1. United States
2. Okla.
3. Letter

I am writing to urge Congress to reject President Trump’s proposal to distribute $5,000 payments to American adults if Republicans retain control of Congress in the midterm elections. Regardless of party, Americans should be deeply troubled by a sitting president explicitly connecting a substantial government payment to the electoral success of his own political party. Public money is not campaign money. Federal benefits should be debated and enacted because they represent sound public policy—not presented to voters as a reward they will receive if they produce the president’s preferred election result. The precedent this creates is alarming. If a president can tell Americans they will receive thousands of dollars if his party wins Congress, what prevents future presidents from promising increasingly large taxpayer-funded payments immediately before elections? There are serious fiscal questions as well. A program of this scale would cost well over $1 trillion, require congressional authorization, substantially increase federal borrowing unless offset elsewhere, and could contribute to inflation at a time when Americans are already struggling with the cost of living. But the democratic principle matters even more. Congress is an independent branch of government with constitutional responsibility for federal spending. Members of Congress should not allow that authority—or taxpayer money—to become leverage in an electoral campaign. I urge you to publicly oppose making any federal payment contingent upon the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections and to defend Congress’s constitutional authority over federal spending. This should not be a partisan issue. No president, Republican or Democrat, should be permitted to turn the United States Treasury into a campaign promise conditioned on keeping their party in power.