This story was produced as part of the Colorado Capitol News Alliance. It first appeared at cpr.org.
Congress left Washington for the Memorial Day recess without passing a major Republican priority: passing a party-line bill that funds Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection for the rest of the Trump administration.
Funding unrelated to the bill helped derail passage of the bill. This week, the Department of Justice announced the creation of a $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization fund,” that would give cash payments to Trump allies who feel they were targeted for unwarranted prosecutions or investigations.
Colorado’s Democratic senators panned the fund.
Sen. John Hickenlooper described it as a “slush fund.” He said when Republicans bring their bill to the floor, he plans to offer an amendment to stop people like former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters from being able to cash in.
“Election deniers who break the law are not victims. They are criminals. The last thing we should do is reward these people with your taxpayer dollars,” Hickenlooper said in a statement.
GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert, however, supported the idea of Peters getting money from it. “This would be well deserved for Tina Peters!!” she wrote on social media after Vice President JD Vance used Peters as an example of someone who would be entitled to compensation.
Still, on the other side of the Capitol, the fund raised concerns with several Republican senators, who spent two hours with Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on Thursday questioning the move.
Republican Sen. John Curtis of Utah told reporters, “What are my concerns? An executive branch being able to, at their will, send money to people without the proper judicial rule. Those are my concerns.”
GOP Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin told CNN “somebody described it as a galactic blunder, and I think that’s true.”
The U.S. House shifted its schedule this week in anticipation of getting the reconciliation funding bill, but instead cut the week a day short.
When asked about his thoughts on the fund, Colorado Rep. Jeff Hurd, a Republican, said he tries to avoid commenting on things before he sees the details. “Let’s see what it is exactly. There’s still a lot of questions out there and I look forward to learning the details,” he said.
GOP Rep. Gabe Evans is also awaiting more details on the fund.
CPR News has also reached out to GOP Rep. Jeff Crank for comment. He did not comment before this article was published.
At least one bipartisan pair of House members, GOP Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick and Democratic Rep. Tom Suozzi, have introduced a bill to kill the fund. And Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin has introduced a bill that stops federal dollars from going to the fund and that would prevent anyone convicted in the January 6 attack on the Capitol from getting money.
Democratic Rep. Joe Neguse took to the House floor to condemn the move. “It is unconscionable. It is corrupt. And my Republican colleagues in this chamber do nothing about it.”
President Trump is not letting go of the idea. He posted on social media Friday morning, “I gave up a lot of money in allowing the just announced Anti-Weaponization Fund to go forward,” he wrote, noting the leak of his tax returns, as well as an FBI search of Mar-a-Lago during an investigation into his retention of classified government records after his first term. “Instead, I am helping others, who were so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration, receive, at long last, JUSTICE!”
The deal to end Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS also says the IRS is “forever barred and precluded” from auditing or prosecuting Trump, his sons or the company.
Ballroom funding gone?
There’s still no text for the Republican funding bill, but another Trump funding priority has reportedly fallen by the wayside: an additional $1 billion for the U.S. Secret Service, a portion of which would go to pay for security around Trump’s ballroom.
Last week, the Senate parliamentarian nixed the idea, but Republicans were expected to try and rewrite that portion to get it to pass the so-called Byrd rule, which bars non-budgetary policy from inclusion in budget bills.
“First, Trump tried to make taxpayers pay for his $1 billion White House ballroom. Now it's his $1.8 billion slush fund for his cronies. It's no wonder Republicans’ plans to hand ICE another $80 billion have been thrown into chaos,” wrote Sen. Michael Bennet on social media. “Even members of his own party can’t stomach his abuse of taxpayer dollars.”
Boebert referred back to the parliamentarian’s ruling, and said she didn’t expect it to be part of the final bill, adding “it’s out of my control at this point.”
Evans, a former police officer, noted that there’s been an increase in political rhetoric and threats that must be addressed. “As House Republicans push forward with passing a reconciliation package to fund the protection of the American people, I remain open to considering the inclusion of supplemental USSS funding to ensure the men and women tasked with protecting our nation’s leaders have the resources and support necessary to carry out their mission,” he said in a statement.
Republican Majority Leader John Thune told reporters that senators would pick up where they left off on June 1, the day Trump said the bill should be at his desk.
Asked whether a resolution could be reached? Thune replied, “That’s what I’m counting on.”
