Jan Wolfe, Reuters
The impeachment proceeding against Donald Trump on a charge of inciting the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol has fuelled speculation online that he could lose some of the benefits extended to former presidents.
But according to legal experts, under the laws currently in effect, Trump will retain perks including a pension, office space and security detail even in the unlikely event that he is convicted by the Senate in its impeachment trial.
Trump can thank a relatively obscure law, the Former Presidents Act. It is a law, enacted in 1958, that provides lifetime benefits to former presidents. The benefits include a “suitable office space,” Secret Service protection, around $100,000 per year to help cover the cost of a staff and a pension currently worth around $220,000 per year.
The law was enacted to provide financial relief to former President Harry Truman, who left office in 1953 facing debts from unsuccessful business ventures that predated his time in office.
For Trump, the annual value of these benefits will likely exceed $1 million. Each year, US taxpayers spend about $4 million to provide perks to the four living former presidents, according to a report by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation, a government spending watchdog.
The most valuable perk is the office space. Former Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama each had more than $500,000 in office rent covered by taxpayers in 2020, according to the report.
Can presidents be stripped of these benefits? Yes, but only if they are removed from office during their presidency, said Brian Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State University. Being impeached by the House of Representatives does not impact the benefits.
Many lawmakers and public figures called for Trump’s removal from office during the final days of his presidency, but he avoided this fate, so the benefits are safe.
There is one caveat: the law could always change. Some advocates say the Former Presidents Act is an unnecessary cost, arguing that modern-day presidents have lucrative opportunities and do not need the public’s help after stepping down.
In 2016, congressional Republicans pushed a bill that would have put limits on the budgets of former presidents. Obama, who was wrapping up a second term, vetoed it. He said he agreed that reform was needed, but the legislation as drafted would have placed “onerous and unreasonable burdens” on the offices of former presidents.
If Congress does reform the Former Presidents Act, it should do so in a way that does not single out Trump, Kalt said. Such a move could be seen as an unlawful “bill of attainder,” or a legislative act condemning a particular person, he said.
Office location: The law allows Trump to pick the location of his office, Kalt said. If Trump were to set up his office at a Trump property, taxpayers would be effectively paying for Trump to rent property he already owns.
The General Services Administration, a federal government agency, would be in charge of appropriately furnishing the office.
And Intelligence briefings? There is a growing push among Democrats to deny Trump a modern-day perk of post-presidency life: intelligence briefings and access to classified information.
“There’s no circumstance in which this president should get another intelligence briefing,” said Representative Adam Schiff, who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, in a CBS interview on Jan. 17. “I don’t think he can be trusted with it.”
Unlike other perks, this is one rooted in custom, not the law. President Joe Biden can unilaterally decide to cut off the briefings.
Biden will consult experts in the intelligence community on the decision, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters on Jan. 22.
Members of the ex-presidents club pose together for pictures. They smile and pat each other on the back while milling around historic events, or sit somberly side by side at VIP funerals. They take on special projects together. They rarely criticize one another and tend to offer even fewer harsh words
Many Republicans are worried about America’s changing demographics. But it was a Republican president — Ronald Reagan — who set the country on its irrevocable course toward greater
Spend a decade or two writing about financial markets, and a few themes will begin to emerge. These are: No. 1. Politics and investing do not mix; No. 2. Presidents usually get too much credit when things go right and too much blame when things go wrong; No. 3. Most of the time, markets don’t care
Few leaders are shining beacons of learning and culture. His Highness Dr Sheikh Sultan Bin Mohammed Al Qasimi, Supreme Council Member, Ruler of Sharjah, is one of them.
The Biden administration is relying on a contested Trump-era policy as it disperses thousands of Haitian migrants along the US-Mexico border in and around the small South Texas city of Del Rio.
Angela Merkel, Germany’s first female chancellor, has been praised by many for her pragmatic leadership in a turbulent world and celebrated by some as a feminist icon. But a look at her track record over her 16 years at Germany’s helm reveals missed opportunities for fighting gender inequality at home.
The image of US Border Patrol US Border Patrol agent on horseback violently trying to grab a Haitian migrant from entering an encampment on the banks of the Rio Grande in Del Rio, Texas, is proof enough that Biden policies may not be any different from his predecessor Trump on issues concerning migrants (“Haitians fear the worst as US begins mass expulsion,” Sept. 22, Gulf Today).