Impoundment: What Congress HATES

Russ Vought, the new (and former) Director of OMB spent time with Tucker.  And PJB mentions!!

During the visit, he mentioned "impoundment," which--until Nixon--was an executive power to NOT spend money Congress allocated.  It was "Just Say No!" to the heroin injection Congress gave itself with its spending prioritizations and it had been in use since the founding.

But Congress passed a law which took away that power.  Was the law constitutional?  WHO CARES?

Naturally, this gave Congress-critters an alliance with the bloodsuckers called "agencies" who could get Congress to spend tax dollars on their own particular agency, one way or another.  Honeypots?  Videos?  Cash?  No problem...  

And naturally, that led to Continuing Resolutions (CR's) rather than budgeting-by-function.  Paul Ryan made CR's the only means of spending when Trump arrived and you can bet your life that McConnell was THE designer of that plot.  (Wouldn't be surprised to learn that McConnell was the prime mover and Ryan--who's not that bright--simply followed along.)

Thus, Congress is the de facto Executive.  What they decide on spending is final.  No exceptions.  Fuggedabout that "President" guy; Congress rules.

Fortunately, impoundments are not really Constitutional.  Unfortunately, the matter will be in the court system for quite some time, unless you "persuade" your Congress-critter to obey the Constitution and the 200-year tradition rather than choosing self-glorification by spending.

Good luck with that. 

By the way, Vought mentions Patrick J Buchanan several times--favorably.  There's good reason for that, as any American should know.