Hold onto your wallets, folks—President Trump’s bold idea to send $2,000 checks to working-class Americans is hitting a brick wall in the Senate.
According to The Hill, Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, a staunch fiscal conservative, is leading the charge against Trump’s proposal to offset rising costs with tariff-funded “dividend” payments, arguing the nation’s finances are too strained to support such a plan.
Let’s start at the beginning: Trump’s plan aims to ease the burden of higher living expenses by using revenue from increased tariffs, which are expected to rake in hundreds of billions for federal coffers.
But here’s the rub—Johnson isn’t buying the math, and he’s got a point when you look at the projected federal deficit of at least $2 trillion for 2025.
“Look, we can’t afford it,” Johnson told Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo. “I wish we were in a position to return the American public their money, but we’re not.” Ouch—nothing stings like a fiscal hawk clipping the wings of a populist promise.
Johnson’s skepticism isn’t just hot air; budget experts from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimate that distributing these $2,000 checks could cost $600 billion annually, ballooning to $6 trillion over a decade.
Meanwhile, the Treasury Department projects that higher tariff rates might bring in $300 billion in 2025, and the Congressional Budget Office estimates $2.8 trillion over 10 years—impressive, but nowhere near enough to cover the rebate costs. So, while Trump envisions these payments going to “individuals of moderate income” around the middle of next year, the numbers suggest a fiscal fantasy that Congress might not sign off on.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota isn’t exactly cheering from the sidelines either, expressing a preference to use tariff revenue to tackle the monstrous federal deficit instead of funding checks.
“The amount of revenue coming in from the tariffs is considered to be substantial at this point and hopefully can be put to a useful purpose, in my view one of which would be repaying the debt,” Thune told reporters. Admirable, sure, but it’s a far cry from putting cash directly into the pockets of struggling Americans.
Let’s not forget the historical context—deficits under President Trump’s first term averaged $800 billion annually, while under former President Obama’s last four years, they were around $550 billion. Now, with a projected $1.8 trillion to $2 trillion deficit for 2025, it’s no wonder fiscal conservatives are sounding the alarm.
Trump’s team, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, has tried to ease concerns by limiting payments to those below a certain income threshold, but even that might not sway the bean-counters in Congress who must authorize the plan.
For many working-class families, the idea of a $2,000 check sounds like a lifeline in an era of relentless price hikes, but the harsh reality of federal red ink could sink this ship before it even sails.
Johnson’s stance, while tough to swallow for those hoping for relief, reflects a broader concern among some lawmakers that America can’t keep spending what it doesn’t have—not without consequences down the road.
So, while Trump’s tariff rebate vision carries the spirit of putting Americans first, the battle in Congress over this proposal will likely be a brutal test of priorities: immediate relief versus long-term fiscal sanity. Which side will win? Only time—and a lot of legislative wrangling—will tell.