Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="newfie" data-source="post: 6126740" data-attributes="member: 58700">part of that is supposed to happen after the budget is passed through recissions. it does not&nbsp; appear recissions have always gotten us the bang for our buck. per grok:Historically, rescissions have been used to reduce federal spending, though their frequency and impact vary. For example:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">In 2018, the Trump administration proposed a $15.4 billion rescission package, targeting unspent funds from programs like the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and other discretionary accounts. Congress passed a smaller $1.1 billion rescission, primarily affecting unobligated balances.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">During the 1980s, the Reagan administration frequently used rescission proposals to curb spending, with varying success. Between 1981 and 1988, Reagan proposed over $40 billion in rescissions, though Congress approved only a portion, often due to political disagreements.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">In the 1970s, after the 1974 Act was passed in response to President Nixon’s impoundment of funds, rescissions became a formalized tool to balance executive and congressional control over spending. From 1974 to 2005, Presidents proposed 1,178 rescissions totaling $76 billion, with Congress approving $25 billion (about 33%).</li>
</ul></blockquote>

[QUOTE="newfie, post: 6126740, member: 58700"] part of that is supposed to happen after the budget is passed through recissions. it does not appear recissions have always gotten us the bang for our buck. per grok: Historically, rescissions have been used to reduce federal spending, though their frequency and impact vary. For example: [LIST] [*]In [B]2018[/B], the Trump administration proposed a $15.4 billion rescission package, targeting unspent funds from programs like the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and other discretionary accounts. Congress passed a smaller $1.1 billion rescission, primarily affecting unobligated balances. [*]During the [B]1980s[/B], the Reagan administration frequently used rescission proposals to curb spending, with varying success. Between 1981 and 1988, Reagan proposed over $40 billion in rescissions, though Congress approved only a portion, often due to political disagreements. [*]In the [B]1970s[/B], after the 1974 Act was passed in response to President Nixon’s impoundment of funds, rescissions became a formalized tool to balance executive and congressional control over spending. From 1974 to 2005, Presidents proposed 1,178 rescissions totaling $76 billion, with Congress approving $25 billion (about 33%). [/LIST] [/QUOTE]

Verification