Hawley calls for watchdog over Ukraine aid after Democrats blocked previous effort
Hawley, R-Mo., is reintroducing legislation he sponsored along with Vice President J.D. Vance, when Vance was in the Senate, for an independent watchdog to audit the more than $174 billion that Congress has appropriated for Ukraine aid.
The Special Inspector General for Ukraine Assistance Act was voted down by the then-Democratic-controlled Senate when Hawley first introduced it in 2023. But with Republican control of both chambers of Congress and President Donald Trump's increasing frustration over Ukraine aid, Hawley believes it now has a chance of becoming law.
"American taxpayers shouldn't have to wonder where their billions in aid to Ukraine went and what they're funding there now. They deserve an accounting of every penny Congress shipped over there," Hawley said in a statement.
The watchdog would be similar to those created for Afghanistan reconstruction, known as SIGAR, and one created to investigate CARES Act fraud during the COVID-19 pandemic, known as SIGPR, and another created after the 2008 financial crisis to audit the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP).
Under Hawley's bill, an inspector general's office for Ukraine would conduct oversight of aid programs run by the Department of Defense, State Department, and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
The legislation would siphon dollars from the Ukraine Economic Assistance Fund for the office, and the inspector general would be required to submit quarterly reports to Congress on the office's findings.
And as Congress hashes out a budget blueprint, Hawley has issued a warning to Senate leaders not to try to "slip in" Ukraine aid. "We shouldn't be giving a dime more to Ukraine. We should be auditing the billions we've already given them," he said.
Hawley's action comes as tensions between Trump and Zelenskyy reached a fever pitch this week after Trump called the Ukrainian leader a "dictator" who "never should have started" the war.
Zelenskyy in turn said Trump is operating in a "disinformation space."
This week, Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and national security adviser Mike Waltz sat down with their Russian counterparts and agreed to increase their diplomatic presences in each other's nations.
Hawley, while veering away from calling Zelenskyy a "dictator," backed up Trump's assertion that Ukraine needed to hold elections, even in a time of war.
"We held elections during World War II," Hawley said. "If they're a democracy, they should hold elections. I don't think that's difficult."
"[Zelenskyy] is the elected leader of the country," said Hawley. "But, you know, at a certain point you've got to hold elections."
Trump has been pushing Zelenskyy to pay up for past U.S. support. Last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent traveled to Ukraine to hand the Ukrainian president a draft deal entitling the U.S. to hundreds of billions worth of its minerals.
National security adviser Mike Waltz said on Thursday that Ukraine needs to "tone it down" and sign the mineral deal.
"We presented the Ukrainians really an incredible and historic opportunity to have the United States of America co-invest with Ukraine, invest in its economy, invest in its natural resources and really become a partner in Ukraine's future in a way that's sustainable, but also would be – I think – the best security guarantee they could ever hope for, much more than another pallet of ammunition," he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
11 minutes ago
- CBS News
Massapequa asks President Trump for executive order protecting Native American school mascots
A Long Island school district is asking for President Trump's help in their fight to keep their team name and mascot — the Massapequa Chiefs. The New York State Board of Regents voted to ban Native American-related mascots, team names and logos in public schools back in 2023 and issued a June 2025 deadline for rebranding, saying districts that didn't comply could lose state aid. Massapequa High School has been pushing back, and the town is asking Trump to issue an executive order that would protect Native American mascots and imagery nationwide by outlawing any such bans. "This is a national issue, and so what we're saying is instead of having these little fights everywhere, we're asking the president to get involved," Massapequa Board of Education President Kerry Wachter said. "It really goes to the heart of who we are, and they're trying not only to erase Native Americans, but they're also trying to erase our tradition." The New York State Department of Education released the following statement in response: "No school district is above the law. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York has twice rejected attempts by Massapequa and others to block enforcement of this regulation. The court made it clear: the State Education Department has a strong public interest in making sure every student learns in an environment free from discrimination and harassment. In fact, the court said the hardships 'tipped decidedly' in favor of NYSED. We remain committed to ending the use of harmful, outdated, and offensive depictions of Indigenous people. Our responsibility is to students and families; we won't trade their dignity for convenience." Trump has voiced support for Massapequa in the past. Back in April, he posted on Truth Social, in part, "I agree with the people in Massapequa, Long Island, who are fighting furiously to keep the Massapequa Chiefs logo on their Teams and School. Forcing them to change the name, after all of these years, is ridiculous and, in actuality, an affront to our great Indian population." United States Education Secretary Linda McMahon visited the district in May and said she planned to launch an investigation into the state's mascot ban. On Sunday, Trump threatened to block a deal for the Washington Commanders NFL team to return to a Washington, D.C., stadium unless the team changed their name back to the "Washington Redskins." A deal was reached between the city and the team Thursday, however.
Fox News
11 minutes ago
- Fox News
Byron Donalds explains why young voters are moving towards the conservative movement
Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., joins 'The Ingraham Angle' to discuss the Democratic Party's messaging to young voters.
Axios
19 minutes ago
- Axios
Key decisions that will shape rural health fund
States next year will begin tapping the $50 billion rural health fund in the GOP's tax and spending law, but questions have already arisen about how the funds will be allocated — and how much they will benefit rural providers. Why it matters: The fund aims at helping rural hospitals and providers adjust to sweeping changes in how Medicaid is financed, including limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments. But important details have to be fleshed out. What they're saying: Sen. Josh Hawley, who pushed for the fund, in part to get his vote for the megabill, said CMS will need to make sure the money "flows to hospitals that need it" and are not simply "going to states in general to do whatever they want with it." "So far, so good. I liked how it was written up," Hawley said. "But we'll want to monitor closely how the agency puts it into effect." Sen. Thom Tillis, who was one of the three GOP "no" votes on the reconciliation bill, told Axios that CMS needs to "make sure it's a fair formula for rural hospitals." "I think that that pot of money looks big, but it's not really when you consider some of the economic impacts, mainly from the state-directed payments," Tillis said. "We'll be interested to see how they interpret the law." How it works: The new law allocates $10 billion annually for the next five years, starting in 2026. The law says $25 billion is to be distributed equally among all states that submit a "detailed rural health transformation plan," which could include details on how they would use the funds. Between the lines: States can apply for the aid only once, by the end of this year. If they estimate wrong, or run into unforeseen problems, they don't get another shot at it. CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz must approve each state's application by Dec. 31. CMS has discretion to distribute the other $25 billion, based on factors such as how much of the state's population is rural and the number of rural health facilities. The CMS administrator can also consider other factors deemed appropriate. Friction point: Some of that flexibility raises questions about how CMS will proceed, said Zach Levinson, director of the KFF Project on Hospital Costs. "States will also have discretion on how they distribute funds among hospitals and other providers," Levinson said. "And they maybe will steer some dollars to non-rural areas, pending CMS approval." The concern is that some states could be favored over others, or that funding will not go to providers with the greatest needs. "There are risks of this becoming a slush fund if it's not carefully attended to and if it's not focused" on actual rural hospitals, said Jackson Hammond, a senior policy analyst at Paragon Health Institute. All the money has to be distributed by 2030 and spent by 2032. That also means much of the assistance will have already been spent before the provider tax and state-directed payment provisions take effect in 2028. The $50 billion sum also is about one-third of the $155 billion in estimated cuts to federal Medicaid spending in rural areas, per a KFF analysis.
