Congress spent $63 million of your money on "constituent communications" last election cycle.
Now those same members are running campaign-style TV ads – and the disclaimer reads "paid for with official funds authorized by the House of Representatives."
Here's what they're doing with your money before the 2026 midterms.
Democrats Used $63 Million in Taxpayer Funds on Campaign Communications Last Cycle
"Franking" is a privilege as old as the republic, originally meant to let lawmakers mail copies of legislation back home.
Nobody in 1775 meant for it to become a taxpayer-funded media operation that Democrats fire up the moment their political futures look shaky.
In the 2024 election cycle alone, House members spent a combined $44 million on franked mail and another $19 million on other franked communications.
Around $5 million went straight to television and digital ads that look indistinguishable from campaign spots.
The only difference is the fine print: your money paid for it.
Democrats have four different political problems right now — and they're billing all four of them to you.
Rep. Shri Thanedar of Michigan is facing a primary challenge and blanketing his district with taxpayer-funded ads to build name recognition before voters can replace him.
Rep. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey spent official House funds building his profile while running for Governor — lost that primary — and is now back running for his House seat with the same taxpayer-funded name recognition he built on your dime.
Members in competitive general election districts are running franked TV and digital ads now to soften their seats before real campaign money has to start flowing.
And Rep. Brad Sherman of California is facing a primary challenge of his own — and spending your money on town halls and official congressional communications bragging about fighting ICE and blocking Trump's immigration agenda, calling ICE agents "masked murderers" in official communications paid for by the same American taxpayers who support Trump's deportation policies by a wide margin.
Congress Has Been Banning the Franking Privilege Since 1873 and Keeps Bringing It Back
Congress banned the franking privilege outright in 1873 after public outrage over members mailing packages of seeds and lengthy floor speeches to voters at taxpayer expense to boost their reelection odds.
Less than 20 years later, they brought it back.
In 1972, a wave of lawsuits accused incumbents of using franked mail for pure electioneering — not official business.
Congress responded by creating the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards, a committee of members policing themselves.
Then in 2021, they quietly softened the required disclaimer from "paid for at taxpayers' expense" to "paid for with official funds."
Stuart McPhail, director of campaign finance litigation at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told Axios: "Using franked mail for campaign purposes would be the same as walking down to the treasury and taking a few gold bars to contribute to your campaign. It's stealing … and should be prohibited."
Carolyn Maloney Wrote the Rulebook on Cheating This System
The law says members must stop mass franked communications 60 days before an election — the "blackout period."
But incumbents found every crack in that wall before the ink was dry.
Former Rep. Carolyn Maloney of New York became infamous for sending just under 500 franked mailers in the runup to her 2022 primary — a maneuver ethics experts called the "499 rule."
Technically legal.
Ethically indefensible.
Thanedar told Axios his voters "appreciate that and thank me all the time" — a Democrat using your money to survive a primary, telling you he's doing you a favor.
The commission policing all of this is made up of other members of Congress — the same people spending the money, setting the rules, and deciding when they've broken them.
House members have already spent nearly $1.4 million in franked ad funds since the start of the 2026 cycle, and that figure will explode as primaries and competitive general elections heat up.
Why Incumbents Win Reelection 95 Percent of the Time and Taxpayers Pay for It
Every challenger in America has to raise every dollar for every ad they run.
Every incumbent gets to tap the U.S. Treasury as a pre-campaign slush fund until 60 days before you vote.
The FEC doesn't track that advantage, the media doesn't cover it, and Congress — which would have to vote to eliminate it — keeps finding reasons to preserve it instead.
In 2021, they didn't tighten the rules; they softened the disclaimer language.
Congressional incumbents who use every tool available — including your tax dollars — win reelection at rates that would embarrass any banana republic.
Democrats battling primaries, running from competitive seats, building their next campaign for higher office, spending your money to call ICE agents murderers — they all figured out the same thing Carolyn Maloney figured out in 2022.
The treasury is right there.
The rules are written by the people spending the money.
You'll keep paying for their campaigns until someone with the power to stop it decides doing what's right matters more than winning the next election.
Don't hold your breath.
Sources:
- Andrew Solender, "Your tax dollars are helping House members get reelected," Axios, April 3, 2026.
- Rob Port, "Is it too much to ask that politicians pay for their own campaign commercials?" Williston Herald, April 2, 2026.
- "Rule changes open door for lawmakers to rely further on ads funded by taxpayers," The Hill, September 15, 2022.
- "Over 5,000 Join Congressman Brad Sherman Telephone Town Hall on Trump and ICE Accountability," Brad Sherman Congressional Press Release, February 12, 2026.
- "The History of the Frank," U.S. House Committee on House Administration.
- "Franking Privilege: Historical Development and Options for Change," Congressional Research Service