Reading mode Exit reading mode

White House Airs Taxpayer-Funded Pro-Trump TV Ads on Fox News and Newsmax Ahead of the Midterms (September 2026)

Six weeks before the midterm elections, the White House used public money to air a campaign-style ad glorifying the president on Fox News and Newsmax. It called the spot a patriotic public service announcement. Democrats asked federal watchdogs to investigate whether it breaks the long-standing ban on spending appropriated funds on 'publicity or propaganda' and the Hatch Act. No watchdog finding had been issued as of this entry's last update.

Record summary

Grade

Grade 1 of 5: Significant Democratic Concern

Actions that weaken democratic institutions, suppress political participation, or restrict fundamental freedoms without reaching the threshold of a rights violation attributable to a specific victim class. Scale and definitions

Status
Ongoing
Incident date
Record updated
Location
Washington, DC
Category
Corruption & Self-Dealing
Legal posture
Reported
Sources
4 cited
Stable ID
taxpayer-funded-trump-ads-midterms
Legal basis
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026, § 718 (publicity or propaganda prohibition); Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. § 1341); Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 7321-7326)
Posture note
GAO and OSC investigations were requested on October 1, 2026. No finding of a violation has been made. The White House has not publicly identified which appropriation paid for the ads.
Victims
U.S. taxpayers; the fairness of the 2026 midterm elections
Alleged responsible parties
The White House

Key points

  • The 30-second spot, labelled 'Paid for by the U.S. Government,' aired repeatedly on Fox News and Newsmax across several media markets during the week of September 21, 2026.
  • ABC News reported an initial buy of about $14,000, citing the ad-tracking firm AdImpact.
  • White House: the ads are 'educational and unapologetically patriotic' and 'clearly not political' because 'President Trump is not on the ballot.'
  • Federal law bars appropriated funds from being used for 'publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized by Congress.' Government-ethics expert Kevin Kosar told ABC the ad appeared to be 'puffery.'
  • Sen. Maggie Hassan asked Chief of Staff Susie Wiles for records on production costs, funding sources and the ad's government purpose, arguing it lacked 'a clear official government purpose.'

What Happened

During the week of September 21, 2026, about six weeks before the November midterm elections, a 30-second television spot promoting President Trump began airing repeatedly on Fox News and Newsmax. It closes with the disclosure "Paid for by the U.S. Government." In the ad Trump pledges to "defeat communism, socialism, and Marxism in America" and says the country "will never be a communist country." Rapid images of the president, American flags and military aircraft accompany on-screen claims including "LARGEST TAX CUTS IN HISTORY" and "REIGNITING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING," and UFC CEO Dana White praises Trump as "the toughest, most resilient person I've ever met". ABC News, citing the ad-tracking firm AdImpact, reported an initial buy of about $14,000.

The White House said the spots are presidential public service announcements, "educational and unapologetically patriotic," and "clearly not political" because Trump is not on the ballot and the ad contains no call to action. It has not publicly identified which agency or appropriation paid for them.

Slate placed the ads alongside other blurring of governing and campaigning in the same period, noting that several Cabinet secretaries had hit the campaign trail and that Attorney General Todd Blanche had appeared on stage at events for Republican candidates in North Carolina and New York.

Congressional Response

Rep. Jamie Raskin, ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said the ad "may be felony criminal theft and conversion of government property for political campaign purposes" and a possible violation of the Hatch Act. Sen. Maggie Hassan wrote to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles seeking records on production costs, funding sources and the ad's official purpose, arguing it lacked "a clear official government purpose." On October 1, Raskin and Rep. George Whitesides formally asked the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Special Counsel to investigate. They cited section 718 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (the "publicity or propaganda" prohibition), the Anti-Deficiency Act, the Hatch Act and criminal statutes on misuse of public money.

Appropriations law has long barred agencies from spending appropriated funds on "publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized by Congress." The GAO, which enforces that rider, generally treats self-aggrandizing material and partisan advocacy as prohibited. The Hatch Act separately bars executive-branch employees from using their official authority to affect an election. Whether this ad crosses either line depends on facts the White House has not disclosed, including who produced it and from which account it was paid, and on findings no watchdog has yet made. What is documented is that public money paid for a spot that promotes the sitting president and his party's record in the closing weeks of a national campaign, and that the White House's defense rests on the president not personally being on the ballot.

The dollar amounts reported so far are small. The significance is precedent: if this practice is accepted, every future administration would have a taxpayer-funded advertising channel available in the weeks before every election.

Classification

This entry is rated significant. It concerns domestic appropriations and ethics law and carries no war-crimes classification.

Sequence of events

  1. Ad airing; White House defends it; Raskin alleges theft and Hatch Act violation

    ABC News reports the 'Paid for by the U.S. Government' spot has aired repeatedly that week on Fox News and Newsmax. The White House calls the ad an 'educational and unapologetically patriotic' public service announcement. Rep. Jamie Raskin calls it potentially 'felony criminal theft and conversion of government property for political campaign purposes.'

  2. Hassan demands records from Wiles

    Sen. Maggie Hassan writes to Chief of Staff Susie Wiles seeking records on the ad's cost, funding source and official purpose.

  3. GAO and OSC investigations requested

    Raskin and Rep. Whitesides ask the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Special Counsel to investigate under the propaganda rider, the Anti-Deficiency Act and the Hatch Act.

Sources

  1. Administration's pro-Trump TV ad is taxpayer-funded — ABC News
  2. The Latest Sign Donald Trump Is Feeling Scared About the Midterms — Slate
  3. White House defends government-funded Trump ad as Democrats demand answers — FOX 17 (Sinclair National Desk)
  4. Ranking Member Raskin, Rep. Whitesides Demand Watchdog Probes into Taxpayer-Funded Trump Campaign Ads — House Judiciary Committee Democrats

How this record was published

Manually curated This entry was added directly and does not carry an automated audit trail.

About our editorial methodology →

Related records

Linked by the editors.

  • Grade 2 of 5: Major Abuse of Power

    Systematic Hatch Act Violations: Using Government Resources for Political Campaigns

    The Office of Special Counsel — an independent federal watchdog — found that Trump administration officials committed the most extensive Hatch Act violations in the law's history. The 2020 Republican National Convention used the White House as a backdrop for campaign speeches by administration officials, naturalization ceremonies were used as political props, and senior White House staff used official accounts and positions to campaign. The administration declined to take any corrective action, with Conway reportedly saying she 'didn't care.'

  • Grade 2 of 5: Major Abuse of Power

    Hatch Act Violations: Using White House and Federal Resources for Campaign Events

    The 2020 Republican National Convention featured events staged at the White House — a building owned by the federal government and maintained with taxpayer funds — in ways that previous administrations of both parties had avoided. The OSC, which enforces the Hatch Act prohibiting federal employees from using their official capacity or government resources for political activity, found multiple violations. Secretary Pompeo's Jerusalem speech was the highest-profile Hatch Act referral; the OSC concluded he had violated the act. Other officials investigated included Kellyanne Conway (previously recommended for removal for Hatch Act violations in 2019). The naturalization ceremony conducted by USCIS Director Cuccinelli at the convention for five new citizens was also reviewed.

  • Grade 3 of 5: Serious Rights Violation

    Executive Order on Elections: Voter Suppression and Presidential Seizure of Election Administration

    An executive order attempting unprecedented presidential control over federal elections — requiring proof of citizenship to register, decertifying voting machines in 39 states, restricting mail ballots, and demanding state voter files — struck down by three federal courts as unconstitutional but partially implemented by compliant states ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Similar by category, grade and tags.

  • Grade 3 of 5: Serious Rights Violation

    DOGE Employees Matched Social Security Data with Voter Rolls to Pursue Voter Fraud Claims

    DOGE employees at SSA secretly worked with a political advocacy group to match Social Security data with voter rolls to find 'evidence of voter fraud and to overturn election results.' A signed data-sharing agreement and Hatch Act referrals followed. A whistleblower alleged DOGE copied 300+ million Americans' records into an unsecured virtual database.

  • Grade 1 of 5: Significant Democratic Concern

    Mike Pompeo: State Department Staff Used for Personal Errands, Spouse Events Charged to Taxpayers

    The State Department IG's report, released in September 2020, found that Pompeo had used department staff and resources for personal and political purposes in violation of federal regulations. Staff described being directed to walk Pompeo's dog, pick up his dry cleaning, make restaurant reservations, and run other personal errands. Susan Pompeo, who had an official role as diplomatic spouse, used State Department resources for what the IG characterized as non-official events. At least 17 dinners charged to the State Department were found to include politically-oriented guests or personal guests rather than serving diplomatic purposes. Pompeo had fired IG Steve Linick in May 2020; Linick said the firing was retaliation for the investigation. Pompeo denied wrongdoing.

  • Grade 1 of 5: Significant Democratic Concern

    Ben Carson HUD Furniture: $31,000 Dining Set Purchased in Violation of Federal Spending Limits

    The $31,561 dining set — table, chairs, and hutch — was ordered in September 2017 for Carson's HUD suite. A career HUD employee, Helen Foster, filed a complaint alleging she was reassigned after she raised concerns about the legality of the purchase. Foster said she was told by HUD leadership that the order would go forward and that 'someone' had ordered it who outranked her. After the purchase became public in February 2018, Carson and his wife initially disputed involvement; subsequent reporting found text messages showing his wife Candy Carson personally directed the purchase and selected items. Carson reimbursed HUD and the set was canceled. The HUD inspector general investigated.

  • Grade 1 of 5: Significant Democratic Concern

    Steve Mnuchin: Requested Government Jet for Honeymoon, Used Military Plane for Solar Eclipse Viewing

    The government plane honeymoon request was denied after it became public in August 2017. Mnuchin said he had made the request for security reasons and had not been aware of the cost. The Kentucky solar eclipse trip drew IG scrutiny when reports emerged that Linton had asked whether she could accompany Mnuchin on the official trip specifically to watch the eclipse. The IG found the trip had a legitimate official purpose — Mnuchin was scheduled to attend meetings at the Fort Knox federal reserve — but noted concerns about the process and the optics of combining official travel with personal viewing of the solar eclipse. Linton's Instagram post — she tagged designer brands she was wearing and responded hostilely to a commenter — became a symbol of administration attitudes toward wealth and public service.