DOGE Caucus senator pushes to end 'slush fund' for presidential candidates: 'Welfare for politicians'
In commemoration of Presidents Day, a top DOGE senator is seeking to claw back $400 million sitting in a "slush fund" set up to help presidential candidates that hasn't borne fruit since Y2K.
Through the Eliminating Leftover Expenses for Campaigns from Taxpayers (ELECT) Act, Sen. Joni Ernst said she hopes to defund an account she calls "welfare for politicians."
"This Presidents Day I am fighting for the integrity of the office because the last thing we need to spend tax dollars on is more political attack ads," said Ernst, R-Iowa.
"There is no better way to pay down the $36 trillion debt than by defunding welfare for politicians. Washington should be working to benefit all Americans instead of itself."
Ernst, the chair of the DOGE caucus in the upper chamber, remarked the fund has not been successfully utilized in decades.
The last winning presidential candidate to pull from the fund was Texas Gov. George W. Bush in 2000, and later in 2004.
Since then, a handful of unsuccessful candidates have utilized it, including former Vice President Mike Pence and Green Party candidate Jill Stein; both in the 2024 cycle.
Pence's campaign reportedly received more than $1 million from the fund amid his GOP primary bid, while Stein utilized $380,000.
The late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., also received $84.1 million from the fund in 2008. An FEC release from that time said nominees of major parties are entitled to $20 million plus a cost-of-living adjustment back to 1974.
Defunding the account was first floated as one of several proposals in a DOGE-centric November letter from Ernst to Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy.
Stein told Fox News Digital the candidates' fund was "raided" of $375 million, and that Democrats too have tried to moot the effectiveness of the fund by trying to put public funding "out of reach of grassroots candidates" through their H.R.-1 (the For the People Act) during the Biden era.
A checkbox on the IRS' 1099 tax form asks filers whether they would like to pay $3 into the fund, which Stein said showed it is different than other public monies.
"It's outrageous," Stein said, calling the effort to end the fund "part of a bipartisan, anti-democratic effort to stifle competition in presidential elections – specifically by denying voters the option to support publicly financed candidates who refuse the legalized bribery of big corporate contributions."
Stein added that a majority of voters have called for presidential candidates outside the two major parties, citing a Gallup survey showing they "do such a poor job" of representing Americans.
"Publicly funded campaigns are the antidote to the massive legalized corruption that puts more money in the hands of billionaires than ever… the American people abhor the corporate buyout of our elections," Stein said.
"As life becomes increasingly unlivable for everyday Americans, while billionaire wealth skyrockets, the demand to end the sale of our democracy will be unstoppable, through simple reforms including publicly funded elections, inclusive debates, ranked choice voting, ending obstructive ballot access laws and voter suppression, and more."
"Eliminating public funding denies voters the option to support candidates who refuse pay-to-play politics."
A source familiar said FEC rules also allow candidates to continue seeking public funds for campaign debt.
IRS Code 9006, with footnotes dating the fund to at least the 1970s, allows for eligible candidates to be paid out of the fund "upon receipt of a certification from the [Federal Election] Commission."
"Amounts paid to any such candidates shall be under the control of such candidates."
In 2014, the portion of the Presidential Election Campaign Fund allocated to assist political parties with their conventions was redirected to pediatric cancer research through an act of Congress.
Then-Rep. Gregg Harper, R-Miss., drafted a bill later signed by President Barack Obama that diverted such funds to an NIH research initiative.
Then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., gave the measure a major leadership push after he heard the case of a young Leesburg girl afflicted with the disease and decided to name the legislation the Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Act in her name.
Fox News Digital reached out to a representative for Pence for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
30 minutes ago
Support for solar energy, offshore wind falls among Democrats and independents: poll
Americans' support for green energy tax credits and renewable energies like wind and solar power has decreased in recent years, according to a new poll, driven by a softening in support from Democrats and independents. The poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that U.S. adults' support for tax credits for electric vehicles and solar panels has weakened, as well as their enthusiasm for offshore wind farm expansion. While Democrats remain the strongest supporters of these initiatives, the poll reveals signs of growing cynicism within their ranks. The poll results coincide with sweeping changes President Donald Trump's Republican administration is making to regulations related to energy and climate change, including slashing the federal workforce in these departments. And although Democrats and independents have weakened their support for some green energy initiatives, there has not been an increase in support for Trump's energy policies. The poll found only about 4 in 10 U.S. adults — including only 1 in 10 Democrats and about 2 in 10 independents, along with three-quarters of Republicans — approve of the way Trump is handling climate change, which largely tracks with his overall approval rating. About 6 in 10 Democrats, 58%, favor tax credits for purchasing an electric vehicle, down from about 7 in 10 in 2022. Among independents, support declined from 49% in 2022 to 28%. Only one-quarter of Republicans supported this policy in 2022, and that hasn't changed measurably. 'As far as the pollution goes ... the vehicles nowadays put out very little emissions to the air,' said JD Johnson, a 62-year-old Democrat from Meadowview, Virginia, who somewhat opposes tax credits to purchase an electric vehicle. That's partly because he sees the electric vehicle manufacturing process as energy intensive and believes gasoline-powered vehicles have made improvements with the pollutants they emit. The decline in favoring solar panel tax credits was across the board rather than being concentrated among Democrats. 'For solar panels, in all honesty, I don't think they're that efficient yet,' said Glenn Savage, 78, a left-leaning independent from Rock Hill, South Carolina. 'I'd rather see them pour money into research and try to get the solar panels more efficient before they start giving tax breaks to the public. I may be wrong on that, but that's just my thought.' Scientists say transitioning to renewable energies and ditching fossil fuels that release planet-warming emissions are essential to protect the planet. Billions of dollars in project grants for clean technologies awarded during President Joe Biden's Democratic administration have been canceled by the Trump administration, and the offshore wind sector has been stunted by Trump's executive order that paused approvals, permits and loans for wind energy projects. Fewer than half of U.S. adults, 44%, now say that offshore wind farms should be expanded in the U.S., down from 59% in 2022. About half favor expanding solar panel farms, while about two-thirds were in support in 2022. When people are concerned about the economy and their personal finances, environmental issues are sometimes prioritized less, said Talbot Andrews, an assistant professor in the department of government at Cornell University who was not involved in the poll. 'I think it makes people anxious to think about increased taxes or increased spending on environmental issues when the cost of eggs are going through the roof,' Andrews said. Trump has championed the expansion of offshore oil drilling, as well as domestic coal production. Despite a decline in support for expanded renewable energies, the new poll shows that only about one-third of U.S. adults think offshore drilling for oil and natural gas should be expanded in the U.S., and only about one-quarter say this about coal mining. In both cases, Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to support expanding these energy sources. Trump has sought to open up national monuments for oil drilling, but more U.S. adults oppose than support auctioning off more public space for oil drilling. Only about one-quarter of U.S. adults favor this, while 4 in 10 are opposed. Republicans are much more likely than independents or Democrats to be in support. The Energy Star program that certifies appliances, such as dishwashers and refrigerators, as energy efficient recently appeared in headlines when the EPA made plans to scrap the program. The blue and white logo is well recognized, and experts say the program has long had bipartisan support until recently. The poll found three-quarters of Democrats support providing consumer rebates for efficient home appliances, compared with 6 in 10 Republicans. Patrick Buck, 54, from Chicago, describes himself as a liberal Republican and is a fan of the consumer rebates for energy-efficient appliances. 'It seems to work in terms of transforming what people have in their houses, because a lot of people have a lot of old appliances and just can't afford new ones,' he said. The poll found only about 2 in 10 U.S. adults are 'extremely' or 'very' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of their drinking water, the air they breathe and the meat, poultry, fruits and vegetables they buy in grocery stores. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults are 'somewhat' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of each of these, and about 4 in 10 are 'not very' or 'not at all' confident. The Trump administration has announced plans to roll back rules and policies related to limiting pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, such as rules that limit pollution from power plants and blocking California's efforts to phase out cars that run on gas. The federal government has also cut staff at the Food and Drug Administration, the federal agency tasked with protecting public health and ensuring food supply safety. ___ The AP-NORC poll of 1,158 adults was conducted June 5-9, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 4 percentage points. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find the AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
CNBC
33 minutes ago
- CNBC
Here's the salary Americans say they now need to earn to live comfortably
With higher prices now firmly entrenched, and President Donald Trump's tariffs fueling inflationary concerns, most Americans say they need an income boost to get by, according to a new report. Nearly half, or 45%, of all adults said they would need to make $100,000 or more a year to feel financially secure, Bankrate's financial freedom survey found. Roughly one-quarter, or 26%, said they need to make $150,000 or more. Fewer — 16% — put the bar at over $200,000. By comparison, the median household income in 2023 was a little over $80,000, according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau estimates. Altogether, the share of Americans who said they do not feel completely financially comfortable rose to 77% in 2025, up from 75% in 2024 and 72% in 2023, according to Bankrate's survey, which polled more than 2,200 in May. Here's a look at other stories affecting the financial advisor business. While Americans might have different definitions of what living comfortably entails, being in "a financial sweet spot," often means "you are able to cover your bills and everyday essentials but also have money left over for eating out and vacations," said Bankrate's economic analyst Sarah Foster. However, the recent period of high inflation and economic uncertainty has chipped away at most consumers' buying power, according to Carolyn McClanahan, a certified financial planner and founder of Life Planning Partners in Jacksonville, Florida. "One major issue is that wages have been stagnant for a large majority of the population over that time, and prices continue to rise," said McClanahan, who also is a member of CNBC's Advisor Council. "Add that to the backdrop of political instability everyone is feeling, and I think that is a perfect formula for people not feeling financially secure." Further, households are also facing surging child-care expenses, ballooning auto loans, high mortgage rates and record rents along with the resumption of student loan payments. But a deterioration of the American dream has been decades in the making, according to Bankrate's Foster. "It starts long before the pandemic," she said. "There has long been this perception that we used to be in this golden age where you could own a home, a car, and get by on a single income — that is a bygone era." A separate survey by Edelman Financial Engines from 2024 had similar findings: 58% of adults said they would need to earn $100,000 on average to not worry about everyday living expenses, and one-quarter said they would need to earn more than $200,000 to feel financially secure. In most cases, feeling financially secure is not based on how much you earn, but rather a commitment to save more than you spend and maintain a well-diversified portfolio, experts often say.
The Hill
37 minutes ago
- The Hill
Midway through year one, America is souring on Trump's agenda
Last week, President Trump signaled that he would soon make the most consequential foreign policy decision of his presidency, whether or not to order the U.S. military to strike Iran. In no uncertain terms, this decision may ultimately have greater impact than former President Biden's unilateral withdrawal from Afghanistan in summer 2021. Biden's polling numbers never recovered from the chaos that unfolded at that time. Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here With that in mind, it is important and instructive to look at what the polls say about how Americans feel about Trump's presidency thus far, both generally and on key issues such as foreign policy. Roughly six months into his second term, new polling shows that support for Trump has declined across the board and on key issues. Indeed, despite Trump's assertions that his approval ratings hit 'all-time highs,' the numbers tell a different story. Trump began his second term with 51 percent approval versus 44 percent disapproval, but now, those numbers have reversed. Just over half (52 percent) of Americans now disapprove of his job performance, compared to only 40 percent who approve — a net 19-point drop-off, according to the RealClearPolitics polling aggregator. To be sure, as chaos spreads in the Middle East and the question of American involvement hangs in the air, Trump's support on foreign policy is also critical. At the start of Trump's term, Ipsos polling showed Trump with a net plus-2 rating (39 percent to 37 percent), likely due to his promises to end wars and deliver peace through strength. Early on, he seemed to be delivering. He was instrumental in securing a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas and oversaw the return of multiple Israeli hostages. According to polling from Data for Progress (Jan. 17-18), a plurality of Americans — 49 percent — credited Trump rather than Biden with the Israel-Hamas cease-fire. For context, Biden ended his presidency with a minus-18 point approval rating for his handling of the Israel-Palestine conflict, and Trump started his with a plus 12 percent approval rating on the same issue. Half a year later, Trump is practically on par with Biden on the conflict, at minus-17 — a 29-point net swing against him, according to Quinnipiac. Looking specifically at Trump's handling of Iran, 41 percent disapprove, versus 37 percent who approve, according to polling from YouGov. It is not that Americans disagree with Trump's perception of Iran as a threat. In fact, nearly three-quarters (73 percent) say they are worried about the threat Iran poses to U.S. national security, up 13 points from last year, according to polling from Fox News. But Americans' fear of the prospect of another forever war in the Middle East seems to be weighing on the mood. That same Fox poll, conducted last weekend, shows that Trump has lost the public's trust in another key issue area: the economy. Likely due to the chaos and uncertainty unleashed by Trump's tariff policy, a majority (58 percent) of voters disapprove of Trump's handling of the economy, while just 40 percent approve, a significant decline for one of Trump's former strengths. In fact, the 18-point margin of discontent is the worst spread Trump has seen in either of his terms. And it does not appear that Trump's cornerstone legislation, the 'big, beautiful bill,' will help. Six in 10 Americans (59 percent) oppose it, and 49 percent think that the bill will 'hurt' their families economically. Just as the economy went from a strength to a vulnerability, Trump's polling has also seen a reversal on immigration, a crucial issue that largely propelled Trump to victory last November. Americans are increasingly concerned about the administration's heavy-handed approach to immigration. This is not to say that Americans dislike Trump's policies generally; a majority (51 percent) approve of Trump's handling of the border, per NBC polling. And exceptionally strong support (87 percent) remains for deporting migrants who commit crimes, according to Economist-YouGov polling. Yet Americans are turned off by the administration's response to protests in Los Angeles specifically, and the belief that the administration is being too cavalier about whom it is deporting. The same poll shows that 57 percent believe the administration is making mistakes in whom it is deporting, and 74 percent say the government needs to make sure there are no mistakes in deportations. Taken together, polling six months into Trump 2.0 shows that many of his former points of pride and political strengths have lost considerable support among all but his most ardent supporters. But it would be a mistake to say the rest of Trump's presidency is doomed. Tariff uncertainty is likely to fade, either because people stop paying attention or due to signed trade deals. In that same vein, it's entirely possible that views on the economy rebound if the 'big, beautiful bill' delivers on Trump's pro-growth agenda. Moreover, tensions in the Middle East will eventually come to a head, with or without American involvement. Fears of a forever war in Iran are misguided, and it's still not at all certain that Trump will commit American forces. Finally, Trump is greatly assisted by the fact that Democrats are still unable to develop a compelling and politically viable alternative. Still reeling from their loss in November, the party continues to struggle to find its way and challenge Trump's excesses. Six months may just be too short a time period to predict the course of the next three and a half years. But it remains useful and informative to gauge the mood of the electorate at this delicate time. Whether or not Trump can reverse this downward trend remains to be seen. It will be extremely compelling to watch. Douglas E. Schoen and Carly Cooperman are pollsters and partners with the public opinion company Schoen Cooperman Research based in New York. They are co-authors of the book, 'America: Unite or Die.'
