A $20 million pool of federal money originally earmarked for Customs and Border Protection is now paying for a national television campaign built around President Donald Trump. At least $2.5 million of it has already gone to airtime, the ad-tracking firm AdImpact estimates. The spots end with the on-screen disclaimer “Paid for by the US Government.” They have drawn formal complaints from watchdog groups, a rebuke from the Senate’s top Republican, and a growing demand for an investigation less than five weeks before the midterm elections.
The Money Trail
Federal budget records show the funds were moved into a CBP account designated for “commemorative events” on September 19. Federal contract data shows a $20 million award went to LMD Agency Inc., a Maryland-based advertising firm, the next day for a “National Media Campaign.” The ads began airing on national television days later.
The White House Office of Management and Budget, led by Russell Vought, allocated the $20 million to CBP for what it labeled “OBBBA commemorative events.” That abbreviation refers to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the 2025 law Trump signed. The law provided billions in border security funding for CBP, including money for “commemorating efforts and events related to border security.” CBP is an agency within the Department of Homeland Security.
The true cost of the campaign is higher than the airtime estimate and cannot be fully determined. The spots have been classified as public service announcements rather than traditional political ad buys, so the spending is not publicly disclosed or verifiable. AdImpact’s figure is built from air dates, times, local markets and other factors. LMD’s parent company, MarCom Group, did not respond to requests for comment.
What Is on the Air
AdImpact logged 2,766 airings between September 23 and 29 across Fox News and the four major broadcast networks. About 30 percent of the spending went to NFL and college football games. The spots also ran during daytime and primetime network programming. The first ad, set to the song “Love Me” by JMSN, has aired more than 1,300 times. Lawyers for the artist sent the White House a cease-and-desist letter this week demanding it stop using the track.
Three ads have aired so far. One is a repurposed version of a spot from Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign. In its 2023 form, the video closed with a call to join the campaign and a “Paid for by Donald J. Trump for President 2024, Inc.” tag. The 2026 version replaces that tag with “Paid for by the U.S. Government.” The White House video team produced the ads in-house, and Trump personally helped select the imagery and footage, sources familiar with the production said. More are coming. At least 13 ads, ranging from 15 seconds to three minutes, have been produced, and first lady Melania Trump appears in many of them.
The White House Defense
The White House has called the ads “public service announcements” in a September 25 press release. It has argued that Trump is not on the ballot and that the spots carry no call to action. It has also pointed to earlier administrations’ campaigns on health care and vaccinations. “When prior Administrations utilized the airwaves, it was called ‘public education,'” the White House said. White House communications director Steven Cheung urged supporters on social media not to let critics “get away with their lies” about the spots. Trump defended the ads on Wednesday on the same grounds.
The “paid for” disclosure sits uneasily with that characterization. Airtime for genuine public service announcements is usually donated. Public Citizen argued in its complaint to the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission that the ads “do not refer to any specific governmental program” and do not serve to inform the public about one. The complaint was signed by co-presidents Robert Weissman and Lisa Gilbert and lobbyist Craig Holman.
The Legal Questions
Annual spending laws have for decades barred the use of taxpayer funds for “publicity or propaganda,” including the appropriations measure Trump recently signed. Propaganda is not defined in statute. The Government Accountability Office has interpreted the ban to cover material that is purely partisan, covert, or self-aggrandizing, while recognizing that administrations may need to explain and defend their policies. The Hatch Act of 1939 separately restricts partisan activity by executive branch employees. The president is exempt from it, though critics argue the White House staff who produced and placed the ads are not.
Public Citizen filed its first complaint with the GAO and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel on September 25, after the first ad aired. It filed another with the GAO and the Special Counsel on Monday, seeking an investigation “into who produced these ads and at what cost to taxpayers.” On Tuesday it sent the FCC and FTC complaint, which warned that a station knowingly airing illegal, taxpayer-funded partisan propaganda has “failed its public interest mandate,” a basis for a license renewal challenge. The group says it has filed a dozen Hatch Act complaints with the Special Counsel over the past year and believes all were ignored.
The GAO has confirmed receiving a separate request from congressional Democrats for a review of the sources and total amount of funds used. “GAO has a process it goes through to determine whether we do work and when, which we are working through right now,” spokesperson Sarah Kaczmarek said. It remains unclear whether any outside group has legal standing to sue over the ads.
Congress Divided
Sen. Maggie Hassan, a New Hampshire Democrat, wrote White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles on September 24 demanding the production cost, contractors and funding source for the “Love Me” ad. She wrote that it “does not have a clear official government purpose.” On Tuesday she sought unanimous consent for a resolution stating that the September 2026 ads “should not be paid for by the United States government.” On the floor she said taxpayers want their money spent “keeping them safe, not propaganda campaigns for a president.” Sen. Cynthia Lummis, a Wyoming Republican, objected, which was enough to block it. She said presidents of both parties “have used public service announcements to speak directly to the American people for decades.”
Republican resistance is not uniform. Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters Monday, “I like the message,” but added, “it shouldn’t be paid for with taxpayer dollars.” Sens. Patty Murray and Chris Murphy, Democrats, wrote Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin on Tuesday accusing the department of “a shockingly corrupt misuse of taxpayer dollars.” Republicans control both chambers and have taken no formal action.
Donald Sherman, president and CEO of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said Congress is the natural check but “has not asserted itself as the first branch of government with the power of the purse.” He suggested GOP lawmakers may be reluctant to act because the ads are “designed to boost Republicans in Congress.”
What Comes Next
The campaign lands in a political environment already primed for a fight over advertising and federal spending. A separate DHS campaign fronted by then-Secretary Kristi Noem, with contracts worth up to $200 million, drew similar objections in 2025. The current $20 million runs through the final weeks before the November 3 midterms, and the Trump-focused spots are still airing. The FCC under Trump has not moved against stations airing pro-Trump content, though it has challenged ABC’s licenses. The GAO’s decision on whether to open a review, and whether the Special Counsel acts on Public Citizen’s complaints, will determine whether the ad buy faces any formal consequence.