The recent GAO decision (B-331564, Jan. 15, 2020) reviews the question raised by Senator Chris Van Hollen during a hearing before the Senate Committee on the Budget and his follow up correspondence to the Comptroller General on 12/23/2019 inquiring as to whether the OMB had legal authority to withhold the USAI funds from obligation. The GAO determined that the OMB did not have authority to withhold USAI funds for "policy reasons" citing Reagan and Bush era decisions B-224882, Apr. 1, 1987 and B-237297.3, Mar. 6, 1990, respectively. The Impoundment Control Act (“ICA”) authorizes the President to defer budget authority in limited circumstances: (1) to provide contingencies; (2) to achieve savings made possible by or through changes in requirements or greater efficiency of operations; or (3) as specifically provided by law. 2 USC §684(b). Title 2 USC §683 provides in relevant part that:
"Whenever the President determines that all or part of any budget authority will not be required to carry out the full objectives or scope of programs for which it is provided or that such budget authority should be rescinded for fiscal policy or other reasons (including the termination of authorized projects or activities for which budget authority has been provided) … "
Notwithstanding the plain language of the statute providing for consideration of fiscal policy and other policy reasons … the GAO partisanly found to the contrary on Impeachment-Pen-Day-Cue. The President has repeatedly said publicly that his concerns were predicated upon ‘fiscal policy’ … not paying foreign aid to corrupt governments. This is a known, frequently articulated, and codified policy of the United States. John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-92, div. A, title XII, §1250, 129 Stat. 726, 1068 (Nov. 25, 2015). Understand, the GAO's conclusion that the funds were deferred pursuant to an impermissible policy reason is not predicated upon the submissions to Congress concerning the successive deferments, but rather, pursuant to a response of the OMB which the opinion states is attached to the opinion. "Curiously", the published opinion does not contain the attachments identified in it.
The GAO should release the numerous documents and correspondence upon which it purports to rely to substantiate its deviation from the plain meaning of the ICA and obviates the obvious legal divide between this case and the partisan authority recited in its opinion. These documents, incorporated by reference into the opinion, should necessarily be part of the public consideration. We have the right … and the ability … to evaluate the findings for ourselves. Without them, the opinion is simply conclusory.
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for their release.
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for their release ...