House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy Kevin Owen McCarthyMcCarthy's Democratic challenger to launch first TV ad highlighting Air Force service as single mother Trump asked Chamber of Commerce to reconsider Democratic endorsements: report The Hill's Morning Report - Sponsored by The Air Line Pilots Association - White House moves closer to Pelosi on virus relief bill MORE (R-Calif.) and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer Steny Hamilton HoyerOn The Money: Powell, Mnuchin stress limits of emergency loans | House seeks to salvage vote on spending bill | Economists tell lawmakers: Kill the virus to heal the economy House moves toward spending vote after bipartisan talks House Democrats mull delay on spending bill vote MORE (D-Md.) are squaring off over the administration's push to rescind $15.4 billion in previously approved funds.

Hoyer ripped into the clawback package Thursday following McCarthy's announcement that the House could take up the spending measure during the coming work period.

The White House sent its request to rescind the approved funds on Tuesday, giving Congress 45 days to approve the measure as Democrats cry foul over the idea of canceling recently approved 2018 funding.

ADVERTISEMENT

Hoyer blasted the clawback package for targeting a contingency fund for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) while leaving defense discretionary spending intact. He argued that the funding is necessary in the event that enrollment is higher than anticipated.

“Last week, Mr. Speaker, I said if there was spending that was neither necessary and had been authorized over long periods of time, then I would have no objection personally to that rescission and would think we could initiate that action,” Hoyer said during a speech.

“But I would hope that in both of these instances we would not take actions, which would adversely affect those who are challenged in America either because of health reasons or nutritional reasons.”

McCarthy, citing the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, maintained that no one would lose health coverage. He noted that Congress set aside $500 million for the fund while just $300 million has been used since it was established.

The California Republican also noted Democrats recently voted for legislation that contained nearly $7 billion in cuts to the CHIP program to provide funding for other programs within the Department of Health and Human Services.

“Let me get this straight, is it OK to rescind the CHIP program when Nancy Pelosi Nancy PelosiPelosi: Trump hurrying to fill SCOTUS seat so he can repeal ObamaCare House lawmakers reach deal to avert shutdown Centrist Democrats 'strongly considering' discharge petition on GOP PPP bill MORE wants to spend more, but when Mr. Trump wants to save the taxpayers money with no effect on the CHIP program at all, is that what Armageddon is?” he said.

Hoyer argued that GOP lawmakers are using rescission proposals as a way to save face following backlash from conservatives over spending levels set in the $1.3 trillion omnibus package that President Trump Donald John TrumpOmar fires back at Trump over rally remarks: 'This is my country' Pelosi: Trump hurrying to fill SCOTUS seat so he can repeal ObamaCare Trump mocks Biden appearance, mask use ahead of first debate MORE signed in March.

“This is not about rescissions per se, what it is about is the flak that the majority party is getting, the president is getting from the Club for Growth, from Heritage Action saying, 'Your budget was too big, the omnibus was too big. We don't like it,'” Hoyer said. “So, in an effort to show fiscal discipline, who do they go after? The Children's Health Insurance Program.”

Hoyer said Republicans should instead look at cutting some of the $95 billion in unobligated funds in the Department of Defense if they want to give money back to the taxpayers.

McCarthy said they the money in the contingency fund in untouchable, arguing Hoyer should “keep his word and vote for it” since the funding is currently just sitting in an account.

“The great thing about a rescission is this doesn’t have to be the only one,” he said. “If you want to work with us and find savings for the taxpayers, I will make myself available to have those meetings.”