Several major airports across the United States have refused to play a video in which Kristi Noem, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, blames Democrats for the government shutdown and the corresponding delays being experienced in airports. I applaud the airports’ bravery, as I believe it is not only unfair, but also offensive, to broadcast government propaganda in a federal government-operated atmosphere — one that is supposed to be neutral, safe and nonpartisan for its customers.
The video comes in response to one of the longest U.S. government shutdowns ever and the first in almost seven years, which began on Oct. 1, after Democratic and Republican legislators were unable to come to a bipartisan agreement regarding the next federal spending bill or pass a continuing resolution. The main point of contention between the two parties is over the need to extend the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) tax credits, which make healthcare premiums available much cheaper for the approximately 24 million Americans who utilize the program. The Democrats are advocating for the extension of these credits before the reenrollment date of Nov. 1, when Americans will log on to the site and begin searching for the most affordable premium. In many cases, they are expected to face premiums that are nearly double the current cost within the next year.
The Democratic Party is also lobbying for the reversal of the Trump administration’s cuts to Medicaid, a program that helps millions of Americans, particularly the elderly, very low-income and disabled people, receive affordable healthcare. The Republican Party — or at least those in it loyal to Trump — wants a continuing resolution without addressing the imminent hike in medical costs and cost-cutting under Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.” They prefer to debate the potential changes in the regular course of budget negotiations that will occur after many of the current cuts come into effect.
So for now, there is a standoff, and the government remains shuttered. Because the Senate vote to pass a budget requires a super majority of 60 votes, Republicans need the help of at least seven Democrats. The spending bill has already been approved by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. In this rare instance, despite a Republican-controlled government, the Democratic Party has a significant amount of negotiating power. This political stalemate has tested both parties’ resolve 13 times, but to no avail. The divide remains firm as Republicans believe the public will blame the Democrats for the closure of many necessary public services — such as Noem pointed out in her video concerning flight delays — while the Democrats believe that they are supported by the people in their fight for affordable healthcare.
This leads us to our primary issue: Noem’s video and whether or not it is right for the partisan messaging to be played to the public in airports. In a statement released by Oregon’s Portland International Airport, they said they “did not consent to playing the video in its current form, as we believe the Hatch Act clearly prohibits use of public assets for political purposes and messaging.”
The Hatch Act is a federal law passed in 1939 that limits the political activities of government employees working for federally funded programs, ensuring that government institutions running day-to-day public affairs remain nonpartisan and neutral.
In my opinion, Noem’s video directly violates that law, as it attempts to turn a place previously safe from coercion and partisan opinion into a political battleground, where the Republican Party can use their control of government at the present point to further their narrative. Moreover, while Noem herself may not fall directly under the Hatch Act, the airports she is attempting to influence — such as popular New York City airports John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) and LaGuardia Airport — are partially funded by federal agencies, such as the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
Forcing these federally funded or operated institutions to broadcast a political opinion is a blatant misuse of public infrastructure for petty political purposes, which only erodes the public trust in the vital institutions they rely on to function on a daily basis. People from all over the world use these airports, including those of different races, ethnicities, religions and political ideologies. Forcing all people to sit through political ads while going through the TSA line is neither right nor is it democratic. There is a reason why content espousing a partisan agenda is prohibited by the Hatch Act, as Americans would be in uproar if videos such as these were released in courthouses or public schools — places where there is an expectation of a neutral and unbiased environment. It should also be taken into consideration the difficult political climate we are operating under today, and how vital it is that we keep these spaces untouched by the divisive influence of politics. Furthermore, if Noem is adamant about releasing her video, she can do so through countless partisan and private channels, like paid advertising or in friendly news channels.
In conclusion, I believe the airports that refused to air Noem’s video have acted both responsibly and within reason, as it is incredibly important that politics be kept off the runway. This ensures that public spaces such as these remain safe, civil and comfortable for all who utilize their services.
McKenna Coveny, FCRH ’27 is a comparative literature major from Houston, Texas.
