Congress is Suddenly Outraged by Slush Funds

 

Conscientious private sector business executives would never leave town for a planned vacation with serious unaddressed issues on their plates and expect to keep their jobs. But that’s exactly what both Houses of the United States Congress did on May 22 with no plans to return until the first week in June.

 

 The passage of what is being called Reconciliation 2.0 in the Senate required their immediate attention when they chose to walk away in favor of their Memorial week recess. The reconciliation process requires 51 votes to pass as opposed to the usual 60 votes needed in the Senate. This was a work around to circumvent the Democrats’ blocking of funding for Homeland Security, first through a 76-day partial shutdown that ended April 30, and now through continued withholding of their votes from funding Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The Reconciliation contains $72 billion to fund these Agencies.

 

The Senate was scheduled to pass Reconciliation 2.0 before Memorial Day, send it on to the House for consideration and passage, and then move it to the President’s desk to sign by June 1.

 

The excuse that Congress used to go home instead of doing their jobs was Trump’s request to include a $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund in the package. The media and politicians on both sides of the aisle summoned their greatest imitations of moral outrage. They called it a move that stunned government ethics experts and railed against what they called a “slush fund for Trump allies.”

 

Democrats, members of the media, and some Republicans tried to generate public opposition to what they describe as “the slush fund” by calling it a way to compensate January 6 rioters who were convicted of assaulting police officers. They were able to concoct this extreme scenario because any American who believes they were harmed by Government abuses is eligible to apply for compensation and have their case reviewed.

 

What we know about the Government’s conduct in the aftermath of the January 6 riot stands as evidence that those who were caught up in their net have as much right as any other citizen to ask for review.

 

There were 1,500 cases brought against citizens who were at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Some were jailed without bail for as long as 4 years awaiting trial. It is undisputed that excessive measures were taken against some who were simply present or did not engage in violence.

 

In March 2021 Michael Sherwin, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lead prosecutor, gave an interview to CBS’s 60 Minutes. He revealed the Government wanted to send a message with harsh treatment of defendants “to ensure that there was shock and awe.”  They wanted to discourage protesters from returning to Washington for the inauguration scheduled for two weeks later. During the interview Sherwin talked about the specifics of cases and speculated there could be future sedition charges for some for attempting to overthrow the Government. He further commented that “Trump was the magnet that brought the people to DC” and may be culpable.

 

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was overseeing some of the cases, was extremely upset the interview had occurred and said: “These types of statements in the media have the potential to affect the jury pool and the rights of these defendants.”  An internal investigation was launched by the DOJ and Sherwin left the Department rather than face disciplinary action. The full interview is available for viewing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoAqWnD7NTI

 

Important details are not yet available to allow rational Americans to make up their own minds about whether the Anti-Weaponization Fund is a good idea. We have enough information, however, to see right through the hypocrisy and pretend outrage over “slush funds” by members of Congress.

 

 

What We Know About the Anti-Weaponization Fund

 

The fund allocates $1.776 billion to compensate individuals unfairly targeted or prosecuted by any previous administration, but was perceived necessary because of the unprecedented targeting of citizens for political, personal, or ideological reasons that occurred under Biden. The Fund was a tradeoff in a legal settlement in which Trump dropped a $10 billion lawsuit he had against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The lawsuit was filed because a contractor working for the IRS leaked Trump’s tax records to the New York Times. The contractor pleaded guilty in 2024 and was sentenced to 5 years in prison.

 

Funding for the Anti-Weaponization Fund will come out of the Federal Government’s Judgment Fund, an account used to settle claims against the United States. The Judgment Fund, created in 1956, is a permanent, indefinite appropriation that pays court judgements and settlements of lawsuits against the Government. It is managed by the Bureau for Fiscal Services, and is the source of the Government’s “deep pockets.” It was created to eliminate the need for Congress to pass legislation to fund every successful claim against the Government. An annual report to Congress details the activities of the Judgment Fund.

 

The Anti-Weaponization Fund will be overseen by a 5-member Commission appointed by the Attorney General. The Fund will process claims no later than December 1, 2028 from those who believe they have been victims of lawfare (misuse of legal systems for political objectives) or Government weaponization (partisan misuse of state power). Any money remaining in the Fund after that date will revert back to the Federal Government.

 

The compensation to victims who prevail in their claims will be financial payouts and formal apologies. Determinations by the Fund are final and not subject to further review by any other body. Donald Trump and members of his family are not eligible to receive payouts from this Fund.

 

The Fund will be required to send quarterly reports of activity to the Attorney General. Acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, has committed to making the quarterly reports available to the public and the activity of the Fund subject to audits.

 

Compensation for Government Abuses is Not New

 

Billions of dollars are paid out every year to those who have been harmed by the Government. The Biden and Obama administrations routinely paid individual citizens harmed by Federal employees or Agencies and Obama created the “Keepseagle Fund,” $760 million to compensate claims of racism against the Federal Government over a period of decades.

 

Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson, appearing on FOX Business May 26, expressed his support for the Fund. He called Trump’s timing of the introduction of the Fund “horribly unfortunate.”  Trump is unconcerned with political expedience when advancing the initiatives he believes must be undertaken. It’s one of many reasons the people love him and career politicians detest him.

 

Conservatives were targeted in both the Obama and Biden administrations with the unlawful weaponization of government power. For example:

 

Beginning in 2010 the IRS subjected conservative non-profits’ applications for tax exempt status to heightened scrutiny, delay, and excessive documentation and applied disproportionate scrutiny to conservative organizations that already had attained tax exempt status. Commissioner Steven Miller was forced to submit his resignation and Director Lois Lerner was forced to retire over the scandalous abuse of power.

 

The FBI worked with the Biden administration in a coordinated effort to suppress conservative viewpoints on social media.

 

The National School Boards Association sent a letter to the Biden administration comparing parent protests at school board meetings to domestic terrorism. In response, the Department of Justice directed the FBI to clamp down on perceived threats against school administrators. Parents across the country had their right to dissent suppressed.

 

The Slush Fund that Trumps all Slush Funds

 

The recent resignation in disgrace of California Democratic Congressman and candidate for Governor Eric Swalwell reminds us that Congress has a history of sleazy sexual predators who take advantage of the power differential they enjoy over staffers in some of the most disgusting ways imaginable. Last week the Chair of the Republican Women’s Caucus and the Chair of the Democratic Women’s Caucus of the House appeared together to talk about the prevalence of the problem and their determination to wipe it out.

 

Between 1997 and 2019 the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights paid over $18 million to settle 291 workplace complaints that included sexual misconduct and harassment. Congress mandates that sexual misconduct settlements and awards are handled through a defined dispute resolution process rather than a standard public lawsuit to protect members of Congress from public exposure. Non-disclosure agreements are required from the victims.

 

The process defines the eligible employees as staffers, interns, and temporary staff. Victims are required to file a claim within 180 days of the violation and must participate in mandatory confidential mediation of the dispute. As of 2018, members of Congress are required to repay the Treasury for settlements related to sexual harassment, but they are not required to disclose their involvement to their constituents.

 

Earlier this year, an attempt spearheaded by Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace to release the names of every member who used these funds was defeated with the majority voting to send the resolution to “committee,” continuing to shield the identities of those involved. Mace vowed to continue the fight to lift confidentiality rules.

 

Members of Congress have conjured up absurd justifications for their indefensible shielding of member misconduct including confidentiality protects victims from media scrutiny; it keeps the settlement process from becoming politicized; changing the rules retroactively is unfair and would break confidential agreements; and disclosing members involved in sexual misconduct claims might lead to political maneuvering by the opposing Party.

 

Congress has no intention of removing the shroud of secrecy from its sexual predator slush fund. It’s time to demand transparency. A simple solution will protect the innocent and punish the guilty:

 

• Maintain strict confidentiality for the victims. We have no need to know who they are.

• Publish the name of every member of Congress involved in a settlement or judgment from the fund. Include the allegations and the amount of money paid. The member’s constituents can take it from there to learn the details directly from their representative and determine how they want to respond.

 

Congressional Compensation is a Slush Fund

 

Members of Congress are paid an annual salary of $174,000. They also receive very large and flexible budgets to cover their “office operations.”  In the House of Representatives it is called the Members’ Representational Allowance (MRA) and ranges from $1.2 - $1.4 million annually. In the Senate it is called the Senators’ Official Personnel and Office Expense Account (SOPOEA) and ranges from $3 – 4.8 million annually. Amounts vary based on distance of the home district from Washington DC, cost of living in the home district, and number of constituents.

 

There are rules about how the money can be spent and members of Congress must account for their spending. Each House of Congress has a process in place to collect and publish the data. Theoretically, citizens can access these reports but if you try, you likely will not be able to find them and, if you do, you will not be able to derive any useful information from them. If you call your Senator or Representative’s office to ask about the detailed spending of these massive accounts, as I have in the past, you will likely get the run around and learn nothing.

 

Members of Congress use complexity and massive data dumps to technically comply with requirements while keeping details of the operations slush funds secret. It’s time to demand that constituents receive an annual detailed, understandable accounting of the operations allowance spending.

 

The weaponization of Government power Donald Trump has been subjected to left him with a keen personal interest in making sure that every citizen harmed by the abuses of Government under the Biden administration has the opportunity to apply for compensation. Congress is suddenly outraged by slush funds. Give us a break!