Dozens of House Republicans accused the Biden administration Tuesday of illegally changing a rule that gives states and municipalities more time to spend billions in pandemic-era emergency funding, and are demanding that the change gets revoked.
In a letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, 36 lawmakers argued that the rule change was done unilaterally and failed to comply with a handful of laws, and that the change perpetuates more “wasteful spending” because of a continued lack of oversight.
The money was originally intended to support state and local recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.
But the conservative lawmakers, led by Reps. Kevin Hern of Oklahoma and Ben Cline of West Virginia, contend the Treasury Department was purposefully preventing the money from being used elsewhere, despite the Biden administration declaring the pandemic’s end in May.
“It is abundantly clear that Treasury is attempting, through this immediately effective and final rulemaking, to wall off money from Congress as we seek offsets to new federal expenditures,” the lawmakers wrote.
The lawmakers called the effects of the rule change “staggering” and listed a series of laws that the tweak violates, including the Congressional Review Act, the Anti-Deficiency Act, and the American Rescue Plan, which authorized the funding in 2021.
The letter from the House Republicans follows a similar letter from six Republican senators, who threatened that they would “have no choice” but to try and reverse the policy under the Congressional Review Act if the Biden administration does not change course.
The Washington Times reached out for comment from the Treasury Department.
The rule change loosens how states and municipalities must legally obligate money from the $350 billion Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund by the end of next year.
The lawmakers took issue with the leeway given to local and state governments to develop a plan on how they would spend the money, effectively giving a two-year extension to spend the money beyond next year’s deadline.
The lawmakers claimed that, so far, much of the funding was not actually being spent properly. Instead, millions were flowing toward golf course improvements, building pickleball courts, and sports stadiums, among others, because of a lack of oversight and review.
They argued that the Treasury Department needed to provide more oversight, considering that 44%, or about $152 billion, of the funding is still unobligated, rather than “unlawfully” expanding the obligation period.
The lawmakers also claimed that the rule change could be politically motivated because of its timing with the final year in President Biden’s first term.
“The SLFRF fund is one program that requires additional oversight,” the lawmakers wrote. “As has been explored, it does not appear that President Biden and Treasury are properly managing the SLFRF program, and indeed are now seeking to unlawfully and unilaterally expand it for apparently political purposes. We cannot tolerate that.”
Please read
our comment policy before commenting.
