Trump’s Grip on Federal Purse Strings Raises Alarm Over Spending Power

WASHINGTON – As the federal government shutdown stretched into its second week, President Donald Trump has wielded control over billions in federal dollars in ways critics say push the boundaries of legality and constitutional norms. From withholding congressionally approved funds to redirecting tariff revenues and reshaping discretionary grants, Trump’s approach to federal spending has become a central flashpoint in Washington’s budget battles.

Shutdown as Leverage

The shutdown, which began October 1 after Congress failed to pass a new funding bill, has furloughed nearly 900,000 federal workers and left another 700,000 working without pay, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Trump has threatened to deny back pay to furloughed employees, despite a 2019 law requiring it. “It depends on who we’re talking about,” he told reporters on October 7, suggesting some workers “don’t deserve to be taken care of” (Government Executive, Oct. 7, 2025).

The White House has also floated using tariff revenues to fund select programs, including the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) food assistance program, which was projected to run out of money during the shutdown (MSN, Oct. 8, 2025). While the move kept benefits flowing, it underscored Trump’s willingness to bypass Congress in deciding how federal dollars are spent.

“This is not how appropriations are supposed to work,” said Joshua Sewell, research director at Taxpayers for Common Sense. “Congress holds the purse strings. The president is supposed to execute the law, not rewrite it.”

Withholding Funds, Defying Congress

Beyond the shutdown, Trump has repeatedly withheld or delayed funds already approved by Congress. A September analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that the administration had failed to obligate roughly $26 billion in fiscal year 2025 funds by July, far behind historical averages. The delays were concentrated in agencies Trump has targeted for cuts, including the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Institute of Museum and Library Services (CBPP, Sept. 26, 2025).

Democratic lawmakers have accused the administration of engaging in illegal “impoundments”—the withholding of funds Congress has appropriated. “This is extortion, plain and simple,” said Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee. “The president is trying to force his agenda by starving programs he doesn’t like.”

The Supreme Court in September granted Trump broader leeway to withhold funds, lifting a lower court ruling that had blocked his efforts to rescind foreign aid appropriations (Wikipedia, 2025 Shutdown). The decision emboldened the White House to expand its use of rescissions and delays, raising fears that Congress’s power of the purse is being eroded.

Executive Orders Reshape Grantmaking

Trump has also moved aggressively to reshape discretionary grantmaking. In August, he signed Executive Order 14332, requiring all federal grants to undergo review by political appointees to ensure they align with administration priorities. The order allows agencies to terminate grants “for convenience” if they no longer serve Trump’s policy goals (JD Supra, Aug. 12, 2025).

The White House framed the move as an effort to stop “wasteful grantmaking.” A fact sheet cited examples such as “drag shows in Ecuador” and “critical race theory doctoral training” as evidence of misuse of taxpayer dollars (White House Fact Sheet, Aug. 7, 2025).

But critics say the order injects ideology into what was once a largely apolitical process. “This is about weaponizing federal dollars to punish institutions and projects that don’t fit the president’s worldview,” said Dr. Laura Blessing, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Government Affairs Institute. “It undermines the merit-based system that has guided federal research and cultural funding for decades.”

Targeting Universities and Research

Universities have been among the hardest hit. Northwestern University is grappling with a $790 million freeze in federal research funding, with faculty divided over whether to negotiate concessions with the Trump administration to restore the money (Daily Northwestern, Oct. 8, 2025).

Some professors warn that accepting a deal could compromise academic freedom. “By withholding funds already promised, the administration is extorting the institution to shape its image,” said Prof. Jorge Coronado. Others argue that without federal support, research could collapse. “If the research at Northwestern collapses entirely, we shut down as a research institution,” said Prof. Justin Notestein.

The standoff has raised alarms across academia. “This is not just about one university,” said Prof. Helen Tilley, a historian at Northwestern. “It’s about whether the federal government can dictate what we teach, what we research, and what we say.”

Comparisons to Past Presidents

Presidents have long sought to influence federal spending, but Trump’s approach is unusually aggressive. Richard Nixon attempted to impound funds in the 1970s, prompting Congress to pass the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Ronald Reagan used rescissions to signal opposition to domestic programs, though Congress often ignored them.

“What’s different now is the scale and the brazenness,” said budget historian Allen Schick. “Trump is not just signaling opposition—he’s actively blocking funds and daring Congress to stop him.”

Political Payoffs and Risks

Supporters argue that Trump is fulfilling his promise to cut “waste, fraud, and abuse.” Conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation have praised his efforts to eliminate funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, climate initiatives, and what they call “radical ideologies.”

But the political risks are significant. Federal workers, many of whom live in swing states like Virginia and Pennsylvania, are furious over threats to their pay. States facing higher costs for programs like SNAP food assistance—after Trump’s July spending bill shifted billions in costs to state budgets (CNBC, Aug. 8, 2025)—are warning of service cuts or tax hikes.

“This is a dangerous game,” said former Congressional Budget Office director Alice Rivlin. “You can’t run a government by starving it of funds and expecting it to function. At some point, the public will feel the consequences.”

Outlook

As of October 8, 2025, the standoff shows no signs of easing. Trump has hinted at “permanently eliminating” billions in Democratic priorities during the shutdown (New York Sun, Oct. 7, 2025). His Office of Management and Budget has instructed agencies to prepare mass firing plans for programs deemed inconsistent with his agenda (Politico, Sept. 24, 2025).

Whether Congress can reassert its constitutional authority over spending remains an open question. For now, Trump’s grip on the federal purse strings has become both a political weapon and a constitutional test.

“This is not just about dollars and cents,” said Elgie Holstein, a former OMB official. “It’s about the balance of power in our democracy. If Congress loses control of the purse, it loses control of the government.”

— Reporting by Nick Ravenshade. Sources: Daily Northwestern, MSN, AOL, CBS News, CBPP, White House Fact Sheet, JD Supra, Politico, CNBC, New York Sun, Wikipedia, PolitiFact, Government Executive.