Sara Haines questioned the price tag behind Donald Trump’s latest television ads on The View. The co-host argued that taxpayers should not have to fund campaign-style messaging ahead of the 2026 midterms.
The discussion aired on Monday, Sept. 28, after the Trump administration released several taxpayer-funded advertisements. The spots promoted his agenda while calling for Americans to “cast out the Communists” and “demolish the deep state.”
Sara Haines slammed Donald Trump’s taxpayer-funded ads as the midterm elections approach
As per OK! Magazine, The View panel watched one of the advertisements during its Hot Topics segment. Sunny Hostin compared the spending with the controversy surrounding former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Haines then joked, “Well, where is DOGE when you need it?” The comment referenced Elon Musk’s former Department of Government Efficiency, which focused on cutting federal spending.
Haines later called the advertising “completely inappropriate” and questioned its purpose. “Because this is like a pump-up ad. They’re calling it a public service announcement, but what’s the service to the public?” she said. She also argued that advertising could not change how people actually felt about the economy. “You can’t advertise the feelings people are having at their dinner tables out of them,” Haines said. She added that forcing taxpayers to fund such messages could make people even more frustrated.
The criticism extended beyond the ABC talk show. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he supported the message itself but opposed its funding. “It’s a great message, I like the message, but it shouldn’t be paid for by taxpayer dollars,” Thune told reporters.
Sen. John Kennedy also questioned the spending during an interview with Face the Nation. “I don’t think any public official, including President Trump… should spend public money on private ads for themselves,” he said. Sen. Thom Tillis called the ads “inappropriate,” while Rep. Thomas Massie criticized them online. Massie wrote that using public money for the spots “is completely legal… in banana republics.”
The White House defended the campaign as public-service messaging. A spokesperson said the ads were “educational and unapologetically patriotic” and aimed to remind Americans why the country was worth defending. The controversy continued as the midterm elections approached, with legal and ethical questions surrounding the use of taxpayer money.
