Taxpayer-Funded Trump Ads Draw Legal Scrutiny as White House Defends 'Patriotic' Spots
Three taxpayer-funded advertisements featuring President Donald Trump have cost over $1.4 million and drawn criticism from legal experts and some Republicans, who say they violate federal propaganda laws. The White House calls them public service announcements reminding Americans to love their country.
Three taxpayer-funded advertisements glorifying President Donald Trump have sparked mounting legal and political criticism, with experts saying they appear to violate federal laws against government propaganda. The ads, which have aired on network and cable television and streaming platforms, have cost more than $1.4 million so far, according to AdImpact, a media spending tracker. The White House has spent days fiercely defending the campaign, calling the spots public service announcements similar to those used by past administrations.
The first ad, which began airing last Wednesday, features clips of Trump discussing the defeat of communism, interspersed with onscreen text promoting the «largest tax cuts in history,» «reigniting American manufacturing» and a call to «defend law and order and police.» A second ad, released later in the week, shows scenic nighttime footage of Mount Rushmore alongside quotes and clips from Trump's Fourth of July weekend speech there honoring the country's 250th anniversary. The third and latest spot, which first aired over the weekend, is virtually identical to an ad from Trump's 2024 Republican reelection campaign. It shows him walking down a hallway as his voice warns of a «final battle» against «globalists» and «warmongers.» All three end with the message: «Paid for by the U.S. Government.»
White House communications director Steven Cheung defended the ads on X, writing: «Don't let the Fake News get away with their lies about our epic Public Service Announcements that have been running on tv.» The White House also published a list of past PSAs from Democratic and Republican administrations, including George W. Bush's promotion of a Medicare law, Barack Obama's ads for Affordable Care Act subsidies, and Joe Biden's COVID-19 vaccination campaign. «The announcements are very clearly not campaign ads; President Trump is not on the ballot and there is no call to action,» the White House wrote. «Instead, the announcements are a reminder for Americans to love their country and know why it's worth defending — at home, at the border, and abroad.»
But multiple legal experts consulted by The Associated Press said the ads appear to run afoul of federal statutes, including a law prohibiting the use of congressionally appropriated funds for «publicity or propaganda» and another limiting the partisan political activities of government employees. Richard Painter, a former White House ethics czar under President George W. Bush, said the ads are fundamentally different from past PSAs because they are not designed to help Americans access any specific government program. «You watch all three ads, they're sheer propaganda,» Painter said. «This is increasingly looking like what authoritarian governments do to promote their leaders.»
Kathleen Clark, a legal ethics professor at Washington University in St. Louis, echoed that assessment. «These ads are nothing more than government propaganda, aimed at helping Trump,» she said. Painter acknowledged that the Bush administration's Medicare PSAs toed the line on appropriateness because they included misleading information about Medicare Part D, but he described Trump's campaign as a far more egregious violation. «There's nothing in here about a particular policy that's at all focused,» he said. «One of them is just about the evils of the deep state. Another one of them is about communists and Marxists.»
The criticism has also come from within Trump's own party. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told reporters: «It shouldn't be paid for with taxpayer dollars. It would not have been something that I would have done.» Sen. Mike Rounds, another South Dakota Republican, said: «I know that the White House is not covered by the same guidance that we are, but it's not something that I would have done.»
The White House has not responded to inquiries about which part of the government is funding the ads. The spots have run across a wide range of TV networks nationwide, including during popular college football and National Football League programming. The actual amount spent could be significantly higher than the $1.4 million tracked so far, depending on whether networks classified the ads as political advertising. With both chambers of Congress led by Republicans, any oversight would likely have to come from Trump's allies, decreasing the likelihood of hearings or other accountability efforts before November's midterm elections.
In its defense, the White House also referenced the administrations of Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt, both of whom used posters, radio and film to rally the country during World Wars I and II. James Kimble, a communication professor at Seton Hall University who studies domestic propaganda, said it is true that Wilson's administration used propaganda to rally Americans, but he noted that most Americans no longer view those actions positively. «By almost any objective measure, looking back, we find what they did pretty repulsive,» he said.
9
