Taxpayer-Funded Trump Ads Top $1.7 Million as Thune, Cornyn and Kennedy Say Stop

Since the first of three taxpayer-funded video ads began airing last Wednesday, September 23, the White House has spent more than $1.7 million promoting President Trump on network TV, cable and streaming, according to an estimate from the media tracker AdImpact cited by The Fiscal Times. The spending has kept climbing even as the criticism has grown louder, including from inside Trump's own party.

The three spots ran in sequence. The first, which started last Wednesday, cuts clips of Trump talking about defeating communism with on-screen text touting the "largest tax cuts in history" and a call to "defend law and order and police." A second ad, showing Mount Rushmore at night with audio from Trump's July 4 speech there, followed later in the week. The third, which aired during Fox News Sunday and multiple college football and NFL games including the Commanders-Seahawks and Panthers-Browns matchups, is nearly identical to a Trump campaign ad from January 2024, according to CNN. It shows Trump walking down a hallway as his voice declares, "This is the final battle... we will demolish the deep state," and vows to "cast out the communists, Marxists, and fascists." All three end with the tag: "Paid for by the U.S. Government."

CNN reported, citing a source familiar with the matter, that Trump personally helped select the imagery and video used in the ads, which were produced in-house by the White House video team inside the communications office. Two Trump advisers told CNN that members of the president's own political operation said they didn't know the ads were coming until they aired, though another source pushed back, saying Trump had discussed the ads with aides beforehand.

Republicans join the criticism

Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters Monday, September 28, that he likes the message but not the funding source. "It's a great message. I like the message, but it shouldn't be paid for with taxpayer dollars," Thune said, according to CNN and Yahoo News. Sen. John Cornyn of Texas called it "not even a close question." Sen. Mike Rounds said it "would not have been something that I would have done." Sen. John Kennedy told CBS's "Face the Nation" that public officials shouldn't "spend public money on private ads for themselves."

Democratic senators Patty Murray and Rep. Rosa DeLauro, in a letter to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles reported by The Fiscal Times, argued the ads violate Section 718 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026, which bars taxpayer funds from producing "government propaganda," as well as the Hatch Act's restrictions on federal employees engaging in campaign activity while on the job. Sens. Mark Warner and Chris Coons also criticized the timing, according to Ground News, given rising living costs and continued conflict overseas.

Legal experts consulted by The Associated Press, cited by WSB Radio, said the ads likely run afoul of those same statutes and differ from prior administrations' public service announcements because they don't direct people to any specific government program. Richard Painter, who served as a White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, told WSB Radio, "You watch all three ads, they're sheer propaganda," adding it looks like "what authoritarian governments do to promote their leaders." Painter separately posted on X that the spending "could be an impeachable offense," though no impeachment inquiry or formal charge has been filed over the ads as of this writing. Common Cause, a government-watchdog group, said stamping political messaging "Paid for by the U.S. Government" "dangerously crosses the line from public service to authoritarian self-promotion."

The White House's defense

The administration has not backed down. White House communications director Steven Cheung posted on X Sunday, "Don't let the Fake News get away with their lies about our epic Public Service Announcements." A White House spokesperson told CNN the spots are "clearly not campaign ads" because Trump isn't on the November ballot, and said they're meant as "a reminder for Americans to love their country and know why it's worth defending." The White House has pointed to COVID vaccine ads under President Biden and Affordable Care Act promotion under President Obama as precedent for government-funded PSAs featuring a sitting president. Critics, including the legal experts cited by the AP, counter that those campaigns directed viewers to specific programs, benefits or actions, something the Trump ads don't do.

With Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress, WSB Radio noted that any formal oversight, such as hearings, would have to come from within Trump's own party, making action before the midterms unlikely.

A separate but related controversy involves Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX), who is running an official congressional ad through his House office promoting his record on border security and healthcare in Starr County, disclosed as "Paid for by the Office of U.S. Congressman Henry Cuellar," according to Breitbart. Unlike the White House spots, Cuellar's ad follows the disclosure format required by the House Communications Standards Manual, illustrating the narrower, program-specific use of official funds that congressional rules were built around, and the contrast critics say the Trump ads fail to meet.

No agency has been named as the funding source for the White House ads, and no formal ethics complaint, Hatch Act referral, or congressional hearing has been scheduled as of September 29. Whether Thune's public criticism translates into any Senate action, or whether the ads keep running through the final weeks before the midterms, remains to be seen.