By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Senator Josh Hawley has proposed the American Worker Rebate Act of 2025, a plan to distribute $600 rebate checks funded by tariff revenues, but with a focus on “Trump blue-collar voters.” Hawley’s statements suggest the checks would exclude “Biden voters” and high-income earners, with funds potentially reaching the working class, drawing criticism and comparisons to past stimulus measures. The plan’s viability is questioned, as tariffs increase consumer costs, potentially negating the impact of the rebate checks, and contributing to inflation.
Read the original article here
Sen. Josh Hawley wants to exclude ‘Biden voters’ from $600 Trump tariff rebate checks, and it’s definitely a head-scratcher, to say the least. The idea, as it seems, is to give some financial relief, likely connected to tariffs imposed during the Trump administration, but with a rather unusual condition attached: the exclusion of those who voted for President Biden. Immediately, the question that pops into mind is, how exactly would they even determine who voted for whom? Given the secret ballot nature of our elections, it poses a logistical and ethical challenge, to say the least.
The core issue with this plan, beyond its apparent impossibility, is its divisiveness. It targets a segment of the population based on their political affiliation. This goes against the basic principle of treating all citizens equally. Some people might see this as a cynical attempt to reward specific voters, essentially bribing them with a small sum while ignoring the broader economic impact of the original tariffs. After all, many would argue that the tariffs themselves, and any “rebate,” are simply band-aids on a much larger problem.
The very notion of this plan raises several practical problems. How do you even begin to identify who voted for whom, and is such a thing even possible? The vote in America is designed to be private. Also, since Biden wasn’t on the 2024 ballot, who would even be included or excluded? It is very confusing, and doesn’t even make logical sense to most people.
The response to this proposal has been a mix of disbelief, criticism, and outright mockery. Many are quick to point out the hypocrisy, highlighting how this gesture is supposedly meant to help those affected by tariffs, while ignoring the far larger costs that tariffs can impose on consumers and businesses. Then there is the question of fairness. Should economic relief be distributed based on political preference? Most people would say no.
Furthermore, some people see this plan as an insult. Six hundred dollars, in the grand scheme of things, isn’t much. It’s barely enough to cover a few tanks of gas and a trip to the store. This isn’t a solution, but a token gesture. Some might argue that it’s nothing more than an attempt to buy votes or garner political support.
One recurring theme in the responses is the broader economic context. Many argue that instead of these small, targeted rebates, the focus should be on policies that bring about more significant and lasting change, like addressing rising healthcare costs or investing in infrastructure. People want real help, not just a quick handout.
Another layer to this is the reaction of those who didn’t vote or voted for another candidate. What happens to them? Are they just left out? This kind of proposal can only drive divisions within society. It also speaks to a larger trend: the increasing polarization of American politics.
Ultimately, Sen. Hawley’s proposal to exclude “Biden voters” from these rebate checks is a deeply flawed idea. It raises serious questions about fairness, practicality, and the role of government in a democratic society. It’s a plan that is unlikely to solve any real problems and is more likely to deepen the political divisions that already plague the nation. The very fact that the senator is even entertaining this idea shows a lack of focus on the well-being of all Americans and a willingness to play political games with taxpayer money.