State Taxpayers Fund Kamala’s Private Venture

Person speaking at podium with American flags behind

California taxpayers are unknowingly funding security for Kamala Harris’s book tour after President Trump terminated her federal Secret Service protection, shifting the financial burden to state resources with zero transparency about the costs.

Story Snapshot

Trump revoked Harris’s extended Secret Service detail on September 1, 2025, forcing California Highway Patrol to assume protection duties during her book tour.
CHP operates on a $3.2 billion annual budget but refuses to disclose per-person security costs, leaving taxpayers in the dark about expenses for Harris’s promotional activities.
Federal protection for 2016 presidential candidates cost approximately $38,000 per day, suggesting California could face substantial ongoing expenses.
Judicial Watch continues pressing for transparency through FOIA lawsuits, having previously exposed over $114 million in Obama family travel costs and millions more for other officials.

Federal Protection Ends, State Burden Begins

President Trump terminated Kamala Harris’s extended Secret Service protection effective September 1, 2025, coinciding with her launch of a multi-city book tour promoting her memoir “107 Days.” Former vice presidents typically receive protection for six months post-office, extendable by presidential memorandum. Trump’s revocation forced California Highway Patrol’s Protective Services Division to step in for events within the state. Governor Gavin Newsom’s office declined to comment on security arrangements, while Harris’s team expressed gratitude for past federal protection without addressing the state-level transition.

Taxpayer Costs Hidden Behind Security Protocols

California Highway Patrol operates on a $3.2 billion annual budget but maintains complete opacity regarding individual protection costs, citing security concerns. Historical federal benchmarks show presidential candidate protection cost approximately $38,000 per day in 2016. With no line-item disclosure for Harris’s ongoing book tour security, California taxpayers have no way to track how much state resources are being diverted for a former federal official’s commercial venture. This lack of transparency prevents voters from holding officials accountable for spending decisions, particularly troubling given California’s history of fiscal mismanagement and budget crises.

Pattern of Executive Travel Expense Abuse

Judicial Watch, a government watchdog organization, has exposed extensive taxpayer-funded travel abuse by former officials through Freedom of Information Act requests. The group uncovered over $114 million in travel costs for the Obama family, $2.25 million for Biden’s early term, $2.1 million over two years for Nancy Pelosi, and documented 411 flights for Hunter Biden. Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch filed FOIA requests in August 2024 for Harris’s vice presidential travel records, including companion details for trips covering 17 foreign visits to 21 countries. The organization alleges agencies concealed information that would reveal campaign-related benefits.

Political Retaliation or Fiscal Responsibility

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass characterized Trump’s decision as an “act of revenge” that endangers Harris, coordinating with Governor Newsom on local safety measures. However, Trump’s action aligns with past revocations for John Bolton and Biden’s children, suggesting consistent policy application rather than targeted harassment. The timing raises legitimate questions about why California taxpayers should subsidize security for a private book tour generating personal income for Harris. Protesters confronted Harris during tour stops, underscoring security concerns but also highlighting the contentious nature of using state resources for what amounts to a commercial enterprise promoting her political brand.

Precedent for State-Funded Former Official Protection

This situation establishes a concerning precedent where states absorb security costs for former federal officials engaged in personal business ventures. California’s involvement creates an unfair burden on residents already struggling with high taxes, inflation, and government overspending from previous Democratic administration policies. The arrangement essentially allows Harris to profit from book sales while everyday Californians unknowingly subsidize her protection detail. Without transparency requirements or cost disclosures, this model could expand to other former officials, creating an unlimited taxpayer-funded security apparatus for political elites pursuing private interests long after leaving office.