唐纳德·特朗普曾承诺，在中期选举前夕不再动用纳税人的钱来播放宣传自己及其政府的竞选类广告。然而，尽管白宫方面不断更改说辞并承诺会做出调整，那些标注着“由美国政府出资”的广告依然大量出现在全国各地的电视频道上。
Donald Trump promised to stop using taxpayer money to run campaign-style ads celebrating himself and his administration in the run-up to the midterm elections. But the ads tagged “Paid for by the U.S. Government” have continued blanketing national airwaves, despite shifting explanations and promises of changes from the White House.
本周，美国民主党全国委员会对特朗普政府提起诉讼。该诉讼要求法官下令停止播放这些广告，称其属于宣传手段，是在利用政府资源为总统所属政党服务，而该政党正试图保住对国会的控制权。
So, this week, the Democratic National Committee filed suit against the Trump administration. The suit asks a judge to stop Trump’s ads, calling them propaganda that marshals government resources in support of the President’s party—as it seeks to keep control of Congress.
“将国会拨款用于党派目的，明显违反了联邦法律的规定，”民主党全国委员会的诉状指出，“从根本上讲，这些广告破坏了选举的公平性与公正性。”尽管特朗普坚称这些只是公益广告，但实际上它们恰恰迎合了他试图动员的选民群体：广告中充斥着他保护民众免受共产主义威胁的承诺，还有边境墙的画面。特朗普目光坚毅地直视镜头，呼吁观众协助他“彻底将美国从这些恶徒手中解放出来”“把战争贩子赶出政府”。
“This use of Congressional appropriations for partisan purposes violates the clear command of federal law,” the DNC lawsuit claims. “Fundamentally, the ads undermine free and fair elections.”Despite Trump’s claims they are simply public service ads, the ads offer red meat to the base Trump’s trying to mobilize: promises that he will protect us from communism. Shots of the border wall. Trump, looking steely-eyed into the camera, asking viewers to help him “liberate America from these villains once and for all” and “expel the warmongers from our government.”
特朗普声称政府内存在战争贩子，这不仅极具讽刺意味，而且内容与他2024年竞选总统时发布的广告如出一辙。
It’s not just ironic that Trump would make that claim about warmongers; it’s also a rehash of a campaign ad he ran while running for president in 2024.
这些广告最初在周末的体育赛事期间播出，随即引发了两党人士的强烈反应——其明显的竞选意图甚至让部分共和党人也感到不安。
When the ads began running—with airings focused on weekend sports games—they immediately provoked a reaction from both sides of the aisle, with the obvious campaign message making even some Republicans uncomfortable.
这起诉讼与监督组织“Common Cause”上周提起的诉讼相呼应。后者请求法官介入干预，因为法律明确规定联邦税款不得用于支付宣传费用。这正是法律原文的内容：由特朗普所属政党推动、并经他亲自签署的今年拨款法案明确规定：“本法案及其他任何法案中所规定的拨款，均不得直接或间接用于——包括通过私人承包商——在美国境内开展此前未经国会批准的宣传或 propaganda活动。”
The lawsuit joins one filed by watchdog group Common Cause last week, which asks a judge to intervene because the law pretty clearly says federal tax dollars can’t be used to pay for propaganda. That’s the actual language of the law—this year’s appropriation’s bill, pushed through by Trump’s own party and signed by him, clearly states: “No part of any appropriation contained in this or any other Act shall be used directly or indirectly, including by private contractor, for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized by Congress.”
这些广告的资金来源是拨给国土安全部的2000万美元拨款。虽然准确统计广告支出数额极为困难，但近期估算显示相关开支已逾1200万美元。
The ads were funded by a $20 million appropriation to the Department of Homeland Security. While it’s notoriously difficult to determine exactly how much has been spent on ad-buys, some recent estimates top $12 million.
“Common Cause”与阿拉巴马州的一名民主党众议院候选人联合提起的诉讼指出：无论特朗普如何声称这些广告属于公益性质，他的真实意图显而易见。
Common Cause’s lawsuit, filed jointly with a Democratic House candidate from Alabama, argues that it doesn’t matter what Trump says about the ads being public service: It’s clear what’s he’s up to.
诉状称：“此外，尽管这些广告并未直接点名民主党候选人，但它们刻意贬低那些特朗普及共和党候选人一直试图与民主党候选人挂钩的议题与立场。因此，尽管白宫坚称这些广告属于公益宣传，但常识与普通观众的直观判断都表明：这些广告本质上就是个人宣传与政治 propaganda。”特朗普本人对这些广告的态度也摇摆不定：起初他强硬宣称这些广告属于公益性质，而当时已有报道称他亲自下令制作这些广告；后来他又表示自己的超级政治行动委员会‘MAGA Inc.’将承担广告费用。
“What’s more, although the ads don’t specifically name Democratic candidates, they disparage issues and positions that Trump and Republican candidates have tried time and again to tie to Democratic candidates,” the suit claims. “So despite the White House’s insistence to the contrary, common sense demands what any viewer understands: These ads are not public-service announcements—they are personal publicity and political propaganda through and through.”Trump himself has wavered on the ads—first defiantly saying they were public service, amid reports he had demanded them himself, and later saying that his super-PAC, MAGA Inc., would pay for the ads.
不过，随着一则关于抓获尼古拉斯·马杜罗的新广告开始播放，特朗普又改口称该委员会只会为未来的广告出资，已播出的广告则不在资助范围内。
But as a new ad about the capture of Nicolas Maduro began running, Trump said that his super-PAC would fund future ads, but that would not count the ads that have already run.
“美国政府本不应从事发布带有政治宣传性质广告的活动，”华盛顿责任与道德公民组织的资深伦理顾问辛西娅·布朗说道。
“The U.S. government is not supposed to be in the business of putting out ads that have political propaganda,” says Cynthia Brown, senior ethics counsel at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
布朗指出，归根结底，确保纳税人的钱不会被用于政治宣传的监督责任在于国会。正是国会负责审批预算并制定相关拨款法律，而特朗普发布的这些广告显然违反了这些规定。虽然联邦各机构设有监察长办公室来监督经费使用，但此次情况特殊——这些广告直接由特朗普下令发布。“因此我们缺乏足够的监督机制，除了依靠国会之外别无他法，”布朗说道，“国会必须行使拨款权，查明事实并要求相关方给出解释。”
At the end of the day, Brown says, the oversight responsibility for ensuring tax dollars aren’t used for propaganda comes down to Congress, which controls the appropriations and writes the appropriations law that Trump’s ads seem to violate. Federal agencies have inspector generals offices to police their spending, but this is coming from Trump directly—”So we don’t have as many oversight mechanisms, except for Congress,” Brown says. “Congress needs to exercise it’s power of the purse and find out and demand answers.”
据报道，这些广告是应特朗普本人的要求发布的，他不仅批准了联邦资金用于广告投放，同时还在考虑是否让自己的超级政治行动委员会“MAGA Inc.”来承担这笔费用。据悉，该委员会目前手握高达4.15亿美元的资金。据相关报道，特朗普曾以占有者的口吻谈及这笔资金，称：“这是由我掌控的钱。”多年来，特朗普似乎一直将政治资金与自己的私人财产混为一谈，而此次广告发布似乎又重演了他以往惯用的手段——随意调配资金以解决自身难题。
The reported over the weekend that the ads came at the behest of Trump personally, who okayed the federal spending on the ads, while simultaneously considering whether his super PAC, MAGA Inc., which appears to be sitting on as much as $415 million, should pay. According to the , Trump has spoken possessively of the super PAC money, saying, “This is my money that I control.”And Trump has, over the years, repeatedly seemed to conflate his political cash with his own pocketbook, and the ads seem to be repeating another pattern Trump has engaged in before—mixing and matching money to solve his problems.
众所周知，特朗普曾动用慈善基金的资金来和解诉讼案件；在2016年大选期间，他还将自己的基金会作为政治工具加以利用。这些行为最终导致他不得不自掏腰包支付200万美元，以了结一起关于滥用资金的诉讼案。
Famously, Trump used his charity’s money to settle lawsuits, and used his foundation as a political tool throughout the 2016 election—activities that led to his having to personally pay $2 million in damages to settle a lawsuit over the misuse of funds.