In a contentious confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill, President Donald Trump’s nominee for the deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Hal Duncan, indicated that the administration might consider canceling congressional funding through a tactic known as "pocket rescission." Duncan's comments have stirred concerns among lawmakers who view this method as a potential circumvention of Congress's constitutional budget authority.

During his testimony before the Senate Budget Committee, Duncan defended the use of pocket rescissions, a practice where the administration unilaterally withholds funding without congressional approval. “Historically, administrations including that of President Ford have utilized pocket rescissions,” Duncan stated. He further added that he could not commit to forbearing from any fiscal tools, including rescissions, that the administration might deploy in the future.

This practice came to the forefront after the Trump administration last year unilaterally canceled $4.9 billion in foreign aid, a move that did not sit well with both Democrats and Republicans. Typically, to withhold funding that has been appropriated by Congress, the White House is required to send a rescissions request to Congress, which then has 45 days to respond. However, the Trump administration claims it can issue such a request even late in the fiscal year, maintaining the funds on hold until they lapse on October 1, irrespective of congressional action.

The Supreme Court previously allowed the Trump administration to proceed with a significant portion of the canceled foreign aid through a pocket rescission last fall. However, the legality of these actions under the Constitution or federal law remains a significant and unsettled question, particularly concerning the billions of dollars withheld from Congress's approved appropriations.

Duncan's stance has reignited the debate over the executive branch's power versus congressional prerogatives in budgetary matters. If the Trump administration employs this tactic again, it is anticipated to occur in the closing months of the fiscal year, namely August or September.

As the confirmation process continues, Duncan is scheduled to appear before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The outcome of these hearings could have profound implications for the balance of budgetary power between the White House and Congress.