Unethical, Illegal, and Unacceptable Misuse of Public Funds
by Winston Wendell
The Trump administration has crossed another bridge on its way to complete disaster by publicly displaying a campaign ad that utilizes taxpayer funds. The video, taken from Trump’s 2024 campaign, includes his usual insults at “villains” and “institutions.” This is not only shameful but illegal and ethically wrong.
According to the Hatch Act, federal employees cannot engage in any politics while on duty and misusing federal resources. Additionally, the Anti-Lobbying Act and appropriations acts state that it is illegal to use federal funds for “publicity or propaganda” for a candidate. In other words, Trump has officially been purchasing attack ads with taxpayer’s money.
This is an utterly unethical and completely corrupt practice, fueled by Trump’s vindictiveness and thirst for attention. The money paid by citizens for defense, roads, or public healthcare gets wasted on ad campaigns for political purposes. This public relations operation will damage the reputation of the government and the office of the president.
Such an unethical and corrupt action demonstrates Trump’s contempt for the rule of law and democratic norms in general. According to CREW, this latest scandal further illustrates the harm that can be done when the government engages in the kind of behavior. The Government Accountability Office already warned about the illegality of these actions. The President of the United States is not an executive for a private company. They should not turn their apparatus into a propaganda machine for their own electoral gain.
Trump’s Broken Promises: A History of Unfulfilled Dividend Checks and Empty Rhetoric
by Winston Wendell
It may seem hard to believe, but promising various types of financial compensation to the population and then failing to deliver on that promise is a fairly common practice in modern-day politics. Throughout his tenure, and particularly during his second term, President Donald Trump has been known to employ a variety of financial promises as a part of his political campaign. Whether it was a reduction in federal spending and the consequent distribution of dividends or a “bonus” funded by import duties, both seem to evaporate into thin air before they can actually reach their intended destination.
Promises Made, Promises Broken
The pattern that has been emerging in the President’s second term is fairly simple and predictable, though it does not seem to have a happy ending. Over the course of the last year, there have been several particularly noteworthy examples of these policies.
The “DOGE Dividend”: Towards the beginning of his second term, Trump’s administration promotes the idea of a direct payment to the nation’s citizens funded by the drastic reduction of federal spending, which was initially proposed by Elon Musk. The Musk plan was welcomed enthusiastically by the public, and months later, that enthusiasm has yet to translate into actual results. The vague wording and the specifics of the budget window, along with a lack of real savings ensured the initiative never saw the light of day.
The $2,000 Tariff-Funded Refund: In late 2025 and early 2026, the White House assured middle- and lower-income Americans that they would receive at least $2,000 each, funded by the import duties. Various experts and commentators were quick to point out that such a decision would not be entirely dissimilar to a tax hike that would take effect on American consumers in the short term. It would appear that little else was considered, as, as of ten months later, the promised dividends have yet to make their appearance, having disappeared – like so many before them – without any trace. Let’s remember that tariffs are actually a tax ON consumers!
The $5,000 Midterm Contingency: Most recently, at the Republican midterm convention in Dallas, the administration unveiled its highest stakes pitch yet: a pledge of $5,000 to each adult citizen, but only if the Republic Party is elected to both houses of Congress. Naturally, it would appear that very few people were interested in the actual substance of the proposal, with more than one commentator condemning it as a shameful attempt to bribe the population with taxpayer money. Even more so, it is also a fairly convenient way to avoid the issue altogether in the event of an electoral failure. Please remember it would cost 1.2 trillion increasing the national debt, which is already too high!
An Exercise in Political Campaigning
Many analysts and commentators, particularly amongst the political and economic elite, view the whole affair as an elaborate sham. In many ways, that assessment is not without its merits or a complete Trump fantasy. By proposing a series of “dividend checks” that range anywhere between $2,000 to $5,000, Trump is just blowing hot air with no real intent to actually do it.
After all, a certain number of congressional committees are required to approve virtually any form of direct payment to the nation’s citizens. That responsibility, in and of itself, should be enough to give anyone pause for thought.
In the end, history – as well as common sense – would indicate that you are unlikely to receive the full amount, or, indeed, any amount at all. As we know, Trump hardly ever keeps promises!
