The left and the media, ever eager to pounce on President Trump’s every move, have found their latest outrage: his decision to delay discretionary spending until his new cabinet members are installed. Predictably, the usual suspects are crying foul, declaring this a gross overreach, a violation of Congress’ power of the purse and—of course—the end of democracy itself. The problem with their hysteria? They are ignoring both historical precedent and the fundamental principles of the Constitution.
Trump is not refusing to spend the money Congress appropriated; he is merely ensuring that when it is spent, it is done so responsibly. However, even if he were to refuse to spend certain funds, he would be well within his constitutional authority to do so—despite Congress’ belief to the contrary. And if history tells us anything, it is that presidents—Democrat and Republican alike—have exercised precisely this kind of discretion. In fact, not only does Trump have the right to delay discretionary spending, but one could argue he has an obligation to do so when reckless, wasteful expenditures threaten American interests. The Constitution does not empower Congress to micromanage executive spending timelines, and history is filled with examples of presidents exercising their discretion in spending appropriations.
The Debt Ceiling
Adding to the absurdity of the outrage over Trump’s spending delay is the fact that the government has literally run out of money. On her last day in office, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen notified President Trump that the government would hit the debt limit during his first week in office. With Congress failing to increase the debt ceiling, Yellen instructed the Treasury Department to implement “extraordinary measures” to keep the government afloat.
Extraordinary measures are financial maneuvers used by the Treasury to avoid breaching the debt ceiling, including suspending investments in government retirement funds like the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund (CSRDF) and the Postal Service Retiree Health Benefits Fund (PSRHBF), redeeming existing and suspending new investments of the Exchange Stabilization Fund and refraining from reinvesting maturing securities in the Government Securities Investment Fund (G Fund) of the federal employees’ Thrift Savings Plan.
These measures do not raise the debt ceiling; they merely delay the inevitable. They are temporary stopgaps that buy Congress time to increase or suspend the debt limit. The reality is clear: Congress has not given Trump additional borrowing authority, so it has no standing to complain about his decision to delay spending. If the House and Senate want the money spent immediately, they should act on the debt ceiling instead of posturing for the cameras.
Constitutional Separation of Powers
The U.S. Constitution clearly divides responsibilities between the legislative and executive branches. Congress controls appropriations—meaning it decides whether money can be spent and for what purpose—but it does not dictate when or how efficiently those funds must be used. Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution directs the president to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This gives the president—not Congress—the authority to execute spending in a manner that ensures efficiency, effectiveness and accountability.
This separation of powers prevents Congress from dictating the minutiae of executive administration. Appropriating funds is one thing; managing them effectively is another. And the responsibility of execution belongs squarely with the president.
Historical Precedents: Trump Is Hardly the First
President Trump’s decision to delay spending is not some unprecedented power grab. In fact, presidents have exercised this discretion for decades. The notion that he is required to blindly follow a spending timeline dictated by Congress is not only constitutionally dubious but contradicted by history.
Obama’s Delay of the Affordable Care Act (ACA): In 2013, President Obama unilaterally delayed key provisions of his own signature healthcare legislation, arguing that the administration needed more time to implement the law effectively. The delay affected employer mandates and reporting requirements, despite clear statutory deadlines. Congress howled in protest, yet the Obama administration maintained that executive discretion was necessary for the law’s proper implementation.
Reagan’s Suspension of Foreign Aid: In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan delayed and withheld foreign aid appropriations when he determined that the recipients—including some brutal regimes—were not aligned with American interests. His administration was heavily involved in vetting where the money went, ensuring that funds did not end up bolstering communist influence.
Eisenhower’s Infrastructure Spending Slowdown: President Dwight Eisenhower, concerned about inflationary pressures and inefficient spending, deliberately slowed infrastructure spending despite congressional appropriations for public works projects. His administration took a measured approach, ensuring that funds were deployed in a manner that maximized effectiveness rather than simply adhering to arbitrary timelines.
Trump’s decision to pause discretionary spending follows in this tradition of executive prudence. Unlike Congress—where politicians love to throw money at problems with little regard for oversight—Trump’s administration is ensuring that taxpayer dollars are not wasted on frivolous or even dangerous expenditures. Consider two particularly egregious examples his team uncovered:
$50 Million for Condoms in Gaza: Yes, you read that right. Bureaucrats were poised to send $50 million to Gaza to buy condoms—enough for 2.5 billion condoms. This was under the guise of “public health” assistance, but given Hamas’s control of the territory and their well-documented habit of misappropriating aid, one might ask: Was this truly a priority for American taxpayers?
$800 Million for a U.S. Embassy in Syria: The Biden administration had allocated $800 million for a new embassy in Syria—despite the fact that the country’s government was effectively controlled by Al-Qaeda affiliates. Building an expensive diplomatic complex in a war-torn region controlled by terrorists is not just reckless—it’s insanity.
Trump’s Duty to the American Taxpayer
Far from being an abuse of power, Trump’s decision to delay discretionary spending is a constitutional prerogative and a necessary safeguard against government waste. The Constitution’s Appropriations Clause gives Congress the authority to allocate funds, but it does not mandate an immediate or rigid timeline for spending. The executive branch, through the Take Care Clause, has the duty to ensure these funds are used efficiently and in the best interests of the American people. Historical precedent, from Reagan’s foreign aid delays to Obama’s ACA implementation postponements, confirms that presidents have long exercised this discretion to manage government resources prudently. History is replete with examples of presidents—both Democrat and Republican—exercising discretion over the pace of spending, and Trump’s actions are well within those precedents.
If anything, Congress should focus less on grandstanding and more on ensuring that its appropriations make sense in the first place. Until then, President Trump is doing exactly what the Constitution demands of him: executing the law faithfully, wisely and with an eye toward the interests of the American people. And if that means delaying some of Washington’s more harebrained spending schemes, then so be it.
Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.
READ NEXT: Whistleblower Reveals Explosive Allegations Against Top Trump Cabinet Nominee
When is the last time that The POTUS or Congress made out a National Budget and stayed with it without running out of money late in the year? All companies that succeed have one, have accountability, and have watchdogs that make sure the accounts get the straight facts, all the facts, and nothing but the facts. When you have different parts of the government tell their employees they must use all the budgeted money before the end of the year, they squander it to get rid of it. Thats our taxes being squandered. If I were Trump right now I would be asking every divison of the US govement to cut costs and give the same service, warning them that they are plenty of people out there that are willing to do it for them. I would reevaluate office structures and see what “fat” could be cut off and save money. One of the major problems with inflation is our goverment seems to think throwing money at anything solves a problem when it does the exact opposite, it caused problems in another direction, called inflation. Everything has a value, if the prices seem to go up, the only thing its telling you is the money is worth less. We went through this in the 1930’s when a $20 gold eagle was 1 troy ounce, gold was worth $20 an ounce. Gold was recalled and only 2 years after was reevalued by the US Government to $34/0z., nearly a 58% rise, or in other works inflated the pregold dollars by 58%, What does that mean, to get anything you had to play 58% more. Today gold is approximately $2400/oz. Why did they do it then, to use cheaper dollars to pay off WWI. Ok, fine and dandy. Now we were on the silver standard where a silver dollar weighed in at 1 Troy ounce. Silver was worth one dollar. Still the economy was pretty steady and rock solid. In 1959 we went off the silver standard quietly and silver went up in price immediately. Today silver is floating around the $30/oz mark an ounce. What system are we on today, it’s called the Federal Reserve Notes. Who is the Federal Reserve anyway, its the banking industry organization and we all Trust banks right? Remember the 1932 Wall Street collapse and even the modern one recently? Hummmmm. Now you know why BRICKS is favored by some of its member over the US Dollar, the dollar is in fall the longer you hold it the less it can buy. BRICKS promises to stop that devaluation. Do you blame they for getting away. Just buying precious metals is not the answer either, as there is not enough to do the job besides trying to trade barter style is not feasable. What is the answer, Congress should stop blowing money out the window at astronomical rates, they should demand accountability, and stop all these pet projects, financing wars that never gets paid back but we pay interest on them, they should stop robbing other peoples money, social security as an example. Further they should start paying off some of the debt they have accumulated, those nations that get foreign aid should be reevaluated for their worth and either adjust or stop the aid. Do you realize that every nation in the world receives American Foreign Aid in either cash or commodiites which tax payers pay for except for four nations? We are allowing our representatives to keep cutting into us and we are bleeding to death. We need to demand changes, accountability and to get rid of the worst offenders who are deeply rooted in Congressm and make lobbying within the District of Columbia illegal to start correcting the problems.
It is incumbent on the bleeding hearts of Demoncrats to criticize any cuts in funding for humanitarian causes. A “pause” is the right to make the time to examine where the money i going. Mind you, when additional money is earmarked for these programs, and when some of that money is removed, the Demoncrats call it a cut, as if it were taken from monies already in place, which is not the target. The target is the additional spending, which is not a cut from the original allocation, but the Demoncrats want the public to believe otherwise, in the way they word it; such as the old bumper sticker that reads: “Education cuts hurt,” for which the only cuts are from the increase; therefore that bumper sticker is propaganda.
The Demoncrats will always have contention with Trump. They hate him because he outshines any of their failed policies. So the Demoncrats, to prove their validity, must attack him, even when they do not have a better idea. Just maintain the present status quo and keep the peace. Nah, what Trump is doing is much more fun, and watching the Demoncrats go apoplectic, and become mute when it comes to solving a problem. Yes, I mentioned it in another commentary; just throw money at it and forget about it. When the problem grows throw more money at it. You can call Trump cheap if you want to, but I see it as a frugal responsibility. Why do we need to further burden the taxpayer, when Trump has a plan to fill the Federal Treasury with tariff money and eventually eliminate the IRS? All we need to do is go back to our history to discover that the Federal Government obtained all the money for the Treasury through tariffs.