Rep. Jason Crow (D-CO) said Thursday that President Donald Trump’s proposed $5,000 dividend, which Trump has said he would distribute if Republicans keep control of Congress after the midterms, amounts to a “bribe.”
Speaking on Fox News Channel’s “The Story,” Crow told host Martha MacCallum: “This is a bribe, basically. Donald Trump tied this to the election and it’s not okay for any president to do this. I don’t care if a Democrat would do it or a Republican would do it. It doesn’t matter. It’s wrong for any sitting president to tie a payout with U.S. taxpayer money to an election result. If a Democrat was saying that, you all would be losing your minds. It’s just not okay.”
MacCallum pushed back, drawing a comparison to policies championed by New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani. “Let me ask you about that, because I think about that. I think about some of these programs we hear about. I think about Mayor Mamdani with his free buses and free preschool in New York, free child care in New York. I mean, it’s all, isn’t that a form of giving people money back?” she asked.
Crow rejected the comparison. “Martha, you shouldn’t compare the use of taxpayer dollars for public services like public transportation and public education, other than like literally writing a check to people tied to an election result,” he said.
MacCallum pressed further. “Why not? It’s all money. It’s all money that the taxpayer,” she said, before adding: “Oh, why is it wrong for the government to take my money in taxes and spend it the way they want, rather than send me a check?”
Crow returned to his central point, arguing the issue is consistency. “If a Democrat got up there and said the same thing that, ‘I’m going to give a $5,000 check to every adult American if you vote for me and if we win the election,’ you would be losing your minds, so at least be consistent. At least be consistent here,” he said.
“It’s wrong for any sitting president to tie a payout with U.S. taxpayer money to an election result.” — Rep. Jason Crow
The exchange highlights a broader argument taking shape ahead of the midterms over whether government cash payments, whether framed as dividends or free public services, are simply different flavors of the same taxpayer-funded spending, or something categorically different when tied explicitly to an election outcome.
