Ernst questions taxpayer-funded Biden campaign signs

EXCLUSIVE — Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) is questioning the cost and legality of “campaign signs” the Biden administration is placing alongside taxpayer-funded projects.

In a letter sent Thursday to Shalanda Young, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, Ernst said she was surprised to learn that the Biden administration has been “strongly encouraging” federal agencies to post signs alongside projects “declaring they were funded, not by taxpayers, but President Joe Biden.”

The White House offers guidance on placing signs that say “project funded by President Joe Biden’s [Insert Name of Law],” according to one “Investing in America” signage guide, while the placards have appeared at work sites since at least last year.

The Iowa senator is known, in part, for her “Squeal Awards,” which recognize federal costs that have “proven to be wasteful and must be cut.” She said in a statement that her June “Squeal Award” is going to OMB for “playing politics with taxpayer money.”

“Political campaign signs are not infrastructure,” Ernst said. “President Biden is clearly using the ‘Bipartisan Infrastructure Law’ as a piggy bank to pay for partisan pork projects to aid his re-election while real infrastructure, like roads and bridges, are crumbling before our eyes.”

Ernst, who voted against both the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act, wrote that both laws “stretched the definition of infrastructure,” though they do allocate billions for highways and public transit.

“But who would have ever guessed the meaning would be stretched so far as to include public financing for the president’s own campaign infrastructure?” Ernst wrote in the letter, provided exclusively to the Washington Examiner. “Yet, at the White House’s direction, the Department of Transportation, Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and other agencies are treating taxpayer money like campaign donations, purchasing and placing thousands of campaign signs along roadsides and other public works sites.”

The Iowa senator quipped that similar signage should be placed next to electric vehicle charging stations across the United States in addition to a rail extension in San Francisco — two projects touted by the Biden administration that have drawn criticism from GOP and some Democratic lawmakers for their high costs and perceived low reward.

“This gravy train is on track to be one of the most expensive transit projects in the world,” Ernst wrote regarding the California rail line. “That certainly makes it qualify as a historical attraction deserving of a sign for public recognition.”

The Iowa senator is requesting that Young provide information on the total number of “funded by President Joe Biden signs” paid for with taxpayer dollars; the total cost to design, produce, and install the signage; and documentation on whether a legal determination was made to determine if making these signs “misuse official government resources for political campaign purposes” by Aug. 1.

This is the latest step from Republicans to determine whether federal agencies are assisting in Biden’s reelection campaign. Both Rep. Roger Williams (R-TX) and Ernst, the leading GOP lawmakers on the House and Senate Small Business committees, have demanded answers on the Small Business Administration’s “aggressive voter registration initiative” in Michigan, a state where Biden is struggling to maintain support due to the Israel-Hamas war.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Ernst alleged that the agency was participating in “politically motivated travel with taxpayer dollars” in a letter to the SBA in April.

The Washington Examiner reached out to the White House Office of Management and Budget for comment.