Hacker News
points by rayiner 2 days ago | 0 comments
That’s not quite accurate. While Congress didn’t abolish USAID, it did enact appropriations bills that transferred the funding to the State Department. https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/4779

USAID still exists on paper. But under the current appropriations bills, the funding is allocated to the State Department.

[–] lesuorac 2 days ago
That bill was never passed into law.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/4779...

[–] rayiner 2 days ago
It was incorporated into the consolidated 2026 appropriations bill that was enacted: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/119/hr4779
[–] paulryanrogers 2 days ago
Most DOGE activity was in 2025, no?
[–] rayiner 2 days ago
There was a recession bill passed in 2025 July 2025 for already appropriated monies.

Moreover, the impoundment rules don’t require congress to act first before the president acts. They require the money to be spent, but if the budgetary authority is provided over a year it’s hard to say when the president must spend that money within the year. (Unless there’s specific requirements in the statute.)

[–] paulryanrogers 1 day ago
DOGE's mandate expired July 4th 2025.

It's absurd to argue the executive can intentionally delay and shuffle money earmarked specifically for certain purposes, like USAID. Why not just give the executive all power over the Treasury? Why have Congress at all?

[–] insane_dreamer 2 days ago
That was only passed a year _after_ DOGE had already gutted USAID entirely, so the Executive branch was acting outside the authority of Congress (or in contravention with Congress) when it gutted USAID in early 2025.
[–] rayiner 2 days ago
There was an bill rescinding already appropriated 2025 USAID funding in July 2025: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/4

There was a few months of overhang, but the Supreme Court ruled that the administration had to pay out billions of dollars that were already allocated to contracts during that period.

[–] jeremyjh 2 days ago
"A few months of overhang" was thousands of people starving or dying of malaria. Also, they didn't rescind all the funding, $4B was just left to expire.
[–] insane_dreamer 2 days ago
But again DOGE acted before that was in place. All I’m saying is I expect a future DOJ to find legal grounds for going ofter those involved for exceeding their authority.
[–] rayiner 2 days ago
What makes you think the impoundment process requires the executive to wait until Congress acts? Impoundment is a rule that says “you have to spend this money.” The appropriations bills give budget authority over a year or multiple years. Why can’t the executive act first then ask congress to rescind money he isn’t going to spend for the rest of the year?