UPDATE (Jan. 29, 2025, 1:20 p.m. ET): The Office of Management and Budget on Wednesday rescinded its previous order freezing federal funding that might run against Trump’s policies.
When President Donald Trump named Russel Vought to run the Office of Management and Budget, I warned it was a sign that his administration intended to seize total control of federal spending from Congress. Two weeks ago, I said that if Vought were confirmed, billions of dollars in projects would go unfunded at the president’s whim, no matter what legislators have said.
I was wrong. They didn’t even wait for Vought to be confirmed.
Instead, on Monday night, OMB’s acting director, Matthew J. Vaeth, sent a memo across the federal government ordering a freeze of “all Federal financial assistance.” The memo insists on calling this a “pause.” A federal judge intervened on Tuesday afternoon, issuing an administrative stay to hold off on the OMB order being fully implemented until Monday at soonest. But beyond the immediate and likely catastrophic impact of halting, even briefly, any portion of the $3 trillion in annual spending Vaeth cites, the memo serves as a reminder that any “temporary” power that Trump claims for himself won’t be easily relinquished.
While Vaeth was anything but vague about the reasoning behind the funding freeze, the scope of the pause itself has been wildly confusing.
“The use of Federal resources to advance Marxist equity, transgenderism, and green new deal social engineering policies is a waste of taxpayer dollars that does not improve the day-to-day lives of those we serve,” Vaeth wrote in the memo, which was first reported by Marisa Kabas of The Handbasket. It then required federal agencies to go through all grants and loans that it doles out to ensure that they align with the firehose of executive orders that Trump has issued. In the meantime, Vaeth ordered agencies to “temporarily pause” any programs that could contradict those orders “including, but not limited to, financial assistance for foreign aid, nongovernmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal.”
While Vaeth was anything but vague about the reasoning behind the funding freeze, the scope of the pause itself has been wildly confusing. While exempting programs that provide assistance “directly to individuals,” as well as Social Security and Medicare, the order could potentially affect a big and broad swath of programming. Accompanying the memo was a nearly 900-page spreadsheet for officials to plug in the details of their programs and identify which funding is legally required to be distributed before March 15, when the current short-term spending bill runs out of money. And because the two-page memo lacked specific guidance, the odds are good that program officials — with the encouragement of their newly installed political minders, who the order tasks with overseeing this process— will err on the side of shutting down anything that could conceivably fall into one of Vaeth’s ideological buckets.
For a glimpse at how this will play out in the short term, look to the halt on foreign aid handed down last week. That freeze didn’t just call for a review but a “stop work” order for all currently funded programs. On Monday, several U.S. Agency for International Development staffers were placed on leave for supposedly violating the pause — a warning to others who might want to keep doing their jobs in the face of a blatantly illegal order. Since that halt, a sense of confusion and concern has reigned in the international aid community.
The mess will surely worsen now that domestic programs are included. Not even the administration seems to know the scope of what it’s asking: When reporters asked White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, at her first briefing, if Medicaid would be affected, she replied, “I’ll check back on that and get back to you.” OMB itself issued a follow-up that said Medicaid, SNAP, Pell grants and “other similar programs” will not be paused.
The shifting guidance has had nigh-cartoonish consequences. The spokesperson for Meals on Wheels on Tuesday told HuffPost’s Arthur Delaney that “the uncertainty right now is creating chaos for local Meals on Wheels providers not knowing whether they should be serving meals today.” (Leavitt said at her briefing that the group would not be included in the pause.) The idea that a program as innocuous seeming as Meals on Wheels could see its funding frozen may seem absurd. But as we saw with “anti-woke” laws in Florida, vagueness prompts pre-emptive cooperation and censorship from those who fear retaliation. Can anyone say with a straight face they know for sure whether MAGA views feeding the elderly as overly “inclusionary” for old people?








