In response to President Trump’s drive to create an “Anti-Weaponization Fund” to compensate people he believes were the victims of government persecution, lawmakers have introduced proposals which would prohibit the use of federal tax dollars to create a special fund from which the President could dispense money to those whom he believes have legitimate grievances against the federal government, create a simplified means by which those who have such grievances can get compensation through the federal courts, and prohibit arrangements between the President and the government without judicial review. The Congress should pass this legislation, as well as legislation to require the reporting of funds given to the President by those pardoned by him or seeking such pardons, to reduce the chances of abuse of power by both Republican and Democratic Presidents.
The three bills currently before the House of Representatives were introduced in response to the settlement of a lawsuit by President Trump against the Internal Revenue Service after an IRS employee illegally released some of Trump’s tax-related information, which the IRS should have kept confidential. Part of the settlement included the creation of a $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” from which Trump would dole out money to those whom he believed were victimized by alleged government persecution. Not only Democrats, but many Republican members of Congress as well, were aghast at the possibility of Trump giving money to those whom he had pardoned, especially participants in the 1/6/21 assault on the Capitol to block the counting of the electoral vote, which would make Joe Biden president.
The bills include:
- The No Taxpayer-Funded Settlement Slush Funds Act to prevent the funding of the “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” and hence prohibit payments to, in the words of Democratic House Judiciary members, “January 6 rioters, MAGA sycophants, senior government officials and members of the President or Vice President’s family.”
- The Constitutional Rights Act to establish how those whose constitutional rights have been violated by the government by any means, including “by malicious agents who commit assault, wrongful death, malicious prosecution, retaliation assault,” etc., can claim financial compensation;
- The Block Lawless Agreements and Nullify Corrupt Handouts and Emoluments (BLANCHE) Act, to prevent future settlements between whomever is President and the government (such as the one between President Trump and the IRS) without judicial review.
One could well be suspicious of the motives behind those who’ve introduced these bills: Democratic congressmen led by Jamie Raskin, who led the Democrats’ second effort to impeach President Trump in 2021. Nonetheless, while these bills are aimed squarely at President Trump, they will, if passed, limit future presidents, Republican and Democratic too.
Neither Trump nor Republican presidents in general have any monopoly on presidential excesses. Democratic presidents can be, and have, also acted questionably. For example, President Clinton granted pardons to representatives of New York State voting blocks while Hillary campaigned for a New York Senate seat, and to a convicted felon whose ex-wife had donated to the Clinton Library and to Hillary Clinton’s campaign for U. S. Senator in 2000. And Hillary’s brothers were given hundreds of thousands of dollars by pardon-seekers to lobby Clinton, although some of the funds were returned after the payments had been exposed in the media. Clinton’s obvious abuse of the pardon power, and the possibility of future pardons given to those who make the right payments to the right people, require the revival of a fourth bill proposed by Raskin a few years ago—the Defend Our Democracy Act, which would require the reporting of all donations given by pardon seekers.
No doubt all Democrats will support these acts, seeing them as a means of resisting President Trump’s overreach in these matters. And most Republicans, given who’s fighting for these acts, will no doubt consider opposing them. But they should also remember that whatever limits are put on President Trump’s powers today will be applied to Democratic presidents in the future. Therefore, they should join with the Democrats and support the passage of these acts now.
Malcolm L. Cross has lived in Stephenville since 1987 and taught politics and government at Tarleton for 36 years, retiring in 2023. His political and civic activities include service on the Stephenville City Council (2000-2014) and on the Erath County Republican Executive Committee (1990-2024). He was Mayor pro-tem of Stephenville from 2008 to 2014. He has served on the Board of Directors of the Stephenville Economic Development Authority since 2018, and as chair of the Erath County Appraisal District’s Appraisal Review Board since 2015. He is also a member of the Stephenville Rotary Club, the Board of Vestry of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, and the Executive Committee of the Boy Scouts’ Pecan Valley District. Views expressed in this column are his and do not reflect those of The Flash as a whole.
Be the first to comment