Tamara Keith and Amy Walter on taxpayer funds used for TV ads promoting Trump

Geoff Bennett:

With just five weeks before the midterm elections, political advertising and messaging is in the spotlight in key races.

For more, we turn to our Politics Monday duo. That's Amy Walter of The Cook Political Report With Amy Walter, and Tamara Keith of NPR, who joins us today from Nevada.

It's always great to see you both.

So let's start with these new White House TV ads. There was a 30-second spot featuring President Trump. He's warning about the deep state, globalists, and Marxists, and he says this is the final battle -- or, rather, there's a voice that says this. And this was aired during the NFL games this past weekend.

Now, this video, which we just saw, originated as Trump campaign material, but now there's a tag at the end that says, "Paid for by the U.S. government." We can take another look at that video if we still have it.

Now, the White House calls this a public service announcement, not a political ad, although it's clearly a political ad. And, Amy, the White House also says -- there's the video. The White House says that there is a precedent for this, that there were the COVID vaccine ads under Biden, the Affordable Care Act promotion under Obama.

Still, it's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison.

Amy Walter, The Cook Political Report:

Yes. I mean, this is clearly -- and, in fact, those stills that you just showed there came from his 2024 political ad that was paid for by his political campaign. So the actual images are the exact same from a paid political ad.

I think there are two issues here, one is, yes, does this violate the Hatch Act, which it clearly looks like it does, which says that you cannot use government funding or government time to pay for political advertising. The next piece, is it politically smart to do?

Well, why would the White House do something like this at a time when, one, most Republicans right now in competitive races are doing all they can to separate themselves from the president, not -- they would like this election to be less about Donald Trump and more about their individual races, and then he literally is looming over these this election with these ads. So that's piece number one about it.

And then the second is, what folks really would like to see the president talk about is the stuff that they care about the most, the cost of living. And nowhere does this really address the real concerns that Americans are having about that.

So, again, it feels a little bit like where we sit with the president going after the news organizations like AP and CNN. There is this sort of idea that the president wants to be the center of the conversation, that especially an aggrieved Donald Trump likes to be the center of conversation to rally his troops behind him.

But, at this point, what we're hearing at least from Republicans who are running campaigns right now and are in tight campaigns, they would like to not have the president as in the spotlight in this way.

Geoff Bennett:

And, Tam, based on your reporting, what more should we know about this ad, how it originated and what the White House is thinking about all this?

Tamara Keith, National Public Radio:

Yes, so this is among at least three ads so far that the U.S. government is paying for. I have asked the White House exactly which department is paying for it, and they have not given us that information.

But what I can tell from looking at AdImpact, which is a tracking firm that tracks advertising, is that the U.S. government has already spent more than a million dollars to air these ads. And they are airing during sporting events and then also on FOX News and Newsmax.

And it seems to be part of this whole theory of the case that Trump's team has had that they want him to be on the ballot. They have been talking about that for more than a year now, that these midterms need to be about him. He makes that plea that we have heard many times now, vote like I'm on the ballot.

And so the places that they're airing this tell us that they are trying to activate Republican base voters who may not be excited about voting in a midterm year, and also trying to get to people who are watching sports and are actively avoiding politics.

You have also seen the president go to a couple of sporting events in the last three or four days, sort of inserting himself into places that people go to avoid politics.

Geoff Bennett:

And, Tam, as Amy mentioned, there is the question of the Hatch Act. The White House might respond by saying the Hatch Act doesn't apply to the president or vice president, but there is a federal prohibition on using appropriated taxpayer funds for unauthorized publicity or propaganda. That is a quote there from the statute.

The question is, are these commercials legal?

Tamara Keith:

It's a question that members of Congress are asking. You had Senator Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire send a letter to Susie Wiles, the chief of staff, asking a series of pointed questions about these ads, including, does this comply with laws that say you can't use federal funds for propaganda?

But it isn't just Democrats. You also had Senator Kennedy from Louisiana, who had been very critical of Kristi Noem when -- the then-homeland security secretary, who ran a whole bunch of glamorous ads that also talked about immigration when she was homeland security secretary. And he was not happy with those ads.

And, in fact, his questioning of her about that may well have led to her being forced out as homeland security secretary. And he said that he doesn't like these ads, whether it's starring Donald Trump or Kristi Noem. He doesn't think that this is appropriate.

Now, whether Congress will actually do something about it, not any time soon. The Senate is not in town for very much longer. The House is out. And it's campaign season, so in some ways it's the White House saying, catch me if you can.

Geoff Bennett:

Returning, Amy, to what you said about the voter focus on affordability, Dan Scavino, one of the president's most trusted White House advisers, one of his most senior White House advisers as well, he posted this AI-generated video showing himself and members of the Trump family spraying champagne at what is a fictional after-party following the state dinner for China's President Xi.

Now, of course, there's been criticism that this was a tone-deaf move on his part, but the backlash aside, what does it say that a senior White House official is posting something like this at all?

Amy Walter:

Right. And talk about not sort of keeping your eyes on the prize here about what this election really is about.

And let's face it, you have in the Trump White House a lot of people, many of whom have been with the president from the very beginning, when they said he can't run, he shouldn't run, he's going to lose, he can't come back after January 6. He continues to defy political gravity.

The difference this year is that, for the very first time, going back to the affordability issue, he is not seen as Teflon on the economy. In fact, his approval ratings on handling inflation even among Republicans are underwater. So he is no -- he is in many ways, yes, the same person that has defied gravity, but the environment is that much different.

And what you're seeing in polling -- and I just saw a Republican poll out of a national sample that asked people, what do you think the president's top priority should be? What do you think it is? And what they pointed to were things like deportations or tariffs. They did not think that the issue of cost of living was high on their list.

In fact, only 17 percent of voters thought that addressing the cost of living was a top priority for the president. Again, he does very well at talking about a lot of other things in hopes of changing the topic, changing the subject. But it is very hard when people are driving in their cars every day, filling up, for them to escape what the cost of living is.

Geoff Bennett:

Tam, we have got a couple of minutes left.

You're in Reno, Nevada, tonight covering a race there. Tell us about it quickly.

Tamara Keith:

Yes, so I am working on a story about what is a longshot race for Democrats here. It is the congressional district Nevada 2 that covers Reno and all of Northern Nevada.

This is a district that has been represented by Republicans since the district was drawn in the very early 1980s. But Republican campaign committees are starting to have to drop real money on this race. The Republican candidate here, David Flippo, has not been endorsed by the outgoing congressman and has had some controversies, among them that he was running for office in Las Vegas earlier in this election cycle, only to then move to the Northern Nevada district to run in the Northern Nevada district.

Got Trump's endorsement and is not -- is a candidate who is not running away from President Trump at this point. And then Democrats nominated a Democrat who is more moderate, more mainstream, and is not sort of from the far left wing of the Democratic Party. So Democrats have some hope, even though it is a district that President Trump won by something like 14 points.

Geoff Bennett:

And that this district is competitive means what?

Amy Walter:

Yes, is the story, is the story in and of itself, right...

Geoff Bennett:

Yes.

Tamara Keith:

Right.

Amy Walter:

... the fact that Democrats are able to compete into this deep dark of a territory.

In fact, if you look at all the races The Cook Political Report rates as competitive, the median district in that list of about 25 seats is a district -- are districts that Trump won by seven points. So that is very much unusual. Mostly, those you're usually fighting in districts that the president narrowly won or lost. This is now going much deeper.

Geoff Bennett:

Amy Walter, Tamara Keith, thanks to you both.

And safe travels home.

Tamara Keith:

Thank you.