Musk Fired-Up About Paul's Rescission Idea For Slashing Spending Up To $500 Billion

Seeking to codify spending cuts pursued by his Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk held a closed-door lunch with Republican senators on Wednesday. Musk was said to be "elated" with Sen. Rand Paul's recommendation to make the cuts stick with a relatively expeditious budget-slashing technique called "rescission." The approach could guide DOGE cuts around federal judges who consider executive-branch-initiated spending cuts as exceeding constitutional authority. 

Rescission offers a means by which presidents can collaborate with Congress to cancel previously-appropriated spending. Enabled by Title X of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the rarely-used process starts with the president sending a special message to Congress, providing specific details about which budgetary authorities he wants to rescind. 

With Republicans holding a narrow 53-47 Senate majority, one of the most attractive aspects of rescission is that it doesn't require 60 votes -- a simple majority suffices to grant the president's wish. Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley told reporters that Musk was "elated" with Paul's proposal: "I think he didn't realize it could be done at 51." According to South Carolina Sen. Lindsay Graham, it was the first time Musk had heard of the rescission process. He said Musk reacted by triumphantly lifting his arms into the air.

The approach promises to immunize DOGE spending cuts from federal judges who are skeptical about the executive branch's power to cut spending that was duly authorized by Congress. This week has seen two major developments that demonstrate the strength of that judicial headwind:

• On Wednesday, the Supreme Court rejected the administration request that it negate a lower court's temporary injunction against Trump's freezing of almost $2 billion in foreign aid. In effect, the ruling compels the White House to re-open the spigots, as directed by Judge Amir Ali.
• On Thursday, a Rhode Island US District Judge indefinitely blocked President Trump's freeze on federal grants and loans, arguing in his ruling that the White House had "put itself above Congress" and undermined democracy.

Rescission is an alternative to "impoundment," by which presidents unilaterally delay Congressionally-directed spending. First used by Thomas Jefferson, the method was restricted by the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) after Democrats felt President Nixon was abusing it. Trump has called ICA "a disaster of a law" and vowed to “do everything I can to challenge [it] in court, and if necessary, get Congress to overturn it.” However, as noted above, the same law provides the opportunity for rescission, which means Trump can use ICA to his advantage. 

Up to this point, Trump has pursued impoundment, but Paul says that increasingly looks like a dead end. Pointing to the Supreme Court's fresh ruling against the administration, Paul said, "My message to Elon was, let’s get over the impoundment idea. Let’s send it back as a rescission package, because then we’ll get … 51 senators, or 50 senators [plus the tie-breaking vote of Vice President JD Vance] to cut the spending.”

That's not to say rescission will be a layup. The move was attempted once during Trump's first administration, only to be derailed by two nay votes from Republican senators. One of them, Maine's Susan Collins, now chairs the Appropriations committee (the other, Richard Burr, left office.) Last time around, Collins said she felt rescission took too much power from Congress -- despite the fact that the rescission process itself springs from an act of Congress. Paul suggested that Trump will need to push harder than he did in 2018: “We lost that battle. But I don’t think they tried very hard. I don’t think they came and lobbied us. I don’t think they came and talked to us.”

Paul told reporters that the lunch discussion with Musk focused on the concept rather than nailing down dollar amounts. However, Paul said the White House and Republican legislators should strive to slash at least $100 billion and perhaps up to $500 billion from a budget that's currently around $7 billion -- or about 23% of GDP.   

Talking to Reason last month, leading deficit-Hawk Paul scoffed at critics who claimed DOGE's initial several-billion-dollar saving opportunities were insignificant against the backdrop of such a huge budget: 

 "Why would we still not start with the most egregious stuff and get rid of it? Ultimately, how do you get to better spending? You get better people in government, or you give them less money. I don't think we can really expect to get better people, less bureaucrats in government….The only way you get less waste is to give them less money to spend." 

Now, Paul is working hard to put up numbers that will silence critics on the right -- and trigger wailing and gnashing of teeth on the left. More power to him.