Monitoring democratic institutions through public records
Spending Money Congress Approved — Week of Jul 13, 2026
Can the President refuse to spend money that Congress already approved? This is called "impoundment" and it's usually illegal.
AI content assessment elevated
AI two-pass review flags anomalous content with P2 corroboration. Monitoring increased.
Two speeches on the floor of Congress last week raised concerns about whether the executive branch is following the rules on how taxpayer money gets spent—or doesn't get spent.
On July 14, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey described an ongoing military conflict with Iran that he says has been running since February without Congress ever voting to authorize it. He cited 14 American deaths, hundreds of injuries, and billions in costs, arguing the President is waging war without the congressional approval the Constitution requires. On July 15, Representative Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico gave a retrospective on the now-defunct Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), alleging it carried out "withholding of funds" and mass layoffs across agencies like the Forest Service and Bureau of Indian Affairs, disrupting services Congress had funded. This might matter because if the executive branch is both spending money Congress never approved (on military operations) and refusing to spend money Congress did approve (through DOGE), it could undermine Congress's power of the purse—the most fundamental check the legislature has on executive power.
Important alternative explanations deserve weight. Most significantly, both speeches come from opposition-party members criticizing the current administration, and floor speeches are designed to persuade, not to present balanced evidence. The military operations may be covered by existing legal authorities the speakers did not acknowledge. And DOGE's activities, as described, appear to have largely ended, with courts actively reviewing the legality of its actions.
Still, the specific details cited—named casualties, quoted administration officials, identified agencies—give these speeches more substance than typical political rhetoric. Whether the facts as described hold up to scrutiny will depend on court rulings, inspector general reports, and congressional investigations that may already be underway.
Limitations: This analysis is based solely on congressional floor speeches from opposition members. No executive branch responses, court decisions, or independent audits were available in this week's data to verify the claims made.