You’d be forgiven if you believed that Donald Trump was simply “reshaping” the Federal Government because that’s likely what you’ve heard ad nauseam on your TV or on your news feeds from journalistic institutions.
Unfortunately, these institutions are not being 100 with you.
There’s no denying that the President of the United States has ample power. They run every agency Congress creates, including household names like the FBI; CIA; NSA; as well as others you’ve likely never heard about until recently, like the United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM) or the United States Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Even if you’ve never heard of any of these agencies or offices, you certainly heard about the funding freeze that paralyzed most of the country for a couple days before it was ultimately rescinded. From our community’s Head Start programs to Meals on Wheels, the funding freeze threatened to grind indispensable life-lines for many Americans.
Needless to say, the offices that are under the Executive Branch of our Government can impact you in vast—and devastating—ways.
But, for as powerful as the Executive Branch may be, the one power it unequivocally does not enjoy is the power of the purse. Nay, per the Constitution, the coffers of our Nation are placed under the control of Congress.
Impoundments
Perhaps you’ve heard this word being tossed around quite a bit lately on Fox News or MSNBC. Now, depending on where you heard this, you might believe that the power to impound appropriated funds—that is, funds approved by Congress through law—is inherent to the power of POTUS.
This is simply just not true, no matter how many times you hear otherwise.
Not only does this power not exist in the Constitution (no, it doesn’t matter how much you try to bend the wording, it doesn’t exist), there are also multiple different opinions and rulings that unilaterally conclude POTUS does not have the authority to impound funds, of which particularly of interest are the multiple conclusions by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) “that the Constitution grants the President no unilateral authority to withhold funds from obligation.”
In case you were wondering: The GAO is responsible for providing Congress and the heads of Executive agencies with non-partisan, fact-based information and is colloquially known as the “congressional watchdog.”
Phew! That’s a lot to take in, sorry about that. But putting all of that aside, there is also the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to contend with. Essentially, this was Congress’ way of ensuring that should any President try to impound funds again (*cough* Nixon), they must do so through the powers of the purse (i.e. Congress).
Any Executive Orders signed by Donald Trump that unilaterally presume to pause or cancel money allocated by Congress are plainly illegal and unconstitutional. Full stop.
This is not “reshaping” Government. This is usurping the power of the purse from Congress.
Government Offices and Agencies
As with the power to spend money, Congress is also bestowed by the Constitution the power to create and destroy Government agencies and offices. Through these powers combined, Congress is not only able to create the offices and agencies, they are also empowered to fund them.
Enter USAID and the myriad of other offices and agencies currently being gutted by Elon Musk and Co.
Before we get into the nitty gritty, let me just say that I am obviously aware that DOGE is not an official office or agency of the United States and is instead being billed as some sort of freak side project of the Executive branch.
Now that we have that out of the way, first and foremost, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is not empowered by an act of Congress to do anything beyond what the Executive branch is empowered to do. And one thing the Executive branch is not empowered to do is to audit or investigate offices and agencies for inefficiencies.
That power falls squarely on the Government Accountability Office (which is a part of Congress itself, albeit independent). You see, among its many duties, the GAO is also the supreme audit institution of the United States.
Some of its core functions are “auditing agency operations to determine whether federal funds are being spent efficiently and effectively” and “advising Congress and the heads of executive agencies about ways to make government more efficient and effective.”
Well this is awkward.
DOGE, by all accounts, is attempting to usurp this power from the GAO and put it squarely in the Executive branch. Not only that, it is also simultaneously impounding the funds (via Trump) of agencies authorized and funded by Congress (i.e. USAID).
This is not “reshaping” Government. This is usurping both the power of the purse and the investigative and auditing powers of Congress.
Federal Worker Purge
Unfortunately for our Federal workforce, this is one area where the Executive branch has largely full control.
The Constitution is clear that the Executive branch is responsible for overseeing all the offices and agencies created and funded by Congress. Naturally, this also includes the workers inside of these offices and agencies, as well as who leads them.
Of course, there are laws for how this is accomplished—some positions require the advice and consent of the Senate regardless—but the Executive branch has a lot of leeway to operate within those laws.
The TL;DR theory on this is that the President is authorized by an act of Congress (the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978) to reclassify employees “whose position has been determined to be of a confidential, policy-determining, policy-making or policy-advocating character by” the President or the Office of Personnel Management.
This wording seems to imply that the President can unilaterally reclassify portions of the Federal workforce for seemingly mundane reasoning like declaring that their positions are determined to be of a “confidential character.”
To clarify: If the President deems your position to be of “confidential character” (i.e. the President needs to keep a secret), then they can reclassify your position.
Whether this was the intended outcome Congress had in mind is hard to tell, but taken at face value, the President’s and DOGE’s hack-and-slash crusade to reclassify and/or shrink the federal workforce is at the very least not blatantly illegal.
And while the premise of DOGE and the reclassification of Federal workers is dubious, the only recourse would be for Congress to act, or for the Supreme Court to clarify or interpret the meaning and implication of the law in question.
As to if either of these institutions will act on this is up for debate.
However one thing that is not up for debate regarding the push to purge the Federal workforce is the lack of legal authority for Elon Musk’s buyout offers.
Once again, Donald Trump and Elon Musk seem intent on usurping the power of the purse from Congress by appropriating funds not as Congress outlined and approved through law, but instead, by diverting funds unilaterally as they see fit.
Say it with me: This is not “reshaping” Government. This is usurping the power of the purse from Congress.
The Media
Lastly, I would like to wrap this distillation up with a note for the mainstream media:
At some point, you decided that “just reporting the facts” without crucial context or interpretation was a silver bullet for maintaining “neutrality” and “fairness” in your reporting. This was a mistake.
By foregoing the interpretation of facts, and how they apply in the context of your reporting, you do the American public a disservice by depriving your audiences of a wholesome understanding of current events.
You can pretend that you do not drive the American public’s perception of current events, but we both know the truth; and one thing you are overlooking is that you don’t have to say anything to say a lot.
By minimizing a Constitutional crisis as “reshaping government” you are setting the perception and the context that this is business as normal; that the American public should have nothing to worry about and that we should all continue operating under that assumption.
This is dangerous business.
It’s dangerous because it has allowed “news” stations like Fox News and OANN to thrive on setting the narrative and the perception of those current events in the vacuum you left.
Explaining the facts and how they apply to the real world is not bias or libel—once upon a time it was your job to be journalists—it is a right protected by the Constitution of the United States.
A right, I’m afraid, you have been far too eager to surrender; of which the consequences have been the permeation of disinformation and propaganda.