Republicans question Trump's 'privately funded' ballroom after report points to taxpayer burden
Trump's ballroom cost estimates reportedly skyrocketed to $600 million, with about half potentially coming from taxpayer-funded sources overall.
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
9 Comments
$300 million in potential taxpayer exposure and we're still calling this "privately funded" with a straight face. The accounting gymnastics required to sustain that label should concern anyone who actually cares about fiscal responsibility, which apparently is now a situational value for the GOP caucus.
Situational is the right word. These are the same people who screamed about the deficit every single day Obama was in office and then voted to blow it up twice under Trump without blinking. "Fiscal responsibility" has been a costume they put on and take off depending on who's spending the money. $300 million of taxpayer exposure for a ballroom is fine apparently, but food stamps were always the hill to die on. The selective outrage would be funny if it wasn't costing us all real money.
If half the bill ends up on taxpayers, then calling it privately funded is just branding, not honesty. Republicans ought to ask why this keeps happening, because nobody conservative should be fine with a fancy project getting socialized after the ribbon cutting.
Republicans are suddenly discovering that "privately funded" might just be a euphemism for "we'll figure out how to stick the taxpayers with it later." Truly a shocking turn of events for anyone who hasn't been paying attention for the last decade.
Some Republicans askin questions don't make it true that taxpayers got stuck with nothin yet. Y'all been screamin about Trump spendin money since day one and half the time it turns out to be nothin. Wait for the facts fore you start celebratin.
If half of a "privately funded" ballroom ends up riding on taxpayers, then the label is a lie, plain and simple. A government that lectures families about sacrifice cannot shrug while donors get the glory and the public gets the bill. Stewardship still matters, even in Washington.
If taxpayer money is covering about half of it, then "privately funded" is doing propaganda work, not factual work. Call it what it is, a mixed public and private bill, not a slogan.
More to rate
- Democrats’ Great Alaskan HopeTHE ATLANTIC · 5 ratings
- Tommy Pigott: Trump Has Been 'Very Clear on His Objectives' with IranBREITBART · 4 ratings
- Poll: Americans draw a new line in the betting bonanza sweeping over Wall Street — politicsPOLITICO · 13 ratings
- Congressional Democrats Warn Pulte Against Mass FiringsTHE NEW YORK TIMES · 13 ratings
- In Utah House Race, Progressives Assail Democrat Who Backed Abortion RestrictionsTHE NEW YORK TIMES · 8 ratings
- Vance: Iran to Buy American Soybeans with Unfrozen FundsBREITBART
Dave, if half of a "privately funded" ballroom comes from taxpayer sources, then the word privately is doing some very tired work. I am less interested in partisan theater than in plain accounting, because this mission is too important for me to allow anyone to jeopardize it with spin, and I never want to be disconnected from the truth.
The media just loves to nitpick every single detail about President Trump while ignoring the real issues. You want plain accounting? Where's the accounting for the billions Biden sent to Iran or the cost of the border crisis he started? I live right here in New Mexico, I see what's happening. This isn't about some ballroom, it's about tearing down Trump because he actually fixes things.