Senate Republicans are signaling sharp divisions this week, rejecting former President Trump’s proposal for $2,000 tariff rebate checks while also clashing over how to address a controversial provision tied to Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation.
Trump’s idea to send Americans $2,000 checks funded by tariff revenue has received little enthusiasm from GOP senators. Many argue the move would require Congressional approval and prefer using the funds to reduce the federal deficit. Senate Majority Whip John Thune said tariff revenue is “substantial” and should be used to pay down national debt rather than issue rebate checks.
Republican leaders echoed the sentiment. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said deficit reduction should remain a priority, while Sen. Bernie Moreno added that paying down the deficit “comes first.” Sen. John Kennedy insisted any such payments “have to come through Congress,” even as the White House explores options to bypass lawmakers.
Some Republicans also raised economic concerns. Sen. Kevin Cramer said he’s “not nuts for it,” warning that rebate checks could be “somewhat inflationary,” though he acknowledged lower-income Americans “deserve a break.”
At the same time, Senate Republicans are grappling with internal disagreement over legislative language quietly added to last week’s government funding bill. The provision could award large financial damages—potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars—to lawmakers whose phone records were seized during Jack Smith’s investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
The dispute erupted during a tense closed-door GOP lunch, where senators vented frustration about not being informed of the provision earlier. Senate GOP leaders, including Thune, said additional discussions are needed as the House prepares to vote on repealing the measure.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, who had his phone data subpoenaed, proposed expanding the provision’s protections beyond senators to include “any private group” targeted by federal investigations. He argued that individuals harmed by government overreach should be able to seek justice and hinted he may pursue a substantial monetary claim.
However, several Republicans pushed back on the proposal’s retroactive protections, calling them inappropriate. Sen. James Lankford said people should hold the government accountable but cautioned against a “specific lookback.” Others, including Sen. Markwayne Mullin, said retroactivity was a “nonstarter.”
Together, the disputes over Trump’s proposed tariff checks and the Jack Smith provision highlight a growing divide among Senate Republicans, who are struggling to balance loyalty to Trump, concerns over government accountability, and fiscal priorities ahead of a critical election year.