Budgets Are Ceilings, Not Floors
There’s a popular argument that if Congress appropriates money in a budget, the Executive Branch has to spend it.
That’s not actually how a budget works.
Think of your workplace. Your department has a budget, which is the maximum amount of money that is allocated to be spent. If you spend all of that amount, fine; you’re entitled to do that. But you don’t have to.
Let’s say you had budget authorization for a computer, but you were able to purchase what you wanted for less than the budgeted amount. That’s financially a good thing, because you’ve saved money, the business can be more profitable, and they might have money for employee raises.
It’s really the same thing in government. Congress authorizes the spending of up to a certain amount. The Executive Branch then handles distribution. But where is it written that the Executive Branch has to spend all the money?
Last year, the Biden Administration failed to send money to Israel, even though Congress had authorized it, because of a dispute over how the war with Hamas was being prosecuted. Now, with the advent of DOGE, the Trump Administration wants to halt runaway spending on certain items deemed wasteful or tied to fraud.
Yes, in theory, if Congress’ role is to allocate money, it’s the Executive Branch’s job to distribute it—but again, that’s not a requirement and given the separation of powers between three co-equal branches of government, it shouldn’t be.
In fact, we’ve gotten into the financial mess we have because those who depend on frequent elections and re-elections have no discipline to stop spending, because it allows them to indirectly buy votes. Someone has to be the adult here, and trying past, piecemeal approaches won’t work. It’s rip-the-Band-Aid-off time…actually, far past time.
Congress authorizes a spending ceiling, not a floor…and until the President gets a line-item veto as many state governors have, it’s not a bad idea to remember the difference between ceilings and floors.
