The Trump administration has spent about $319,000 (£240,478) in taxpayer money airing a campaign-style television ad that closely recreates one of Donald Trump's 2024 election videos, even as lawmakers question whether public funds are being used for political promotion.
The 30-second spot, titled 'Final Battle', shows Trump walking through a portrait-lined hallway in black and white while a voice-over reprises rhetoric from his presidential campaign.
The ad ends with a disclosure that reads: 'Paid for by the U.S. Government.' Spending on the spot had topped roughly $319,000 (£240,478) by Sunday, according to advertising tracker AdImpact.
It aired during programmes including Saturday Night Live and Fox News Sunday, as well as college and National Football League football broadcasts.
2024 Campaign Video Repurposed With Taxpayer Funds
The imagery and much of the language are virtually identical to a video Trump's campaign distributed during the 2024 presidential race.
'This is the final battle,' Trump says before promising to remove 'warmongers', 'globalists' and the 'deep state' from government and defeat communists, Marxists and fascists.
One notable difference comes at the end. The campaign version encouraged supporters to join Trump's political fight, while the new version identifies the US government as the payer.
It is the third in a growing series of government-funded advertisements centred on Trump ahead of November's midterm elections. The White House calls the spots public service announcements, not campaign advertising.
White House Says Ads Are Not Political
The administration argues that Trump himself is not on the ballot in November and that the videos contain no explicit instruction to vote for a party or candidate.
'The announcements are very clearly not campaign ads,' the White House said, pointing to government-funded information campaigns under previous Republican and Democratic presidents.
It accused critics of applying a double standard, arguing that similar use of government-funded advertising by previous administrations was called 'public education' while Trump's efforts were being labelled propaganda.
That comparison has limits. Previous administrations have used taxpayer-funded advertising to promote government programmes and policies, but federal spending rules restrict the use of appropriated funds for unauthorised 'publicity or propaganda'.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has said government material can violate that restriction when it is 'purely partisan' and designed to assist a political party or candidate, although agencies retain broad authority to explain and defend their policies.
No court or GAO decision has been reported finding that the current advertising campaign violates that prohibition.
Republican Senator Joins Criticism
Criticism has not come only from Democrats.
Republican Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana told CBS's Face the Nation on Sunday that he did not believe Trump, or any public official, should spend government money on advertisements promoting themselves.
'I don't think any public official, including President Trump or Kristi Noem or John Kennedy, should spend public money on private ads for themselves,' Kennedy said.
Several Democratic lawmakers have separately called on White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles to halt the advertising campaign over possible violations of federal spending law.
The controversy follows similar scrutiny of a roughly $220 million (£166.03 million) Department of Homeland Security advertising campaign under former secretary Kristi Noem, which prominently featured her.
For now, the White House is standing by the ads. But the 'Final Battle' spot has sharpened the central question surrounding the growing advertising blitz: where government messaging ends and taxpayer-funded political promotion begins.
