Representatives Thompson, Thanedar, McIver Demand Investigation into TSA Shutdown Propaganda Video

Congressional Democrats Call for Expanded GAO Investigation into DHS Partisan Messaging

Three senior House Democrats have requested the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) broaden its ongoing investigation into the Department of Homeland Security’s potential misuse of taxpayer funds for partisan communications during a federal funding lapse.

In a letter sent today, Representatives Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS), Ranking Member of the Committee on Homeland Security, along with subcommittee Ranking Members Shri Thanedar (D-MI) and LaMonica McIver (D-NJ), expressed concern over reports that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) distributed airport videos attributing longer wait times to a “Democrat shutdown.”

The lawmakers argue this partisan phrasing likely violates multiple federal statutes, including the Antideficiency Act, which restricts government spending during funding lapses, and the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from engaging in certain political activities.

“The unnecessary and inaccurate insertion of the word ‘Democrat’ not only breaks grammatical laws in its use as an adjective—but seems to represent a violation of several statutes,” the Ranking Members stated in their letter.

This request expands upon a previous inquiry by the same legislators regarding another TSA checkpoint video featuring outgoing Secretary Kristi Noem that allegedly contained partisan messaging. The representatives specifically noted that despite Noem’s imminent departure from office, questionable communications practices appear to continue within the department.

The controversy comes amid heightened tensions over government funding and shutdown politics. Federal agencies face strict limitations on communications during appropriations lapses, with rules generally permitting only essential information directly related to agency operations during such periods.

Government ethics experts note that federal communications must maintain political neutrality, particularly regarding partisan disputes over government funding. The insertion of politically charged language like “Democrat shutdown” in official government messaging could constitute improper lobbying or campaign activity using federal resources.

“This represents a concerning pattern at DHS under Secretary Noem’s leadership,” said a former federal ethics official who requested anonymity to speak freely on the matter. “Government communications must serve the public interest, not partisan political narratives.”

The GAO, as Congress’s investigative arm, regularly examines potential violations of appropriations law and government ethics standards. Their findings, while not legally binding, carry significant weight and can prompt administrative changes or further congressional action.

The timing of this controversy is particularly notable as Secretary Noem prepares to leave her position. Her tenure has been marked by several controversies, including questions about management practices and departmental priorities.

For TSA specifically, the agency responsible for aviation security at over 450 U.S. airports, maintaining public trust is crucial to its mission. Political messaging at security checkpoints raises questions about the agency’s focus during a period when operational readiness should be its primary concern.

Congressional oversight of DHS has intensified in recent years as the department’s vast responsibilities—covering everything from border security to disaster response—have made it a frequent flashpoint in partisan debates over national security and immigration policy.

The Democratic lawmakers have requested the GAO incorporate this latest incident into its ongoing review, signaling continued scrutiny of DHS communications practices regardless of leadership changes at the top of the department.

Neither DHS nor the TSA has publicly responded to the lawmakers’ letter, which was released earlier today. The GAO typically acknowledges such requests within days but comprehensive reviews often take several months to complete.