>>Congress in charge of the purse

Congress authorizes appropriations for new expenses (so that executive branch could not authorize their own expenses at taxpayer cost), but not cost cutting within executive branch

That's patently ridiculous to anyone who has read the constitution lately. It was even a ridiculous idea to Republicans a few months ago when they argued that forgiving student loan debt was outside of the presidents power, despite that money having already been approved by Congress and spent. They can not in good faith now argue that the executive gets final and unlimited authority over spending.

Article I, Section 9 grants Congress the power of the purse to approve spending and article II Section 3 says that the president must "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". That's all of the authority over the budget the president has: the ability to faithfully execute the spending Congress approved or to veto the bill when it's passed.

Further, the matter has been to the supreme court TWICE already. First during Nixon's reign in the 70's (Nixon lost), then later under Clinton during the line-item veto mess. Clinton also lost, rightfully.

The worst part of all of this is that I know these things and I'm NOT someone who swore to uphold the constitution.