We publish the objective news, period. If you want the facts, then sign up below and join our movement for objective news:


Latest News

Biden Accused of Misusing Taxpayer Funds for Signs Touting Infrastructure Law

 June 24, 2024

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has sparked controversy by accusing the Biden administration of violating the Hatch Act through the use of taxpayer dollars to post signs crediting President Joe Biden for the 2021 infrastructure law, which he claims act as campaign promotions.

Cruz argues these infrastructure displays serve as "yard signs" promoting Biden's reelection, thus crossing legal boundaries intended to separate government actions from campaign activities, as the Post Millennial reports.

The lawmaker's allegations center on the infrastructure act, formally known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, established in 2021. According to Cruz, the administration is using federal funds to create and display signs crediting President Biden, stating, "Project Funded by President Joe Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law," across various infrastructure projects.

Cruz voiced his concerns through a formal letter addressed to the head of the Office of Special Counsel, a federal agency responsible for investigating potential violations of the Hatch Act. This law prohibits the use of taxpayer resources for promoting political candidates or campaigns.

Cruz's Claims and Concerns

In his letter, which was made public by Politico, Cruz compared the signs to campaign yard signs and insisted they represented a misuse of taxpayer funds for political purposes.

"These displays are nothing more than campaign yard signs courtesy of the American taxpayer," Cruz wrote, emphasizing that the infrastructure law was a bipartisan effort and should not be solely attributed to President Biden.

Historically, it's not uncommon for presidents and public officials to include their names on project signs related to initiatives they've supported. However, Cruz asserts that the current administration has overstepped by branding the infrastructure law as President Biden’s own, thus blurring the lines between governmental transparency and campaign activities.

White House Response

In response to Cruz’s accusations, White House spokesperson Robyn Patterson defended the administration's actions, stating the signs were meant to promote transparency and inform taxpayers on how federal dollars were being allocated. Patterson criticized Cruz for his stance, pointing out that he did not vote in favor of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which is set to provide essential funding for Texas.

"If Senator Cruz were half as concerned about Texas kids getting safe drinking water as he is about signs, he might have voted for the Infrastructure Law and to send $31 billion to tackle essential infrastructure needs across Texas," Patterson said.

Infrastructure Law's Impact

Patterson went on to highlight the law’s significant benefits for Texas, including the construction of roads, expansion of high-speed internet access, and replacement of lead pipes, which are all crucial for the state’s development. She further noted that the signage was consistent with the administration's broader goal of informing the public about legislative achievements.

The White House sign guidelines, Patterson added, include similar phrases for other major legislative acts such as the Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPS and Science Act, and the American Rescue Plan. Each sign bears the phrase "Investing in America" and features a design similar to that of the Biden-Harris campaign logo. This logo was created by the same firm that designed their campaign graphics.

Cruz's Final Arguments

Cruz remains adamant that the Biden administration’s approach crosses the line into improper campaign promotion.

"Congress, not President Biden, wrote [the infrastructure law], and it did not do so to aid the President’s reelection campaign," he noted, stressing the bipartisan nature of the law's creation.

Cruz's letter underscores his broader argument that there should be a clear separation between government resource use and campaign-related activities, invoking the Hatch Act as the legal basis for his claims.

Tension over the Hatch Act

The contention between Cruz and the Biden administration is indicative of ongoing tensions over the Hatch Act, primarily concerning its interpretation and enforcement. While the Act aims to maintain a nonpartisan federal workforce and prevent the misuse of government resources for political gains, its application in this context remains a matter of debate.

As this issue unfolds, it raises important questions about government transparency, the appropriateness of crediting public officials for bipartisan efforts, and the implications for future administrative actions.

Sen. Ted Cruz's allegations against the Biden administration over the use of taxpayer-funded signs for the infrastructure law have ignited a debate about the boundaries between government transparency and political promotion.

While the White House defends the signs as informative tools for taxpayers, Cruz argues they are campaign materials in disguise, citing the Hatch Act. This controversy not only spotlights the infrastructure law’s impact on Texas but also raises broader questions about the use of federal resources in politically sensitive contexts.

By observing the developments and responses from both sides, it will become clearer how such issues of government resource usage for political messaging will be regulated in the future.