The use of federal money to promote partisan agendas

Democrats are showing increasing skill at rapid response. Case in point is a new report from the House Democratic leadership on the recent revelations of questionable Bush administration expenditures for public relations (pdf). In it they demonstrate that the Bush administration has overseen a 128% increase in federal spending on such promotional activities. Furthermore, an increasing number of these activities are being contracted without "full and open competition". 40% of the 2004 contracts were noncompetitive.

The two aspects of this scandal (and I do think it is scandalous) that I find most disturbing are (1) the use of federal money to advocate policy change as opposed to just educating the public on existing policy and (2) the use of federal money to pay advocates who are already supporters, suggesting that federal money is being used as a reward for good behavior.

Click here to see the Executive Summary of the report

Recently, questions have been raised about the use of taxpayer dollars to fund public relations campaigns. The Government Accountability Office has found that the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy and the Department of Health and Human Services engaged in illegal "covert propaganda" by hiring a public relations firm to produce and disseminate fabricated video news reports. Investigative reporters have disclosed that the Department of Education paid a journalist to promote the No Child Left Behind Act in television and radio appearances and that the Department of Health and Human Services had a contract with a syndicated columnist who promoted the President’s marriage initiative.

At the request of Democratic Leader Pelosi, Democratic Whip Hoyer, and Reps. Waxman, Dingell, Obey, Rangel, Miller, Slaughter, Thompson, and DeLauro, this report examines federal spending on public relations contracts. It finds that federal spending for public relations has more than doubled under the Bush Administration. While not all public relations spending is illegal or inappropriate, this rapid rise in public relations contracts at a time of growing budget deficits raises questions about the priorities of the Administration.

Specifically, the report finds:

• In 2004, the Bush Administration spent over $88 million on contracts with public relations agencies.

• The value of federal contracts with public relations agencies has increased significantly over the last four years. In 2000, the last year of the Clinton Administration, the federal government spent $39 million on contracts with major public relations agencies. By 2004, the value of these PR contracts had grown by almost $50 million, an increase of 128%.

• An increasing number of PR contracts are being awarded without full and open competition. During the last year of the Clinton Administration, less than 20% of PR contracts were awarded without full and open competition. By 2004, over 40% of PR contracts, worth $37 million in total, were awarded on a noncompetitive basis.

• The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services spent over $94 million on contracts with public relations agencies over the last four years, the most of any federal agency. The three public relations agencies that received the most in federal contracts over the last four years are Ketchum Communications ($97 million), Matthews Media Group ($52 million), and Fleishmann Hillard ($41 million).

For over 50 years, annual federal appropriations laws have prohibited the expenditure of appropriated funds on "publicity and propaganda," unless authorized by Congress. This longstanding prohibition has been interpreted by the Government Accountability Office to prohibit covert propaganda that does not identify the government as the source, information intended for "self-aggrandizement" or "puffery," and materials that serve a solely partisan purpose.1 The prohibition reflects the principle that the federal government should not use its vast resources to influence public opinion on political and policy issues.

In two recent incidents, the Government Accountability Office has found that federal agencies violated the prohibition on publicity and propaganda by hiring a public relations firm to produce "covert propaganda." In May 2004, GAO found that video news releases distributed to television stations for the Department of Health and Human Services constituted illegal covert propaganda because they did not reveal the source of the information.2 These releases featured paid contractors posing as reporters who spoke in positive terms about the newly enacted changes to Medicare. In January 2005, in a separate investigation, GAO made a similar finding regarding fabricated video news releases produced by a contractor and distributed by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy.3

An investigation by USA Today revealed another example of covert propaganda.4 The Department of Education hired a public relations agency, Ketchum Incorporated, to promote the No Child Left Behind Act. As part of this contract, Ketchum entered into a subcontract to pay Armstrong Williams, a conservative commentator, to promote the No Child Left Behind Act on his radio and television appearances. The contract with Mr. Williams specifically provided that Mr. Williams would "regularly comment on NCLB during the course of his broadcasts.”5 Neither Mr. Williams nor the Department of Education disclosed these payments. Similarly, a recent investigation by the Washington Post found that syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher, who frequently wrote on the President’s $300 million initiative encouraging marriage, had received a $21,500 contract with the Department of Health and Human Services. The contract called on Ms. Gallagher to draft an article for Department officials and draft brochures for the Department promoting the marriage initiative. Neither Ms. Gallagher nor the Department of Health and Human Services disclosed these payments.6 As part of an investigation into the use of covert propaganda by federal agencies, Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer, and Reps. Henry A. Waxman, John D. Dingell, David R. Obey, Charles B. Rangel, George Miller, Louise McIntosh Slaughter, Bennie G. Thompson, and Rosa L. DeLauro asked the Special Investigations Division to analyze executive branch spending on public relations efforts. This report presents the results of this analysis.