THIS is disgusting, and it is also typical of politicians behavior around dictators. There will be a day when NOT MY pres drumpf / trump turns on many of these fools and they are so stupid, so ignorant, they will actually be surprised. From the Washington Post.....
A $250 bill and ‘WMAGA’: GOP lawmakers push legislation honoring Trump
Political experts say the bills, which include renaming Dulles Airport and Washington’s Metro after Trump, are unprecedented because they honor a sitting president.
The legislation also called for Metrorail, the system’s flagship rail line, to be renamed the “Trump Train.”
The bill, Steube said in a statement, would signal a “cultural shift away from bureaucratic stagnation toward public-facing excellence and patriotism.”
Steube’s proposal is just the latest in legislative offerings this year paying tribute to President Donald Trump. House Republicans have proposed at least eight bills since January to honor the president or burnish his image. They would, among other things, put Trump’s portrait on U.S. currency, carve his face onto Mount Rushmore, rename Washington Dulles International Airport for him and make his birthday a national holiday. Two bills, both introduced by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia), called for the House to expunge Trump’s impeachments in 2019 and 2021.
Longtime political observers say the GOP’s legislative love fest for the president is well outside of congressional norms. While members have often proposed legislation that honors presidents, it is almost never while they are still in office.
“It is unprecedented and to be honest with you, it’s completely wild,” John White, professor emeritus of politics at Catholic University, said in an interview. “History shows that most things are named after presidents after they have either long left office or been deceased.”
Ronald Reagan was still alive in 1998 when Congress passed legislation renaming Washington National Airport for him. But by then, Reagan had been out of office for almost a decade and had been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s. White also pointed to the renaming of Idlewild Airport in New York for John F. Kennedy in December 1963, just a month after his assassination. But that was a decision proposed by New York City’s mayor at the time, not Congress.
In 2012, Congress passed bipartisan legislation that renamed federal buildings for former Democratic president Bill Clinton and former Republican presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush.
Steube’s proposal to rename the Metro was cheered by many from Trump’s’s base and met with derision by Democrats and other critics who saw it as a craven appeal to the commander in chief.
“WMATA is not a vanity project for Donald Trump to steamroll. It’s the backbone of our nation’s capital,” Sen Mark R. Warner (D-Virginia) posted on X. “When will House Republicans stop trying to suck up to Donald Trump and start focusing on lowering the cost of living?”
WMATA did not respond to a request for comment on the proposed change.
None of the current laundry list of Trump-praising bills are likely to become law, as they face a challenging legislative process and constitutional obstacles. But they do serve a purpose for the members who introduce them, said Casey Burgat, director of the Legislative Affairs masters program at George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management.
“They’re trying to stand out amongst their peers of who can be the most supportive of a president who has a complete hold on their party,” Burgat said. “Attaching their name to something in their institutional capacity not only signals to their constituents that they’re doing this, but more importantly, probably, the president who’s looking for fealty.”
Three days after Trump’s inauguration in January, Rep. Addison McDowell (R-North Carolina) proposed renaming Washington Dulles International Airport in Virginia to the “Donald J. Trump International Airport.”
“President Donald J. Trump, the greatest president of my lifetime, was just sworn into office for a second term after a historic landslide victory,” Rep. Guy Reschenthaler (R-Pennsylvania), a co-sponsor of the bill, said in a statement. “This legislation will cement his status in our nation’s capital as our fearless commander in chief, extraordinary leader and relentless champion for the American people.”
Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-New York) chose Valentine’s Day to submit a bill that would make Trump’s birthday, June 14, a national holiday along with Flag Day.
“Just as George Washington’s Birthday is codified as a federal holiday, this bill will add Trump’s Birthday to this list, recognizing him as the founder of America’s Golden Age,” Tenney said in a statement at the time. (A few days earlier, Tenney had introduced H.R.1216 — a bill that would end federal support for PBS and NPR. It is titled the Defund Government-Sponsored Propaganda Act).
“President Trump is arguably the most consequential president ever, and his place in history will be remembered for generations to come,” said White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt in a statement. “These proposals from Republican lawmakers serve as further proof there’s never been a political leader in American history with such immense support from their Party as President Trump. The President appreciates the overwhelming support and these kind gestures from Republican lawmakers.”
Several lawmakers in the current session have served up bills that aim to make Trump’s face more ubiquitous.
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Florida) introduced legislation directing the secretary of the interior “to arrange for the carving of the figure of President Donald J. Trump on Mount Rushmore National Memorial.” The National Park Service has previously said there is no suitable stable space on the monument for another face to be added.
Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) proposed H.R. 1790, the Golden Age Act of 2025, which directs the Treasury Department to print $100 bills with Trump’s portrait on them. That was just after Rep. Joe Wilson (R-South Carolina) introduced the Donald J. Trump $250 Bill Act, which would require the Treasury to print “Federal reserve notes in the denomination of $250 and such notes shall feature a portrait of Donald J. Trump.”
The $250 bill is meant to help the nation celebrate its 250 birthday next year, Wilson said in a statement, which concluded, “The most valuable bill for the most valuable President!” Numerous House members co-sponsored the bill including Steube, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-New York), Rep. Diana Harshbarger (R-Tennessee), Rep. Ralph Norman (R-South Carolina) and Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California).
U.S. Treasurer Brandon Beach, who was appointed by Trump, wrote to Wilson in late May expressing his support for the bill but acknowledging that the law does not allow living people to appear on U.S. currency. In a letter Wilson’s office shared with The Washington Post, Beach wrote, “I am willing to help in any way that I can to make this a reality.”
A spokesperson for House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) did not respond to an email seeking comment. Spokespeople for other Republican representatives contacted for this story pointed to statements made when the bills were introduced.
Former Republican congressman Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania, who served in Congress from 2005 to 2018 and was a chair of the House Ethics Committee, said he thinks the bills honoring Trump would probably make some current GOP House members uncomfortable and he doesn’t see much appetite for action on any of them.
“It’s better to name buildings and institutions and airports for politicians long after they’re out of office, after there’s been some time to reflect on their records and their place in history,” he said.
The various proposals honoring Trump this session are “being done to please the president,” Dent said in an interview on Friday. “I mean, he loves that kind of attention.”
Dent added that he thinks it is “ill-advised” to pass legislation bestowing honor on people in such a politically charged atmosphere.
“Usually when you do these types of honorifics, they are moments of celebration and joy to remember that individual,” Dent said. “I don’t think that’s what would happen today with the current president, certainly not while he’s in office. Maybe over time, after he’s long gone, maybe people’s views will shift on him. Who knows?”
GW’s Burgat says there’s a risk involved that the legislation introduced extolling Trump diminishes the institution’s reputation and its work.
A 2023 Congressional Research Service report on commemorations noted that beginning in the 1960s, Congress attempted to reduce legislative proposals for naming federal buildings, designating federal holidays and establishing monuments.
“These initiatives were in response to concern that the legislative time spent on commemorative measures was excessive,” the report stated.
“It undermines the job itself,” Burgat said. “Your job is to write laws, to study them. Not just memorialize the current president.”
The Republican squirm is in full swing
Amid extraordinary Trump gambits in recent days, Republicans are straining — hard — to avoid passing judgment.
Trump and his top aides have floated suspending habeas corpus, pushed to accept a $400 million airplane from Qatar and sought to unilaterally lower prescription drug prices. All of these are legally dubious, and the first two are especially extraordinary.
Habeas corpus — the foundational constitutional right to challenge one’s detention in court — has been suspended only four times in American history (including during the Civil War). The Constitution requires a rebellion or invasion for its suspension.
The plane gift from Qatar poses both major security challenges and huge ethical and constitutional concerns. That’s because presidents are barred under the emoluments clause from accepting gifts from foreign leaders without congressional consent. (The plane would be used as Air Force One but then transferred to Trump’s presidential library foundation. He has claimed he wouldn’t use it personally.)
A handful of Republicans have spoken out against these proposals, especially the airplane from Qatar. But mostly their responses have been to avoid any personal judgments of the legality, advisability or morality of these moves.
And often they strain really hard.
Perhaps the most striking example was Rep. Richard McCormick’s appearance on CNN on Monday night. Anchor Kaitlan Collins peppered him with repeated questions about what he personally thought about accepting a plane from Qatar. He repeatedly volleyed back by talking about its legality and how others would render judgment.
“I’m sure that we’ll run it through the legal course, to make sure that it’s not going to be something nefarious,” McCormick (R-Georgia) said.
When pressed again for his personal view: “I can tell you that if it’s unethical, that will be up to the people to decide, or the president to decide.”
And again: “I’m not a lawyer. I’m a doctor. I’m in Congress. We’re not going to vote on this. … Whether it’s acceptable or not, that’s going to be — remain to be seen.”
After Collins noted that the Constitution explicitly says Congress must approve foreign gifts, McCormick allowed that Congress could vote on it.
Rep. Ryan Zinke’s appearance Tuesday on CNN went similarly. Zinke (R-Montana) repeatedly responded to questions about his personal views by asking questions himself — without offering firm answers.
“I understand it went through [Attorney General] Pam Bondi, so it’s legal, it’s ethical,” Zinke said, before adding: “Does it give the right message?”
“Is it a good look?” Zinke added. “Is it a good look to have a Qatari aircraft that now is the president’s?”
And: “But I understand, you know, our aircraft — is it a better aircraft? It must be. Now, to your point, does it provide a leverage [for] the Qataris?” (Zinke did answer this question with a not-totally-firm “I don’t think so.”)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) also withheld judgment.
“Air Force One is the symbol of America,” he said. “When it lands or flies, it is America flying or landing, and I want to make sure this whole thing is kosher. Time will tell.”
And the GOP leaders of both the House and Senate offered very circumspect answers.
“It’s not my decision to make,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) told CNN on Tuesday. He emphasized the need for security checks and suggested the plane wasn’t a personal gift to Trump, but added: “Beyond that, it’s his decision. So I don’t have — there’s not a whole lot I can or should say about this.”
Johnson added Wednesday that the issue was “not my lane.”
(Not only are emoluments an issue of congressional approval, but as CNN reporter Manu Raju noted, Johnson is by trade a constitutional lawyer.)
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-South Dakota) toed much the same line Tuesday. He called it a “hypothetical” — even as Trump has made clear he wants to accept the plane and has detailed how the transfer would work — and said that “there will be plenty of scrutiny of whatever that arrangement might look like.”
When pressed for his personal view, Thune demurred: “There are lots of issues around that that I think will attract very serious questions, if and when it happens.”
Thune’s answer was similar when the news conference turned to Trump’s prescription drug executive order. He was again asked for his personal view, and he again fell back on talking about legal issues.
“My guess is that it’ll be the subject of probably multiple lawsuits, and I think the courts will probably have something to say about it,” Thune said, adding: “Again, we’ll see how it plays out.”
And perhaps none of these issues have produced squirming like top White House adviser Stephen Miller’s recent suggestion that Trump might suspend habeas corpus if courts continue to rule against the president’s expedited deportations.
Asked repeatedly on NBC’s “Meet the Press” whether he would vote to suspend habeas corpus, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) repeatedly avoided the question — instead saying Trump would follow the law.
When asked a third time, Barrasso responded: “I don’t believe this is going to come to Congress.”
Former House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) engaged in much the same dance on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Asked repeatedly for his view, he repeatedly cited the coming legal fights.
“It’s a very extreme measure, you know, to take,” McCaul said. He added: “So, I think the courts are going to decide this one as to whether this invasion, in fact, constitutes what would be a state of war. Some would say it would. … I think that will be a very interesting legal argument before the court.”
Indeed, it seems congressional Republicans, based on their public comments at least, regard much of what Trump is doing as an interesting legal effort — and little more.
It’s not exactly news that the Republican-controlled Congress has largely subjugated itself to Trump. It has allowed him to pursue an agenda almost completely focused on executive actions without seeking legislative input, even in areas that are supposed to be under its purview. That’s most notably the case on his tariffs, which are a power the Constitution expressly gives to Congress. (Congress enacted a historically low five laws in Trump’s first 100 days.)
But as remarkable is how little they venture opinions publicly. They seem content to suggest that maybe what Trump is doing is problematic, while hoping it will go away.
Perhaps that’s a strategy that works as well as any strategy could. Trump has at least scaled back on his tariffs, even without a GOP revolt.
But the downside is it reinforces just how irrelevant Congress is becoming. And the last few months suggest Trump is just going to keep making them squirm.
No comments:
Post a Comment