Key Takeaways

• The Trump administration ran shutdown ads while food aid stopped for 42 million Americans.
• The Department of Homeland Security spent $51 million on shutdown ads in 2025.
• Ads discourage illegal immigration and praise President Trump.
• Some shutdown ads aired in Mexico, even as U.S. families missed meals.

The Impact of Shutdown Ads on Public Funds

The government shutdown has stretched past 33 days. Millions of Americans lost food aid because of the shutdown. Yet during this crisis, the Trump administration kept spending on shutdown ads. The Department of Homeland Security alone paid $51 million in 2025 for these ads. They aim to scare people away from crossing the border and to promote the president. Critics say running shutdown ads while families go hungry is a wrong choice.

High Costs for Shutdown Ads

Early in October, the shutdown began. Almost at once, new shutdown ads started appearing on TV and online. Natalia Campos Vargas, a deputy research director at Equis, points out that many ads began after the shutdown started. Therefore, the ads did not slow down while federal employees sat home without pay. Instead, agencies spent millions more. For example, the Department of Homeland Security spent $51 million by mid-October. Meanwhile, no extra funding went to food assistance for the 42 million Americans hurt by the shutdown.

Political Spin in Shutdown Ads

These shutdown ads do more than warn about illegal immigration. They also feature government leaders praising President Trump. In some spots, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem directly thanks the president. As a result, critics argue the ads act like paid political propaganda. Yet the ads ran on taxpayer money. This choice drew immediate backlash. Researchers and voters alike say it misuses public funds during a national crisis.

Measuring Shutdown Ads Abroad

Surprisingly, some shutdown ads aired in Mexico. Natalia Campos Vargas admits her team cannot track all the spending outside the U.S. However, they confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security targets audiences in Mexico. Therefore, while Americans missed food benefits, shutdown ads reached viewers abroad. No public report explains why or how much was spent overseas. This lack of transparency worries many observers.

Missing Meals vs. Media Messages

The shutdown caused the first food assistance cut for 42 million citizens. That group includes 16 million children. Yet at the same time, shutdown ads ran in living rooms across America. Affected families saw no relief but heard messages discouraging illegal immigration. They also saw praise for President Trump. In effect, the government chose to spend on ads rather than restore food aid. Critics ask why emergency funds were not used to fill the help gap. After all, the administration claimed to have $6 billion in reserve.

Why Shutdown Ads Matter Now

Shutdown ads matter because they show the priorities of those in power. First, millions of Americans face hunger without help. Second, the government keeps spending on ads with political messages. Third, the lack of oversight over ad spending abroad raises ethical questions. For these reasons, the debate over shutdown ads grows louder by the day.

Potential Paths Forward

Some lawmakers call for pausing all shutdown ads until the crisis ends. Others want strict limits on how much can go to political promotions. A few propose shifting those ad dollars to food assistance programs. However, no bill has passed so far. Meanwhile, the shutdown marches on. Families continue to wait for their next meal.

FAQs

How much money went to shutdown ads?

The Department of Homeland Security spent $51 million in 2025 on shutdown ads.

Who is raising concerns about shutdown ads spending?

Natalia Campos Vargas from Equis and other political researchers are sounding the alarm.

Are shutdown ads still running during the shutdown?

Yes. Ads continued on TV and digital platforms after the shutdown began.

Why are shutdown ads airing in Mexico?

The government targeted Hispanic audiences abroad, though exact spending remains unclear.