I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the excessive taxpayer costs associated with presidential travel to personal properties, specifically highlighted by the numerous trips former President Donald Trump made to Mar-a-Lago during his term. Over the course of his presidency, these trips have significantly burdened taxpayers, with some analyses suggesting costs that could escalate into the hundreds of millions over a full term.

According to reports by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), four trips to Mar-a-Lago in early 2017 alone cost taxpayers $13.6 million, averaging $3.4 million per trip. This includes not only the expenses for Air Force One but also additional costs for security, local law enforcement, and Coast Guard operations around the estate. Furthermore, the Coast Guard alone spent nearly $20 million for 16 trips to Mar-a-Lago, showcasing how these visits have a substantial financial impact on multiple government agencies.

These expenses are particularly concerning when considered against the backdrop of federal budget constraints and the need for fiscal responsibility. The fact that these trips often result in direct financial benefits to the president's personal business interests raises ethical questions about the use of taxpayer money.

I urge you to support or introduce legislation that would:

Require Transparency: Mandate detailed public reporting of all costs associated with presidential travel to personal properties, ensuring taxpayers are fully aware of how their money is being spent.

Set Cost Caps: Establish legal limits or caps on the total amount of taxpayer money that can be spent on presidential travel for non-official business or leisure, especially when it involves properties owned by the president or their family.

Prevent Conflict of Interest: Strengthen the enforcement of the Emoluments Clause or introduce new laws to prevent presidents from financially benefiting from taxpayer-funded travel to their own properties.

Promote Fiscal Responsibility: Encourage or enforce alternative travel arrangements that minimize costs, such as using government facilities for official or semi-official events rather than personal estates.

These measures would not only safeguard taxpayer money but also uphold the integrity of public office by ensuring that personal business does not benefit unfairly from government expenditure.

Thank you for considering this urgent matter. I look forward to your response on how you plan to address these issues to ensure fiscal responsibility and ethical governance.

Sincerely,