3 ms·
I think that delegating power to government agencies are a lot more complicated than is commonly understood. My surface level understanding is that the agencies
by pfannkuchen 2y ago
I think that delegating power to government agencies are a lot more complicated than is commonly understood. My surface level understanding is that the agencies run under the executive branch with funding from congress. If that is true, then the chief executive would have the authority to instruct the agency to do nothing and spend no money, but he wouldn’t have the authority to instruct the agency to spend more than authorized by congress. I guess congress will have to garbage collect the funding as a technicality, though there may be a built in mechanism for reallocating underspent budgets.
- Volundr 2y ago> If that is true, then the chief executive would have the authority to instruct the agency to do nothing and spend no money This is called Impoundment, and is illegal. Just ask Nixon. The Executive branch is actually required to spend as dictated by Congress. There is a portion of spending that is discretionary, but it's a small minority of the Federal budget, and does not include the things currently being targeted. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impoundment_of_appropriated_funds https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impoundment_of_appropriated_...
- mplanchard 2y agoThis is not correct. The executive branch is required to disburse the money allocated by Congress. See the Impoundment Control Act of 1974.