Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: $3.6 million for pastry cooking classes and dance focus groups for male prostitutes in Haiti
Executive Summary
The claim that the U.S. government spent $3.6 million on pastry-cooking classes and dance focus groups for male prostitutes in Haiti is not supported by available evidence and has been challenged by multiple fact-checking reports; the allegation traces to statements made by federal officials and was later repeated by political figures without documentary proof [1]. Reporting and commentary that repeat the figure cite the Trump administration's waste-identification process but provide no verifiable budget lines or contracts to substantiate the specific programs described [2] [3].
1. How the Claim Entered Public Debate — From Testimony to Headlines
The narrative originated in testimony by the Office of Management and Budget Director and was subsequently amplified in political commentary, notably a July 2025 op-ed by Senator John Kennedy that repeated the "$3.6 million" figure and described programming such as pastry classes, cyber cafes, and dance focus groups for male prostitutes in Haiti [1] [2]. Fact-checking work published in October 2025 identifies that chain — testimony, political repetition, and media circulation — as the key pathway by which an uncorroborated assertion became widespread, noting absence of underlying documents tying that dollar amount to the specific activities named [1].
2. What Fact-Checkers Found When They Looked for Paper Trails
Investigations by fact-checkers concluded the claim is false or unsupported because searches for budgetary records, contract listings, or agency program descriptions matching pastry classes and dance focus groups for male sex workers in Haiti turned up no evidence. The October 2025 fact-check explicitly states there is no documentation linking $3.6 million to those activities and identifies the allegation as a mischaracterization stemming from OMB testimony and later political rhetoric [1]. This absence of primary budgetary evidence is central to the debunking.
3. Political Uses and Motives — Why This Story Spread
Senator John Kennedy’s July 2025 commentary used the claim to argue for cutting perceived federal waste, framing the allegation as an example of foreign-aid bloat and urging congressional action to trim spending [2] [3]. Fact-checkers and analysts treat such political repetition as potentially serving partisan aims: one side uses a vivid anecdote to justify budget cuts, while opponents highlight the lack of evidence and the danger of misinformation. The reporting shows the political utility of a sensational claim can drive dissemination even when support is absent [2] [3].
4. What Is Not Supported — Distinguishing Assertion from Documentation
Available analyses stress that the specific programs described — pastry-cooking classes, cyber cafes, and dance focus groups for male prostitutes — are not backed by any identified contracts, grant descriptions, or line items in publicly available aid or domestic spending records [1]. Fact-checkers emphasize that while government budgets are large and contain varied programs, assertions require documentary links which have not been produced here. The central fact is the lack of verifiable connection between the $3.6 million figure and the alleged activities [1].
5. Conflicting Narratives in Media and Opinion Pages
Opinion pieces and political commentary repeated the claim as part of broader arguments about fiscal responsibility and foreign-aid oversight, often without presenting supporting documents; fact-checkers later pushed back, labeling the narrative misleading or false [2] [3] [1]. This contrast between claim-makers and verifiers illustrates a pattern where opinion-driven rhetoric can outpace documentary corroboration, prompting independent checks that rely on budgetary records and official statements to assess accuracy [2] [1].
6. Context about Haiti and Why the Claim Resonated
Background reporting on Haiti underscores the country’s acute humanitarian needs — for example, reporting from 2016 notes millions facing food insecurity after natural disasters — which makes claims of small-scope, non-essential programs both emotionally salient and politically potent [4]. Fact-checkers argue that invoking an image of frivolous spending in a high-need context amplifies outrage, but the substantive question remains whether the described programs existed; in this case, investigators found no evidence to substantiate the spending claim [4] [1].
7. Bottom Line: Evidence, Dates, and What Remains Unresolved
As of the most recent published checks in October 2025, the allegation that $3.6 million funded pastry classes and dance focus groups for male prostitutes in Haiti is unsupported and has been classified as false or misleading by fact-checkers who traced the claim to OMB testimony and later political repetition [1]. The central unresolved point would require release of specific contract or appropriation documents showing that exact allocation and program descriptions; such documentation has not appeared in the reviewed sources [1].
8. How to Evaluate Future Claims Like This Quickly and Reliably
Evaluators should request primary budget documents: appropriation language, grant awards, contract numbers, and agency program descriptions, then cross-check with independent budget databases and watchdog reports; in this instance, those verifiable records were absent and led independent checkers to reject the claim [1]. Given the partisan contexts in which the figure circulated, readers should treat vivid anecdotes about government spending as requiring documentary proof and seek corroboration from multiple independent sources before accepting headline assertions [2] [3].