If you've been keeping an eye on DOGE, you might have come across a new political buzzword: rescission. It’s not exactly a term that pops up in everyday conversation, but in the world of government spending and legislative maneuvering, it’s making waves. Essentially, rescission is a process that allows the president to propose cuts to already approved congressional spending. However, it’s not as straightforward as it sounds—especially with the Republican Party’s slim majorities in both the House and Senate.
What’s the Big Deal About Rescission?
Rescission is a tool that some Republicans are eager to use to tighten their grip on DOGE spending. Their hope? That President Donald Trump will take the lead by sending a rescission bill to Congress, which would require only a simple majority in both chambers to pass. If successful, this would allow them to roll back unspent funds that Congress had previously given the green light.
For many in the GOP, rescission is about securing the future of DOGE-related policies. They argue that without formalizing these cuts, a future Democratic president could easily undo all the changes they’ve worked to implement.
“We don't want a repeat of 2021, where another administration comes in, reverses everything on energy, spending, the whole nine,” said Republican Rep. Barry Moore of Alabama. “If we don’t codify some of this stuff, then it’s extremely likely that somebody down the road would reverse that.”
But that’s not the only reason rescission is being pushed so hard. There’s a legal angle, too. Some of the cuts that Elon Musk and the Trump administration have been making might not even be legal under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA), a law dating back to the Nixon era. Trump has made it clear that he intends to challenge this law in court, but there’s a faster and cleaner route—rescission.
A Legal Shortcut?
By opting for rescission, Trump and his allies could potentially avoid drawn-out legal battles. Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky pointed out that trying to challenge the ICA could be a messy ordeal.
“It will likely be challenged in court, and it'll go through a lot of different court deliberations 'til we finally get to what the conclusion is,” Paul said. “Rescission won't be challenged in any way, and it's a much cleaner way of doing it.”
On the surface, rescission seems like a straightforward solution. But in reality, getting it passed through Congress is a whole different battle.
A Legislative Minefield
Republicans are already juggling a packed legislative calendar, and adding rescission to the mix could make things even more complicated. Government funding is set to run out at the end of next week, raising serious concerns about a potential shutdown. Meanwhile, they’re also working on a reconciliation bill that includes major cuts to Medicaid while pushing forward new tax cuts.
Trying to pass rescissions on top of all this? That’s a heavy lift.
Historically, rescissions haven’t always been successful. When Trump attempted to get Congress to rescind $15 billion in 2018, the effort failed. This time around, if Democrats remain united in their opposition—especially considering the party's broad disapproval of DOGE—Republicans can only afford to lose a single vote in the House and just four votes in the Senate.
And there’s another hurdle: Some Republicans themselves are pushing back against DOGE cuts, particularly those affecting their own states.
“You know, we all want to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse,” said Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, a moderate Republican from Pennsylvania. “But we have to do it with compassion. We have to be smart about it.”
The Real-World Impact
Even if rescission were to pass, it wouldn’t necessarily provide a long-term fix.
“All that does is cut spending,” said Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina. “It doesn’t really codify policy.”
That’s a critical distinction. If the goal is to make DOGE cuts permanent and ensure that a future administration can’t simply reverse them, rescission alone may not be enough. Meanwhile, legal challenges surrounding Trump’s decisions—such as the firing of federal workers and freezing of federal funds—are still working their way through the courts. The uncertainty adds another layer of complexity to an already chaotic situation.
Another concern? The potential consequences of DOGE’s shutdown of agencies like USAID and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, both of which were established by Congress. If those agencies are eliminated, what happens to the programs and protections they provide?
The Bottom Line
Republicans are eager to use rescission to push through DOGE cuts, framing it as a necessary step to solidify policy and avoid legal battles. But even within their own party, there are doubts about whether this strategy will work. Given the current political landscape, with razor-thin majorities and pressing legislative priorities, the path forward isn’t clear-cut.
Could Trump’s rescission efforts succeed where past attempts have failed? It’s possible, but far from guaranteed. One thing is certain, though: The battle over DOGE spending is far from over, and the next few weeks could be crucial in determining its fate.
Login