On May 18, the U.S. Department of Justice announced a $1.776-billion "anti-weaponization fund" as part of a settlement involving President Donald Trump and the Internal Revenue Service. The department stated that the fund will "provide a systematic process to hear and redress claims of others who suffered weaponization and lawfare." While governments often make financial compensations for established wrongs, this particular fund feels different.
The possibility exists that convicted insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol, attacked police, and were later pardoned by Trump would be eligible for compensation. Trump defended the fund, saying, "I am helping others, who were so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration, receive, at long last, JUSTICE!" However, a participant at a Nebraska congressman's town hall described it as a "slush fund for crooks."
Parallels with Alberta Politics
This development has prompted reflection on political issues in Alberta, which are dizzyingly complex even for close observers. Major concerns include the rejection of the majority report of the independent Electoral Boundaries Commission. This action arguably resembles removing a referee from a soccer game, redesigning the match ball, and moving the goalposts without adequate consultation—simply because one team is unhappy with its prognosis.
Albertans are also dealing with the fallout of a data leak involving millions of electors. Reports indicate that The Centurion Project, which aims at secession, obtained the data from the Republican Party of Alberta. Former Premier Jason Kenney claims to have been impacted and has threatened to sue those responsible. Security concerns transcend party affiliation, especially for those who have faced threats.
Additionally, an existential referendum is scheduled for October. Questions remain about what will be posed and the semantic and syntactic rigmarole of the wording. Premier Danielle Smith has drawn criticism for failing to learn from the Brexit referendum, which shocked even some who stoked the fire for political gain. Some separation supporters are promising to remove her from office due to the lack of a definitive referendum and her apparent support for remaining in Canada. There is no middle ground in this debate.
Implications for Democratic Norms
The anti-weaponization fund and Alberta's issues share common themes. They indicate that elections have consequences—the obvious part. However, they also reveal that institutions function not only on established laws and policies but also on basic conventions and norms that may not be codified into law. The rejection of the boundaries commission recommendations is unprecedented in Alberta. Setting up an explicitly partisan committee to redo the work with seemingly preset results is being questioned widely as evidence of democratic backsliding.
