Senate leaders quietly added a clause to a government funding bill that could award $500,000 or more to senators whose phone records were seized without notice, prompting bipartisan anger. The House plans to vote to repeal the provision Wednesday, while Senate Majority Leader John Thune defends it as a guard against "weaponized" probes. Several senators — including Republicans who say they were not told about the language — have called for repeal, but it is unclear how quickly the Senate can act.
Senators Spar Over Surprise $500K Phone-Record Payout Inserted by Thune
Senate leaders quietly added a clause to a government funding bill that could award $500,000 or more to senators whose phone records were seized without notice, prompting bipartisan anger. The House plans to vote to repeal the provision Wednesday, while Senate Majority Leader John Thune defends it as a guard against "weaponized" probes. Several senators — including Republicans who say they were not told about the language — have called for repeal, but it is unclear how quickly the Senate can act.
07:37 AM, 11/19/2025Politics
Senators from both parties erupted in frustration after Senate leaders quietly added a provision to a recent government funding bill that could award at least eight Republican senators $500,000 or more if their phone records were seized without notice. The House plans a Wednesday vote to repeal the clause, while Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who helped negotiate the language, has defended it as protection against perceived "weaponization" of government investigations.
"The House is going to do what they are going to do with it," Thune told reporters Tuesday night, adding the House repeal effort "doesn't apply to them." Still, senators across the aisle said they were blindsided that Thune and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer had negotiated the provision as part of the end-of-shutdown funding package.
Fast-growing backlash
Interviews with nearly a dozen senators on Tuesday revealed confusion, anger and calls for repeal. Critics called the clause a politically toxic, taxpayer-funded windfall for a small group of lawmakers. Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) quipped that tensions could boil over during the Senate GOP lunch, saying there could even be "some stabbings" when the provision is discussed.
"Whoever put this in had an obligation to tell us about it, and they didn’t. There's something called trust and good faith around here,"
— Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.).
What the provision does
The contested language, signed into law last week as part of the funding bill, would make senators eligible for payments of $500,000 or more if they learn their electronic records were seized without notification. Thune has argued the clause was a response to anger among Republicans after special counsel Jack Smith obtained phone records for at least eight Republican senators while investigating efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
Thune told reporters he expected the matter to be discussed at Wednesday’s lunch but said he was not having second thoughts. "It’s designed to protect United States senators," he said, framing the measure as a guard against future misuse of investigative powers.
Divided reactions
Some Republicans applauded the addition. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who says he was targeted by the Smith probe, praised Thune for securing the language. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), confirmed to have had records subpoenaed, said he plans to use the provision to "make it so painful" for those involved. Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) even called for expanding the provision to enable a broader range of parties to sue.
Other senators — including members of Thune's own party — said they were not informed about the language prior to the vote and want it removed. Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) said he will support repealing the clause and that he had received an "apologetic" call from GOP leadership after learning of it. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) similarly said she played no role in including the measure and was not told about it in advance.
Can it be repealed?
It is unclear how quickly the Senate could reverse the provision. Thune could pursue a standalone repeal, but lawmakers disgruntled by the surprise insertion might complicate any effort by demanding amendments or prolonging floor debate. House leaders, by contrast, appear set to pass a repeal easily: Speaker Mike Johnson and Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan support the House measure, and Jordan is pressing for a transcribed interview with Smith.
Democrats have said they will press the issue if the Senate does not act. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) introduced a bill to narrow the payout language and called leadership "furious" over the development. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Democrats will "make every effort to try to reverse that pretty serious mistake," arguing the provision amounts to a direct cash payout rather than a principled safeguard.
The controversy underscores tensions within both parties over how to handle perceived overreach in investigations and how much legislative leaders should disclose when negotiating high-stakes deals.
Contributors: Jennifer Scholtes and Meredith Lee Hill.