, tribal and noncommercial stations rely on that federal support to provide emergency alerts and day‑to‑day local programming.

Director Russell Vought told the committee the rescission would affect advanced appropriations for fiscal years 2026 and 2027, not fiscal year 2025 funds already available, and that recipients would have time to adjust. \"For the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, this would reduce funding for FY '26 and FY '27. Entities who receive funding under the Corporation for Public Broadcasting have time to readjust their budgets and plan accordingly,\" Vought said.

Senators including Patty Murray, Lisa Murkowski and Tammy Baldwin said the federal support reaches stations in rural Alaska, tribal communities and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan where public radio and television often are the primary source of local emergency information, weather reporting and community notices. \"There are 120 rural public media stations that receive at least 25% of their revenue from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting,\" Senator Baldwin said, adding that some local stations could not survive the change.

Senator Lisa Murkowski described Alaskan stations that cover thousands of square miles and provide emergency alerts when other communications fail, and she asked OMB to work with the Appropriations Committee to avoid service gaps for those communities. Senator Mitt Rounds and others echoed the concern, asking OMB to consider targeted measures for stations that have no viable alternative revenue sources.

Vought said the administration sought to target what it described as politicized national content rather than the emergency‑service functions of local stations and that fiscal year 2025 funding was not included in the rescission. He said the administration would work with members on specific cases but that the rescission responds to long‑standing concerns about partisan content funded by federal dollars.

Why it matters: Many senators framed the issue as a local public‑safety matter as well as a budget question. Committee members said they expect to press OMB for station‑by‑station analyses before deciding how to treat the CPB portion of any rescission.

Provenance:
First related transcript excerpt: discussion of CPB advanced appropriations and local impacts (transcript block starting at 1365.5399).

Last related transcript excerpt: Vought confirmation that FY25 funds are maintained and an offer to work with members (transcript block starting at 8011.75).","The administration seeks to rescind $1.1 billion in advanced appropriations to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for FY 2026–27. Senators said local and tribal stations that rely on CPB funding provide emergency alerts and community services and may not have time to adjust.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6183303,"Committee questions OMB plan to rescind parts of foreign assistance, including PEPFAR and family‑planning funds",6357,1318000,7675000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5098190-5e5ca880df1b5c4a17b018a6f69e8281&start=1318&end=7675","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5098190-5e5ca880df1b5c4a17b018a6f69e8281/thumbnail_1318000.jpg","/articles/6183303/Committee-questions-OMB-plan-to-rescind-parts-of-foreign-assistance-including-PEPFAR-and-familyplanning-funds","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6183303-e013223ebbbc4a3d72189a82341b3efc/orig.mp4?Expires=1770815540&Signature=XRIjaq587VUhxZMDw1r9NghrOxahNx8VhbAZdC~Lr3QsPj3Pg3zG6Qcmg-Ili2eOonwzHxfLww~Iqe9XC9pVLEpHT9TBG1TjgPpgRcBogIOP29Ye0XDLy1DcrPlcbsvK7EjVU3Nn6j-Kinlke0pUf2M6Ysuhi1RkAR1ey0RPAOdg9acUogpe6HNVTwG47kg0TszGKjYAJBQ87kBYYNMLi8H5KqJ51T9zJkr9H-tNr3DnqU27ZmUfQ2dMSs1JQrhiKE0CGSeoyIMvPe1STCf0lNgcV1G0MkbkeMVOO~r2C1fPJmYq-XVPXhsQEbCbV7QASb8VmxqDjzFnyviIydyqbg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senators pressed the Office of Management and Budget on which foreign assistance accounts and programs would be cut if Congress approves a presidential rescission request transmitted June 3 citing the Impoundment Control Act.

The administration’s package includes roughly $8.3 billion in proposed rescissions to State Department, USAID, and other foreign‑assistance accounts. Director Russell Vought told the committee the package would include $500 million in family‑planning cuts and a $400 million rescission from PEPFAR, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Vought said the submission was designed to target what the administration characterizes as wasteful or ideologically driven spending while preserving life‑saving treatment.

Senators from both parties said the account‑level numbers are not sufficiently specific. Senator Brian Schatz said programs cited by proponents as “outrageous” had already been canceled and that the package, as written, risks cutting longstanding bipartisan priorities including assistance for humanitarian crises and economic development. “You would think…if you're asking the Congress to use this extraordinary authority…you would have a line‑by‑line. Here's what we're cutting. Here's what we're keeping,” Schatz said.

Chair Susan Collins asked whether the proposed $500 million reduction to global health programs would affect specific activities such as vaccines funded through Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; Collins said the June 3 message did not specify which subprograms would bear reductions. Collins also pressed whether the PEPFAR cut would reduce maternal and child health programs, nutrition supplements and other interventions used at clinics and refugee operations.

Vought replied that the administration sought to protect direct, life‑saving treatment and essential supplies, and that the rescission was aimed at prevention and programmatic items the administration described as “liberal NGOs doing activities that the American people wouldn't support.” He said $10 billion would remain for PEPFAR even if the rescission passed and that unobligated balances in affected accounts are substantial.

Other senators disputed the administration's characterization. Senator Chris Murphy and others cited field reports and nongovernmental trackers they said show programs and commodities — including therapeutic ready‑to‑use foods used to treat severe malnutrition — were already being delayed or held up, with potential life‑and‑death consequences in some locations. Murphy said some field shipments were in warehouses and at risk of expiring while awaiting federal funds.

Why it matters: PEPFAR and other global‑health programs have bipartisan backing and are credited with large public‑health gains overseas. Senators said vague account‑level rescissions make it impossible to determine whether treatment, prevention or other critical services would be affected.

Provenance:
First related transcript excerpt: discussion of PEPFAR history and proposed $400,000,000 rescission (transcript block starting at 1318.635).

Last related transcript excerpt: Director Vought confirming $500,000,000 proposed for family planning and $400,000,000 for PEPFAR (transcript block starting at 6451.535).","Lawmakers at the Appropriations hearing pressed OMB Director Russell Vought for details after the administration proposed $8.3 billion in foreign-assistance rescissions, including $500 million from global health programs and $400 million from PEPFAR.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate Appropriations hearing pits OMB rescissions plan against concerns about congressional authority and local impacts

Committee presses OMB on pocket rescissions, deferrals and statutory limits under ICA

Lawmakers warn proposed CPB rescission could threaten rural and tribal public‑media emergency services

Committee questions OMB plan to rescind parts of foreign assistance, including PEPFAR and family‑planning funds