The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 9, 2024. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday said the Trump administration can temporarily hold on to $4 billion in foreign aid funding approved by Congress, overturning a lower court’s order and continuing a struggle over who controls the nation’s purse strings. 

The one-page ruling from the emergency docket, signed by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., came just one day after the administration appealed the lower court’s ruling. 

While the original lawsuit over withheld foreign aid began in February and stemmed from an executive order, the Trump administration sent Congress a rescissions request covering some of the spending in late August. 

The proposal is part of the formal process laid out in a 1974 law that allows the president to ask lawmakers to cancel previously approved spending. 

Congress typically has 45 days to approve, modify, or disagree with a rescissions request. During that time the president can legally freeze the funding and only has to spend it if lawmakers don’t approve the plan.  

This particular rescission request, however, was sent to lawmakers within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year, creating a dispute that complicated the nature of the original lawsuit. 

That maneuver, sometimes called a pocket rescission, is considered illegal by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office and several members of Congress, though White House budget director Russ Vought believes it’s within the bounds of the law. 

Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in the Trump administration’s appeal that the federal district court’s order to spend the funding “requires the Executive Branch to rush to obligate the same $4 billion that the President has just proposed rescinding between now and September 30, and thus puts the Executive Branch at war with itself.”

“Just as the President is pressing for rescission and explaining to Congress that obligating these funds would harm U.S. foreign policy interests, his subordinates are being forced to proceed to identify and even negotiate with potential recipients,” he added. 

The Supreme Court’s decision Tuesday doesn’t address whether the justices agree with the administration that it can refuse to spend the billions in foreign aid since it sent the rescissions request close to the end of the fiscal year. 

Roberts wrote “that the September 3, 2025 order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, case Nos. 1:25-cv-400 and 1:25-cv-402, is hereby partially stayed for funds that are subject to the President’s August 28, 2025 recission proposal currently pending before Congress pending further order of the undersigned or of the Court. It is further ordered that a response to the application be filed on or before Friday, September 12th, 2025, by 4 p.m. (EDT).”

The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 29, 2024. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Monday asked the Supreme Court to overturn a lower court’s ruling and allow it to withhold $4 billion in foreign aid that was previously approved by Congress.

The case is one of many lawsuits challenging the White House’s efforts to supersede Congress’ spending authority by canceling funding without lawmakers’ explicit approval.  

This particular case became more complicated in late August when the Trump administration sent Congress a rescission request, asking lawmakers to cancel billions in foreign aid, including some of the funding subject to this lawsuit. 

This “pocket rescission,” as it’s sometimes called, came within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year. Under the Trump administration’s interpretation of the law, they believe that allows them to cancel the funding even if Congress refuses to go along with the proposal. 

The move is considered illegal by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office and evoked ire from senior lawmakers, including Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine.

“Article I of the Constitution makes clear that Congress has the responsibility for the power of the purse,” Collins wrote in a statement. “Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law.”

Administration sees executive branch ‘at war with itself’

The appeal to the Supreme Court filed Monday urges the justices to let the legislative and executive branches figure out the spending dispute on their own and criticizes a federal district court for ordering the Trump administration to spend the money. 

“The injunction requires the Executive Branch to rush to obligate the same $4 billion that the President has just proposed rescinding between now and September 30, and thus puts the Executive Branch at war with itself,” wrote Solicitor General D. John Sauer. “Just as the President is pressing for rescission and explaining to Congress that obligating these funds would harm U.S. foreign policy interests, his subordinates are being forced to proceed to identify and even negotiate with potential recipients.”

The pocket rescissions request at the center of this case is separate from the one Trump sent Congress in early June that asked members to eliminate funding for numerous foreign aid accounts and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Lawmakers approved that proposal in July after preserving full funding for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR.

Congress has yet to act on the second rescissions request as its leaders look for ways to fund the government ahead of an Oct. 1 shutdown deadline. 

Attorneys for the organizations that brought the lawsuit — the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and Global Health Council — wrote in a brief to the Supreme Court submitted Monday that they opposed the Trump administration’s request to overturn the lower court’s preliminary injunction. 

“USAID and the State Department have been under a duty to obligate these funds since at least March 2024, when Congress enacted the appropriations; they chose not to act sooner,” they wrote. “The government faces no cognizable harm from having to take steps to comply with the law for the short period while this Court considers its stay application.”

White House budget director Russell Vought speaks with reporters inside the U.S. Capitol on July 15, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The White House budget office moved Friday to yank nearly $5 billion in foreign aid already approved by Congress in a controversial maneuver meant to bypass lawmakers.

The so-called pocket rescission, which a top congressional watchdog and the Republican chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee have called illegal, would pull funding that Congress has already approved for the State Department to fulfill overseas commitments.

The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office has deemed such actions to circumvent Congress unlawful. And Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins said Friday that “any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law.”

“Given that this package was sent to Congress very close to the end of the fiscal year when the funds are scheduled to expire, this is an apparent attempt to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval,” the Maine Republican said in a statement. 

According to a summary provided by Senate Appropriations ranking Democrat Patty Murray, the move would claw back $3.2 billion from the State Department’s Development Assistance account that funds food security programs, works to limit irregular migration to the U.S. and to strengthen the market for U.S. companies involved in climate issues to expand overseas.

It would also remove $913 million in U.S. treaty dues to the United Nations to support peacekeeping missions; $445 million in security assistance from the State Department’s Peacekeeping Operations, particularly in Africa; and $322 million from the Democracy Fund, according to Murray’s office.

The White House Office of Management and Budget did not respond to a message seeking the request. 

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement that President Donald Trump is “using his authority under the Impoundment Control Act to deploy a pocket rescission, cancelling $5 billion in foreign aid and international organization funding that violates the President’s America First priorities.”

“None of these programs are in America’s interest, which is why the President is taking decisive action to put America and Americans first,” Rubio said.

Frustration from Congress

When the White House makes a request to Congress to claw back funding already approved, the payments are withheld for 45 days while lawmakers make a decision to approve the rescission or not. Because there are fewer than 45 days before the end of the current fiscal year, funding is essentially paused indefinitely, regardless if Congress approves the move.

As lawmakers face an Oct. 1 deadline in order to avoid a government shutdown, the rescission has already drawn frustration on Capitol Hill.

Murray, of Washington state, blasted the rescission request. 

“Donald Trump wants to zero out more bipartisan investments in our national security and global leadership,” Murray said in a statement. “This time, however, he is attempting to do an end run around Congress altogether. No lawmaker should accept this absurd, illegal ploy to steal their constitutional power to determine how taxpayer dollars get spent.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer slammed the Trump administration for withdrawing funds approved on a bipartisan basis. 

“As the country stares down next month’s government funding deadline on September 30th, it is clear neither President Trump nor Congressional Republicans  have any plan to avoid a painful and entirely unnecessary shutdown,” the New York Democrat said in a statement. 

Pennsylvania Democrat Brendan Boyle, who is the top Democrat on the U.S. House Budget Committee, said in a statement the rescission wasn’t “worth the paper it’s printed on,” and criticized Trump and White House budget director Russell Vought by name.

“It is deeply alarming, plainly illegal, and a blatant abuse of power,” Boyle said. “Congress approved this funding on a bipartisan basis, and the Constitution is clear: it is Congress—not the President—that holds the power of the purse. With this illegal power grab, Donald Trump and Russell Vought are driving us toward a government shutdown.”

This is the Trump administration’s second rescissions request to Congress. The first, which Congress approved, yanked $9 billion in congressionally approved funding. That included about $1.1 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, such as National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service, for two fiscal years. It also clawed back $8 billion of foreign aid. 

President Donald Trump holds up an executive order after signing it during an indoor inauguration parade at the Capital One Arena on Jan. 20, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court on Wednesday overturned a lower court’s ruling that had required the Trump administration to spend foreign aid dollars approved by Congress.

But instead of addressing the central argument of the lawsuit — that a president cannot refuse to spend money approved by lawmakers, who hold the power of the purse — the Circuit Court in a potentially significant decision said the organizations that filed the case didn’t have the authority to do so.

Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson wrote in her 33-page opinion that only the comptroller general, who leads the Government Accountability Office, has the power to bring lawsuits when a president impounds, or refuses to spend, congressionally approved funds.  The GAO is an independent, non-partisan watchdog agency that works for Congress.

“Because the grantees lack a cause of action, we need not address on the merits whether the government violated the Constitution by infringing on the Congress’s spending power through alleged violations of the 2024 Appropriations Act, the ICA and the Anti-Deficiency Act,” Henderson wrote. The ICA is the Impoundment Control Act, which is the legal mechanism through which the president can delay or withhold funds.

Henderson was nominated to the Circuit Court in 1990 by President George H.W. Bush, a few years after President Ronald Reagan nominated her as a federal district judge in 1986.

Henderson wrote that she and Judge Gregory G. Katsas, who was nominated by President Donald Trump, concluded “the district court abused its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction” for several reasons.

Both Republican and Democratic state attorneys general filed amicus briefs in the case, with Republicans siding with the Trump administration. The case originated when Trump signed an order on Inauguration Day freezing certain foreign aid spending.

Henderson wrote that “within weeks, the State Department and USAID suspended or terminated thousands of grant awards.”

‘It is our responsibility to check the president’

Judge Florence Y. Pan, who was nominated by President Joe Biden, issued a 46-page dissenting opinion, arguing the ruling from her two colleagues was “procedurally and substantively flawed.”

“It is our responsibility to check the President when he violates the law and exceeds his constitutional authority,” Pan wrote. “We fail to do that here.”

Pan wrote she disagreed with the majority’s opinion that Trump withholding certain foreign aid funding was “a mere violation of the Impoundment Control Act that should be addressed by the Comptroller General.”

“In this case, the President’s violation of the Impoundment Control Act is a sideshow,” Pan wrote. “That statute provided a mechanism for the President to lawfully attempt to impound the funds, and his failure to follow its prescribed procedures is evidence that he was, in fact, refusing to obligate the funds in defiance of Congress.”

Public media funding targeted

The Trump administration has used the Impoundment Control Act one time this year, when it requested Congress cancel $9.4 billion in funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and various foreign aid programs.

The House voted mostly along party lines to approve the full request in mid-June.

Senate Republicans approved the bill in July after preserving full funding for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR.

House GOP lawmakers then cleared the bill for Trump’s signature just before a 45-day clock ran out.

Trump administration sees ‘big win’

Several members of the Trump administration, including Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought and Attorney General Pam Bondi, cheered the Circuit Court’s ruling in social media posts.

“In a 2-1 ruling, the DC Circuit lifted an injunction ordering President Trump to spend hard-earned taxpayer dollars on wasteful foreign aid projects,” Bondi wrote. “We will continue to successfully protect core Presidential authorities from judicial overreach.”

Vought wrote the ruling was a “Big win!”

An OMB spokesperson wrote in a statement the ruling represented a victory for the White House.

“Radical left dark-money groups have been using the court system to seize control of U.S. foreign policy,” the spokesperson wrote. “Today’s decision stops these private groups from maliciously interfering with the President’s ability to spend responsibly and administer foreign aid in a lawful manner and in alignment with his America First policies.”

Lauren Bateman, attorney at Public Citizen Litigation Group and lead counsel on the suit, wrote in a statement that the court’s ruling represented “a significant setback for the rule of law and risks further erosion of basic separation of powers principles.

“We will seek further review from the court, and our lawsuit will continue regardless as we seek permanent relief from the Administration’s unlawful termination of the vast majority of foreign assistance. In the meantime, countless people will suffer disease, starvation, and death from the Administration’s unconscionable decision to withhold life-saving aid from the world’s most vulnerable people.”

The U.S. Capitol on July 2, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House cleared legislation just after midnight Friday that will cancel $9 billion in previously approved spending for public broadcasting and foreign aid, marking only the second time in more than three decades Congress has approved a presidential rescissions request.

The 216-213 mostly party-line vote sends the bill to President Donald Trump for his signature and notches another legislative victory for the White House, following passage earlier in July of a giant tax and spending cut package. Republican Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Mike Turner of Ohio voted against approval along with Democratic lawmakers.

The Senate voted to pass the bill earlier this week after removing the section that would have eliminated hundreds of millions of dollars for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR.

South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds also secured a handshake deal with the White House budget director to transfer $9.4 million from an undisclosed account within the Interior Department to Native American radio stations in rural areas.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting will lose $1.1 billion in funding that Congress had previously approved for the fiscal year slated to begin Oct. 1 and for the year after that.

The corporation provides funding for National Public Radio, the Public Broadcasting Service and hundreds of local stations throughout the country.

Another $8 billion of foreign aid will be eliminated once Trump signs the legislation.

The White House budget office’s original rescissions request included more than a dozen accounts for reduced spending, including those addressing global health and democracy programs.

The proposal called on lawmakers to cancel $500 million the U.S. Agency for International Development used for “activities related to child and maternal health, HIV/ AIDS, and infectious diseases.”

“This proposal would not reduce treatment but would eliminate programs that are antithetical to American interests and worsen the lives of women and children, like ‘family planning’ and ‘reproductive health,’ LGBTQI+ activities, and ‘equity’ programs,” the request states. “Enacting the rescission would reinstate focus on appropriate health and life spending. This best serves the American taxpayer.”

The final bill includes that spending cut but says the cancellation cannot affect HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, nutrition, or maternal and child health programs. It also says that “does not apply to family planning and reproductive health programs.”

The White House asked to eliminate $83 million from the State Department’s democracy fund, writing that “aligns with the Administration’s efforts to eliminate wasteful USAID foreign assistance programs and focus remaining funds on priorities that advance American interests. This best serves the American taxpayer.”

Lawmakers included that request in the bill, along with nearly all the others, without any caveats or additional guardrails.

Congress last approved a stand-alone rescissions bill in 1992 following a series of requests from President George H.W. Bush, according to a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

The first Trump administration sent Congress a rescission request in 2018 that passed the House, but didn’t receive Senate approval.

‘Wasteful spending’ or ‘stealing from the American people’?

House debate largely fell along party lines, with Republicans citing disagreements with how the Biden administration spent congressionally approved funding as the reason to claw back money that would have otherwise been doled out by the Trump administration.

North Carolina Republican Rep. Virginia Foxx said the $9 billion, spread across accounts that have existed for decades, was a prime example of “wasteful spending (that) overtook Washington during the Biden-Harris administration.”

“The American people saw the fiscal ruin that was created by the previous administration,” Foxx said. “That’s why they overwhelmingly chose Republicans to lead the nation and restore fiscal sanity. That restoration is here.”

The federal government spends about $6.8 trillion per year, with $4.1 trillion going to mandatory programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Another $1.8 trillion is spent on discretionary accounts, including for the departments of Agriculture, Defense, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Justice, Transportation and State. Nearly $900 billion goes toward net interest payments on the country’s debt.

Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, said during floor debate the bill represented the Trump administration “stealing from the American people.”

“This bill will shut down rural television and radio stations, cutting off coverage of local news; eliminating emergency information, like severe weather alerts; jeopardizing access to PBS Kids children’s programs, like Sesame Street,” DeLauro said.

The foreign aid spending reduction, she said, “rips life-saving support away from hungry, displaced and sick people in developing countries and conflict zones.”

DeLauro raised concerns that U.S. withdrawal as a source of support for people and nations that are struggling would leave space for non-democratic countries to increase their influence.

“When we retreat from the world, diplomatically and through our assistance to vulnerable people, America will be alone — without allies, in a less stable world, without the support of the international community,” DeLauro said. “And do you know who will come out ahead? China, Russia, Iran.”

White House budget director Russ Vought speaks with reporters inside the U.S. Capitol building on Tuesday, July 15, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate on Tuesday night moved one step closer to canceling $9 billion in previously approved funding for several foreign aid programs and public broadcasting after GOP leaders addressed some objections.

Nearly all the chamber’s Republicans voted to begin debate on the bill, though Maine’s Susan Collins, Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell and Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski opposed the procedural step along with every Democrat.

The 51-50 vote marked a significant moment for President Donald Trump’s rescissions request, which faced more headwinds in the Senate than in the House. Vice President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote.

Trump proposed doing away with $1.1 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting that lawmakers had approved for the next two fiscal years as well as $8.3 billion from several foreign aid accounts.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting provides funding to National Public Radio, the Public Broadcasting Service and local media stations throughout the country.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said before the vote that some of the progress stemmed from removing a spending cut for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, a global health program to combat HIV/AIDS launched by former President George W. Bush.

“There was a lot of interest among our members in doing something on the PEPFAR issue and that’s reflected in the substitute,” Thune said. “And we hope that if we can get this across the finish line in the Senate that the House would accept that one small modification.”

South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds, who had raised concerns about cutting funding for rural public broadcasting stations run by tribal communities, announced a few hours before the vote he’d reached an agreement with the White House.

“We wanted to make sure tribal broadcast services in South Dakota continued to operate which provide potentially lifesaving emergency alerts,” Rounds wrote in a social media post. “We worked with the Trump administration to find Green New Deal money that could be reallocated to continue grants to tribal radio stations without interruption.”

Rounds said during a brief interview that $9.4 million will be transferred from an account within the Interior Department directly to 28 Native American radio stations in nine states.

“I had concerns specifically about the impact on these radio stations that are in rural areas with people that have basically very few other resources, and to me, they got caught in the crossfire on public broadcasting,” Rounds said. “And so I just wanted to get it fixed and I was successful in getting it fixed.”

White House budget director Russ Vought told reporters after a closed-door lunch meeting with Republican senators that he didn’t want to get “too far ahead” of discussions, but that his office was working with GOP senators to ensure certain local broadcast stations “have the opportunity to continue to do their early warning system and local reporting.”

Maine’s Collins wants more details

Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Collins, who voiced reservations about several of the rescissions during a June hearing, said preserving full funding for PEPFAR represented “progress.”

But Collins said a few hours before the vote she still wants more details from the White House budget office about the exact source of the other $9 billion in cuts to previously approved spending.

“One of the issues, which I raised at lunch, is the total is still $9 billion and it’s unclear to me how you get to $9 billion, because he’s listed a number of programs he wants to, quote, protect,” Collins said, referring to Vought. “So we still have the problem of not having detailed account information from OMB.”

Collins, R-Maine, then held up a printed version of the 1992 rescissions request that President George H.W. Bush sent Congress, which she said was “extremely detailed” and listed each account.

“I would contrast that to the message that we got for this rescission, which just has a paragraph and doesn’t tell you how it’s broken down in each program,” Collins said, adding she’s still “considering the options.”

The Senate’s procedural vote began a maximum of 10 hours of debate that will be followed by a marathon amendment voting session that could rework the bill. A final passage vote could take place as soon as Wednesday.

Trump expected to send more requests

The House approved the legislation in June, but the measure will have to go back across the Capitol for a final vote since the Senate is expected to make changes.

The effort to cancel funding that Congress previously approved in bipartisan government funding bills began last month when the Trump administration sent Congress this rescission request.

The initiative, led by White House budget director Vought, is part of Republicans’ ongoing efforts to reduce federal spending, which totaled $6.8 trillion during the last full fiscal year.

Vought expects to send lawmakers additional rescissions proposals in the months ahead, though he hasn’t said publicly when or what funding he’ll request Congress eliminate.

Once the White House submits a rescission request, it can legally freeze funding on those accounts for 45 days while Congress debates whether to approve, amend, or ignore the proposal.

Johnson slams funding for public media

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said during a press conference before the PEPFAR removal was announced that he hoped the Senate didn’t change the bill at all.

“I’ve urged them, as I always do, to please keep the product unamended because we have a narrow margin and we’ve got to pass it,” Johnson said. “But we’re going to process whatever they send us whenever they send (it to) us and I’m hopeful that it will be soon.”

Johnson said canceling the previously approved funding on some foreign aid programs and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting represented “low-hanging fruit.”

Federal funding for public media, Johnson said, embodied a “misuse of taxpayer dollars” on organizations that produce “biased reporting.”

“While at its origination NPR and PBS might have made some sense, and maybe it does now,” Johnson said. “But it shouldn’t be subsidized by taxpayers.”

Trump has also sought to encourage Republican senators to pass the bill without making any significant changes.

“It is very important that all Republicans adhere to my Recissions Bill and, in particular, DEFUND THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING (PBS and NPR), which is worse than CNN & MSDNC put together,” Trump wrote on social media last week. “Any Republican that votes to allow this monstrosity to continue broadcasting will not have my support or Endorsement. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

The National Public Radio headquarters in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, May 27, 2025.  (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration’s request to claw back $9.4 billion in previously approved spending on foreign aid and public media ran into significant opposition Wednesday, potentially dooming its path forward in the Senate.

Numerous GOP lawmakers on the Appropriations Committee, including Chairwoman Susan Collins, expressed concern at how the proposed rescissions would affect American “soft power” as well as local radio and television stations that rely on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting — many in rural America.

Collins, R-Maine, highlighted opposition to cutting already approved funding for CPB, which goes toward National Public Radio, the Public Broadcasting Service and hundreds of local stations outside the nation’s larger metropolitan areas.

“The vast majority of this funding, more than 70%, actually flows to local television and radio stations,” Collins said. “In Maine this funding supports everything from emergency communications in rural areas to coverage of high school basketball championships and a locally produced high school quiz show. Nationally produced television programs such as ‘Antiques Roadshow,’ ‘Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood,’ are also enjoyed by many throughout our country.”

Collins said she understands objections to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting providing funding to national NPR operations, given what she called its “discernibly partisan bent.”

“There are, however, more targeted approaches to addressing that bias at NPR than rescinding all of the funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting,” Collins said.

Effect on Alaska

Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski appeared to signal she also opposes cancelling funding that Congress previously approved for public media and told White House budget director Russ Vought that she wanted him to understand the ramifications on her home state.

“I hope you feel the urgency that I’m trying to express on behalf of people in rural Alaska, and I think in many parts of rural America, where this is their lifeline, this is where they get the updates on that landslide, this is where they get the updates on the wildfires that are coming their way,” Murkowski said.

“And so how they will be able to not only get the emergency alerts that they need, but also the weather reporting to make sure that fishermen … can go out safely. So that these communities can be connected when a deadly landslide has come through,” she said.

Rural radio in South Dakota, Nebraska

South Dakota GOP Sen. Mike Rounds pressed Vought to ensure uninterrupted federal funding to local radio stations in rural areas of his home state, even if Congress rescinds the Corporation for Public Broadcasting’s appropriation.

“First of all, we have Native American radio stations in South Dakota. They get their funding through NPR – 90 some percent of what they use. They will not continue to exist if we don’t find a way to take care of their needs,” Rounds said. “It’s not a large amount of money, but would you be willing to work with us to try and find a way for these places where, literally, they’re not political in nature?

“These are the folks that put out the emergency notifications. They talk about community events and so forth. But they’re in very, very rural areas where there simply isn’t an economy to support buying advertising on these stations.”

Vought appeared to agree to work with Rounds, before saying that if Congress approves the rescissions request for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the administration wouldn’t pull back funding until the next fiscal year, which starts on Oct. 1.

Vought also pledged to work with Nebraska Republican Sen. Deb Fischer to ensure people in rural areas will have a way to learn about emergency alerts if the rescissions request is approved.

“I am very concerned also about the emergency alerts that come to many places in Nebraska only through that rural radio,” Fischer said. “We’re a state of vastness, very sparsely populated areas that don’t receive cell service in many cases. It’s difficult even with landlines in many areas of my state.”

Reductions to AIDS relief

Chairwoman Collins also said during the nearly three-hour hearing that cutting funding on certain global health programs, including the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, “would be extraordinarily ill-advised and short-sighted.”

“PEPFAR has saved more than 26 million lives and enabled 7.8 million babies to be born HIV-free to mothers living with HIV,” Collins said. “This program remains a bipartisan priority of Congress. After years of commitment and stable investment the finish line is in sight. The United States has the tools to fulfill PEPFAR’s mission and get the job done while transitioning HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention to country ownership by the year 2030.”

Collins argued that the Trump administration is unlikely to spend foreign aid dollars on the same “questionable projects” that were part of the Biden administration.

“Unless the current administration plans to continue these controversial projects that it has identified — which I very much doubt — those projects alone cannot be used to justify the proposed rescissions,” Collins said.

Just before Vought began giving his opening statement to the committee, a group of protesters in the room stood up and began to yell in an attempt to preserve PEPFAR funding. They were escorted out by U.S. Capitol Police.

Kentucky Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell, chairman of the Defense spending subcommittee and former majority leader, appeared to reject some of the proposed foreign aid cuts, arguing they eroded American influence around the world.

“There’s plenty of absolute nonsense masquerading with American aid that shouldn’t receive another bit of taxpayer funding. But the administration’s attempt to root it out has been unnecessarily chaotic,” McConnell said.

“In critical corners of the globe, instead of creating efficiencies, you’ve created vacuums for adversaries like China to fill. Responsible investments in soft power prevent conflict, preserve American influence and save countless lives at the same time. So if we’re concerned about spending, and we should be, it’s important to remember what wars cost.”

Protesters are escorted out of the hearing by U.S. Capitol Police. (Video by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, however, announced that he will vote for the rescissions package, arguing that some ways the Biden administration spent funds in the PEPFAR account deserved rebuke.

“No more preaching to me. I’m going to vote for this package. And do you know why I’m going to vote for this package? Just as a statement that PEPFAR is important but it’s not beyond scrutiny,” Graham said. “That how you run the government has consequences. Don’t lecture me about being mean or cruel.”

How rescissions work

The Trump administration sent Congress the $9.4 billion rescissions request in early June, allowing the White House budget office to legally freeze funding for the various programs included in the proposal for 45 days while lawmakers decide whether to approve or reject it.

The request called on lawmakers to zero out funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting during the next two fiscal years, a total of $1.1 billion in previously approved spending.

It proposed more than $8 billion in cuts to numerous foreign aid accounts run by the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, including health programs, initiatives that promote democracy, economic development, peacekeeping activities and refugee assistance.

One of the rescissions proposed lawmakers claw back $500 million of the $4 billion that Congress previously approved for “activities related to child and maternal health, HIV/ AIDS, and infectious diseases.

“This proposal would not reduce treatment but would eliminate programs that are antithetical to American interests and worsen the lives of women and children, like ‘family planning’ and ‘reproductive health,’ LGBTQI+ activities, and ‘equity’ programs.”

The House voted mostly along party lines in June to approve the request in full, sending it to the Senate, where it has been on the sidelines for weeks as Republicans instead work toward an agreement on the party’s “big, beautiful bill.”

The rescissions bill isn’t subject to the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster, so it only needs the support of 50 Republicans and Vice President JD Vance’s tie-breaking vote to become law. That, however, must happen before the 45-day clock runs out on July 18.

If Senate leaders do not schedule a floor vote, or that vote does not get the necessary support, the Trump administration would have to spend the funding as previously planned. And the White House budget office would be blocked from sending up a rescissions request for the same accounts for the remainder of President Donald Trump’s time in office.

Senate floor consideration also comes with unlimited amendment debate, giving senators from both parties the chance to call for votes on whether to keep or eliminate each proposed rescission.

Any changes to the bill would require it to go back across the Capitol for a final vote in the House before the deadline. 

U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., holds up an Elmo toy while the chamber debates a bill that would eliminate previously approved funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides grants to public radio and television stations, including the Public Broadcasting Service, or PBS, which airs "Sesame Street." (Screen shot taken from House Clerk website livestream.)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House narrowly passed legislation Thursday that would revoke $9.4 billion in previously approved funding for public media, including National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service, as well as foreign aid, though the bill’s future in the Senate amid a strict timeline is uncertain.

The 214-212 mostly party-line vote marks just the third time in several decades the House has approved a bill to claw back funding that lawmakers formerly agreed to spend. President Donald Trump sent the rescissions request that led to the House bill to the Republican-controlled Congress earlier this month.

Republican Reps. Mark Amodei of Nevada, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Nicole Malliotakis of New York and Mike Turner of Ohio voted against approving the bill along with all of the chamber’s Democrats.

Nebraska Rep. Don Bacon and New York Rep. Nick LaLota, both Republicans, switched from opposing to supporting the bill after Speaker Mike Johnson spoke with them on the floor as the vote was held open.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., contended during floor debate that pulling back the funding is the right place to start, but said the GOP will seek to do much more in the months and years ahead.

Scalise said PBS and NPR should have to compete against other media organizations without grant funding from the federal government.

“There is still going to be a plethora of options for the American people,” Scalise said. “But if they’re paying their hard-earned dollars to go get content, why should your tax dollars only go to one thing that the other side wants to promote? Let everybody go compete on a fair basis.”

Maine Democratic Rep. Chellie Pingree said every state in the country would feel the impact of eliminating funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

“I rise today in strong opposition to the reckless attack on public media contained within this rescissions bill and millions of Americans who rely on and treasure their local public television and radio stations,” Pingree said.

Efforts to defund CPB, she said, were the result of Trump’s “agenda against the free press and his authoritarian desire to control the media.”

Public media would lose $1.1 billion

The seven-page bill would rescind all funding that Congress approved for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for fiscal years 2026 and 2027, a total of $1.1 billion.

CPB, which provides grants to public radio and television stations throughout the country, is one of the few programs that receives an advanced appropriation. So the funding elimination envisioned in the House bill would take effect starting on Oct. 1.

The legislation revokes more than $8 billion from several foreign aid programs run by the U.S. State Department or the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Florida Republican Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart, chairman of the State-Foreign Operations Appropriations subcommittee, said during an interview Wednesday there were extensive talks between GOP lawmakers and the Office of Management and Budget before the Trump administration officially submitted this rescissions request.

But Díaz-Balart cautioned there would need to be substantial pre-negotiations ahead of any future rescissions requests for programs within his annual funding bill.

“This rescission package — which I’ve had communication with OMB on — if this passes, we can move forward,” he said. “Now, if you’re talking about a potential for future additional rescissions, that could potentially create a problem and tie the president’s hands when it comes to dealing with adversaries or helping allies.”

Díaz-Balart said that OMB officials hoping to make any additional rescissions requests on foreign aid would need to engage in “a level of coordination that is so detailed, so intense to make sure that nothing comes forward that could potentially hurt the president’s ability to really do the America First agenda internationally.”

Florida Democratic Rep. Lois Frankel, ranking member on the State-Foreign Operations spending panel, said during floor debate Thursday the bill was an attack on American values and posed a threat to national security.

“It’s not charity, it’s strategy,” Frankel said of foreign aid. “Don’t take my word for it, military leaders from both parties have warned us for years — if we fail to lead with soft power, we’ll end up paying in blood, bombs and more boots on the ground.”

“Cutting foreign assistance will deepen desperation, fuel extremism, push fragile societies toward collapse and when that happens we all pay the price,” she added. “Refugee crises surge, diseases spread, trade routes shut down, our troops and diplomats face greater danger and our homeland security is weakened.”

First of many requests

The House vote took place just one week after the Trump administration sent lawmakers the rescissions request, the first of many proposals the White House budget office plans to submit. 

The $9.4 billion cancellation proposal represents a small fraction of the roughly $6.8 trillion the federal government spends each year.

The recommendation said some of the foreign aid should be cancelled because it supported “programs that are antithetical to American interests and worsen the lives of women and children, like ‘family planning’ and ‘reproductive health,’ LGBTQI+ activities, and ‘equity’ programs.”

The rescissions request allows the Office of Management and Budget to legally freeze funding on the programs listed for 45 days while lawmakers decide whether to approve the recommendation as is, amend it, or ignore it.

The House and Senate must agree to approve the same rescissions bill before mid-July for the changes to take effect. Failure to reach a bicameral agreement before then would require the Trump administration to spend the funding and block the president from requesting the same cancellation for the rest of his term.

Rescissions requests are rare since Congress typically negotiates spending levels on thousands of federal programs in the dozen annual spending bills that are then signed by the president.

The first Trump administration proposed rescissions in 2018, but the bill never made it through the Senate.

The last time Congress actually approved rescinding funding was in 1992 during the George H.W. Bush administration, according to a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

More action in the Senate

The Senate will need to take up the bill before mid-July if it wants to approve any of the spending cuts, though several GOP senators told States Newsroom during brief interviews Wednesday ahead of the House vote they may amend the package, which would require it to go back to the House for final approval before the 45-day clock runs out.

Rescissions bills come with a vote-a-rama in the Senate, giving Republicans and Democrats the chance to call up as many amendments as they want for a floor vote. The GOP holds a 53-member majority, so four or more Republicans opposing any element of the bill would likely lead to its removal.

Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she will give the rescissions bill “careful consideration.”

In a statement released earlier this month just after the White House sent the request to lawmakers, Collins wrote the committee would “carefully review the rescissions package and examine the potential consequences of these rescissions on global health, national security, emergency communications in rural communities, and public radio and television stations.”

South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, chairman of the State-Foreign Operations Appropriations subcommittee, said he’s mostly supportive of the rescissions request, though he didn’t rule out offering an amendment to restore full funding for the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, often called PEPFAR.

“I think I’ll be okay with most of it. I’m concerned about PEPFAR. I’ll have to look at that,” Graham said.

West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, chairwoman of the spending panel that oversees the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, said she’s planning to evaluate the bill once it arrives.

“We’ve got all these other things I’m thinking about. I haven’t even focused on it,” Capito said, referring to ongoing negotiations over the party’s “big, beautiful bill.”

Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, said she’s going to “try to” ensure the Corporation for Public Broadcasting keeps its funding.

“I’m a supporter of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. It’s a lifeline for many of my small, rural communities,” Murkowski said

Kansas Republican Sen. Jerry Moran, a senior appropriator, said he’s “trying to figure out a strategy of how to deal with” both the foreign aid and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting provisions once the bill comes over from the House.

“I’m looking at both of them to see what the right outcome should be.”

‘The risk of living in a news desert’

Both PBS and NPR released statements following the House vote, pledging to do their best to keep their funding intact.

Katherine Maher, NPR president and CEO, wrote in a statement the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is essential to the organization.

“Americans who rely on local, independent stations serving communities across America, especially in rural and underserved regions, will suffer the immediate consequences of this vote,” Maher wrote. “If rescission passes and local stations go dark, millions of Americans will no longer have access to locally owned, independent, nonprofit media and will bear the risk of living in a news desert, missing their emergency alerts, and hearing silence where classical, jazz and local artists currently play.”

Paula Kerger, president and CEO at PBS, wrote in a separate statement the “fight to protect public media does not end with this vote, and we will continue to make the case for our essential service in the days and weeks to come.

“If these cuts are finalized by the Senate, it will have a devastating impact on PBS and local member stations, particularly smaller and rural stations that rely on federal funding for a larger portion of their budgets. Without PBS and local member stations, Americans will lose unique local programming and emergency services in times of crisis.”