Yves here. In an encouraging turn of events, widespread public outcry has successfully halted a controversial financial scheme proposed by Donald Trump. This development raises hopes for more accountability as Trump’s influence wanes.
By Brad Reed, staff writer at Common Dreams. Originally published at Common Dreams
President Donald Trump has reportedly abandoned his plans to secure Congressional approval for a $1.8 billion slush fund intended for his political allies, following significant public backlash.
A senior source within the Trump administration informed Axios on Monday that the initiative is “dead for now,” particularly after two federal judges recently ruled against it, with one judge specifically blocking the disbursement of any funds.
According to reports, the fund was established to compensate allies who were allegedly targeted during President Joe Biden’s administration, including individuals involved in the violent uprising at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. However, it became “a distraction” that jeopardized the president’s wider legislative goals, as one source explained.
“The president believes that the government has been weaponized against people—not just him,” noted the source. “But this isn’t the right time or method for addressing that.”
Reese Gorman, a politics reporter at NOTUS, relayed that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) played a role in persuading Trump to drop the plan during a conversation on Monday.
Gorman further reported that the fund faced considerable pushback from Congressional Republicans, many of whom sought ways to prevent its establishment.
The decision to abandon the fund coincided with Democratic lawmakers preparing legislation to obstruct it.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) stated on Monday that his caucus aims to go beyond merely terminating this particular fund; they wish to legally prohibit Trump from attempting to create a similar one in the future.
“If Trump and Republicans are genuinely abandoning this corrupt scheme, they should have no problem legislating against it,” Schumer posted on social media. “This week, Senate Democrats will pursue legislation to ban this slush fund and ensure no president can establish something like this again. Trump’s assurances mean little.”
Schumer’s sentiments were mirrored by Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), who expressed skepticism regarding Trump’s sincerity in dropping the plan.
“I don’t trust Trump’s word, and neither do the American people,” Coons commented. “I look forward to collaborating with my Senate Democratic colleagues to permanently outlaw this slush fund. If Congressional Republicans are truly against this initiative, they should join us without hesitation.”
The press office of California Governor Gavin Newsom, a potential 2028 presidential contender, celebrated the apparent termination of the fund. Newsom had previously proposed a 100% tax on any Californians receiving funds from Trump’s initiative.
“Just days after Gavin Newsom took a stand against Trump’s January 6 criminal slush fund and suggested a 100% tax on any profits, Axios reports that Trump has decided to end the plan,” the press office stated. “Bullies tend to back down when faced with resistance!”
On Monday, Senators Elisa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) introduced a new piece of legislation named the “Drain the Slush Fund Act,” aimed at preventing taxpayer money from being allocated to the “president, his associates, individuals convicted of crimes, or those involved in the January 6, 2021 insurrection.”
In announcing this legislation, Slotkin described the fund as another example of Trump exploiting the government “as a personal bank for himself and his allies.”
“This so-called anti-weaponization fund represents an unprecedented misuse of taxpayer money, and it must be halted,” Slotkin expressed. “Our bill addresses this issue directly. Americans across the political spectrum are demanding that the president prioritize the economy and help lower their costs.”
In the House of Representatives, Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) partnered with Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) to introduce similar legislation intended to block the fund.
“Congress must expose what is morally unacceptable,” Suozzi posted on social media while announcing this initiative. “The checks and balances inherent in our democracy must hold us accountable.”
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, acknowledged that the reported cessation of the fund is a positive outcome. However, she cautioned against ignoring other detrimental policies that the president and his GOP allies may push through in a new budget reconciliation package.
“While eliminating this objectionable policy is critical,” Gilbert said, “we must remain vigilant and not allow this development to greenlight substantial increases in funding for [US Immigration and Customs Enforcement] embedded in the reconciliation bill.”
The legal advocacy group Democracy Forward, which has pursued lawsuits aimed at blocking the fund’s implementation, stated it will continue its efforts until Trump’s plan is conclusively abandoned.
“Until the administration comprehensively drops this scheme, we will not relent in challenging it,” declared Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward. “We anticipate the government’s response to the courts and our filings, and we are determined to advocate on behalf of our clients until justice is served.”
