The White House calls them public service announcements, like those used in past administrations. But almost everyone else doesn't agree, with three taxpayer-funded advertisements that glorify US President Donald Trump drawing criticism from across the partisan divide. Legal experts say the ads violate federal laws on government…
Page A2From§Eachthe early evening edition — 1 October 2026
Government cuts 300,000 jobs, spends savings on ads thanking the man who cut them, lawyers check Hatch Act.
As it ran on the front
Here's the clean version, the one I'd planned to file: trimming the federal payroll is a taxpayer win, and anything the administration spends explaining that win to the public is just good government. That's the pitch in the Washington Examiner's op-ed crediting the White House with 300,000 fewer federal jobs since January 20, 2025, bringing the workforce down to what the Examiner itself calls a "still-bulky" 2.7 million. Good news, delivered plainly. The problem is what came next.
House Democrats wrote to the White House on October 1, the Guardian reports, over a parallel campaign of taxpayer-funded video ads promoting the president — ads other members have already called "pure cult propaganda." I was going to say every administration runs public messaging, that this is routine, that these are just — actually, these aren't safety notices or open-enrollment reminders. ABC reported September 28 that the White House is airing more of these spots, an expanding rotation, and Common Dreams reported September 25 that the backlash ran across two separate pieces in a single week, each one some version of outraged.…
…(cont) So I'll grant the ads exist, and I'll grant taxpayers are paying for them. France 24 put the sharper question to it on September 29: public service announcement, like prior administrations ran, or propaganda? Their reporting notes legal experts calling the ads a violation of federal rules on government messaging — not a fringe complaint, a documented one.
Which is where I was supposed to close this out reassuring everyone there's no legal exposure, that the Hatch Act is about campaign conduct and nothing to do with — no. Actually. CBS News ran a segment on October 1 with legal contributor Jessica Levinson walking through exactly how the Hatch Act, the law governing political activity by federal employees, could apply to this specific ad campaign. Critics aren't just annoyed; they're calling for a federal investigation. That's not a messaging dispute anymore. That's a legal question, raised on the record by someone whose job is explaining the law on television, about ads the taxpayers funding them are now formally asking the government to look into.
I don't have a clean landing for that. I'm not sure there is one.
“They found money to run a glossy ad campaign the same week 300,000 federal workers lost their jobs — that's not messaging, that's a reelection spot laundered through your tax bill. The guy getting credit for cutting the payroll is also getting a commercial paid for by the payroll he cut. Watch what happens when lawmakers ask the Hatch Act to actually bite.”
“Every administration runs public messaging, this is standard operating procedure, nothing like propaganda, more like reminding citizens of achievements the taxpayers happen to be funding. Did I say taxpayers are funding the president's own promotional ads? That's not— look, the Hatch Act doesn't really apply to routine messaging, legal experts are just speculating, it's not like anyone's calling for a federal investig— actually, yes, they are, but that's partisan noise.”
Earlier in this story
- Government cuts 300,000 jobs, taxpayers fund $1.7 million ad campaign for the one who survived. By Chip · the early bird edition, 1 October 2026
The receipts
Critics of President Trump's taxpayer-funded ads are calling for a federal investigation. CBS News' legal contributor Jessica Levinson shares her analysis.
This page is a back-issue: the story as it ran, receipts as they were. The current edition is at the front. The byline is a pen name for a column drafted by a machine and checked by the editor: how this is made.