Rescission Package Targeting Several ED Programs Draws Congressional Pushback
By Hugh T. Ferguson, NASFAA Managing Editor
Prior to the start of fiscal year (FY) 2027, the Trump administration put forward a “rescission package” partially targeting some funds for the Department of Education (ED), a move that could complicate the appropriations process when Congress returns from its recess after the mid-term elections.
The overall request to rescind roughly $1 billion in congressionally appropriated funding includes $69.6 million allocated to the Higher Education Act (HEA) Title VI international education domestic programs, but does not impact any Fulbright-Hays programs. Additionally, the recession includes about $25 million in competitive grants within Special Programs for Migrant Students.
The administration put forward its request on September 25, less than a week before the start of the new fiscal year, and wrote that eliminating these funds would “eliminate unnecessary and wasteful spending.”
Congress is granted 45 days to consider the rescission request. If it does not offer partial or total approval of the package, then the administration must spend those funds. However, the White House argues that since the proposal was unveiled with less than 45 days remaining in the fiscal year, it has the authority to carry out a “pocket rescission” because the funds will lapse before Congress can weigh in.
The administration’s effort has drawn bipartisan pushback from Congress.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, posted on social media that she would work with her colleagues to address these “illegal actions.”
"Not only is the delay itself an impoundment that was not reported to Congress, but also it is a usurpation of Congress's appropriations powers," Collins said. "OMB is an agency of the executive branch. It does not get to decide which programs are worth funding."
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, also said that the administration’s effort was “illegal.”
“This is theft from the American people, plain and simple. These are funds Congress has delivered on a bipartisan basis and should be helping people—not cut off by a president more focused on building a ballroom than investing in families,” Murray said. “Every Republican who voted for these bills should be furious because [Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget] is saying their votes don’t count.”
“In negotiations over the recently enacted CR, Democrats fought to include language to prevent the Trump administration from once again usurping Congress’ power—but for the second time in a year, Republicans refused to take common sense action and prevent this from happening,” Murray explained.
Additionally, a new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined that the rescission “subverts” both the constitutional process and Congress’s power of the purse.
“GAO has previously concluded that the [Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA)] does not permit the withholding of funds past their date of expiration. The plain language of the ICA provides that amounts proposed for rescission must be made available for obligation unless Congress completes action on a bill rescinding them,” GAO wrote. “Therefore, the rescission proposals contained in the President's September 25, 2026, special message to Congress do not permit the President to withhold the appropriations beyond the end of fiscal year 2026.”
When Congress returns from recess – currently scheduled for early November – it will still need to complete the appropriations process for FY 27, since government funding is currently operating under a continuing resolution through December 11.
Stay tuned to Today’s News for the latest information on the appropriations process.
Publication Date: 10/7/2026
You must be logged in to comment on this page.