A new ad that first aired on cable TV Wednesday shows footage of President Donald Trump as he’s heard saying “together we will defeat communism.” It features bold red lettering claiming political achievements made by the administration, like the “largest tax cuts in history” and “reigniting American manufacturing.” It also included a line that read “defend law and order and police.”
Between those claims was text stating that “America will never be a communist country,” a label Trump and other Republicans have focused on in speeches and ads for the upcoming midterm election.
Download the Straight Arrow app today to get the stories that matter free from manipulation, bias or agenda.™
Point phone camera here
But another line of text lower down in the video reads, “Paid for by the U.S. government,” meaning that taxpayers funded this ad. While the ad doesn’t directly endorse any certain candidate, it still raised questions from lawmakers in both parties because federal rules prohibit anyone from using tax dollars for “publicity or propaganda.”
Does the ad break the rules?
According to an AdImpact analysis by The Associated Press, the ad cost $14,000 and ran on Fox News and Newsmax. The outlet couldn’t find what part of the government paid for the ad.
The White House said in a statement to the outlet that the ad is meant to be “educational and unapologetically patriotic.”
“These public service announcements are about reminding Americans to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending, at home, at our borders, and abroad,” the White House statement read.
Annual government funding bills, including the one Trump signed earlier this year, ban using federal funds for “publicity and propaganda purposes.” The Government Accountability Office said the prohibition applies to messaging that is “purely partisan” and “designed to aid a political party or candidates.”
The Washington Post reported there was no precedent for a government-sponsored political ad during a campaign season. But it noted that in 2004 President George W. Bush was criticized for releasing video segments showing Bush signing a Medicare prescription drug law. The ad featured hired contractors posing as reporters. The GAO said then that the videos violated anti-propaganda rules.
During Trump’s first term, the Department of Health and Human Services paid $250 million on a COVID-19 ad campaign that Democratic investigators said included partisan interests, according to The Post.
More recently, the Department of Homeland Security faced scrutiny after it commissioned more than $200 million in ads that promoted then-Secretary Kristi Noem and the Trump administration’s immigration actions. The scrutiny over the ad and her handling of killings by federal immigration agents led to the Senate Judiciary Committee requesting testimony from Noem. Trump fired her after her testimony.
Bipartisan reaction
Both sides of the aisle criticized Trump’s latest ad. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the leading Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said the ad could be “felony criminal theft and conversion of government property for political campaign purposes” in a post on X. He also said it could be a Hatch Act violation, which prohibits government employees from using their positions or any official resources for political activities.
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who is not running for reelection, called the ad “inappropriate” and referenced the former right-wing Hungarian prime minister in his criticism, the AP reported.
“It’s not like they need a GoFundMe page to have the dollars to do that sort of ad and they could do it,” Tillis said. “But using taxpayer dollars, it feels like Viktor Orban.”
Another Republican, Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy, told reporters he hadn’t seen the video but questioned its legality, saying he doesn’t “like to see politicians use public money to pay for their own campaign ads.”
Ethics experts who spoke to The Wall Street Journal said the ad, which appears to feature an audio clip from the Republican National Convention, could violate federal law.
“This is an astonishing misuse of public resources in the campaign context, one of the most blatant I’ve ever seen,” Daniel Weiner, senior director at the Brennan Center for Justice, told the outlet.
Violations of the propaganda prohibition can bring administrative disciplinary actions, including unpaid suspension or removal from office. In cases of a “knowing and willful” violation, criminal penalties can be up to a $5,000 fine and two years in prison. But in practice, no one has been criminally prosecuted under the law, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center.
Hatch Act violations carry their own penalties: removal from federal service, unpaid suspension, debarment from federal employment for up to five years or civil fines of up to $1,000. But for officials confirmed by the Senate, the law leaves any final discipline up to the president.
Round out your reading
- He built his own Flock-style camera to track police. The police didn’t like it.
- Trump’s apparent joke about letting Iran bomb LA and San Diego catches bipartisan condemnation.
- Grandparents are fighting for access to their grandchildren. Here’s what the law says.
- When the ‘victim’ is made with AI, child pornography cases get complicated.
- Fibermaxxing is trending. Here’s what the science says.
