GREAT FALLS — In a move that has ignited debate over the boundaries of government communications, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has posted a banner on its homepage reading:
“Due to the Radical Left Democrat shutdown, this government website will not be updated during the funding lapse. President Trump has made it clear he wants to keep the government open and support those who feed, fuel, and clothe the American people.”
That message and similar ones on several other federal agency sites have drawn outrage from critics who say it violates ethics laws and undermines the nonpartisan nature of federal institutions.
Brianna Juneau reports - watch the video here:
Supporters argue the messaging is simply factual and appropriate in a highly polarized era.
When Congress failed to pass a continuing resolution in early October 2025, the federal government entered a funding lapse. As with past shutdowns, many federal agencies suspended nonessential operations.
What stands out in this instance is how multiple agencies inserted partisan language in their public-facing messaging to assign blame.
In addition to the USDA banner, other sites included similar messaging such as the Department of State and the Department of Justice.
Some government sites took a more neutral tone, not including any partisan language to inform users of their lack of site updates.
The legal question centers on the Hatch Act of 1939, a statute that limits the political activity of federal employees and seeks to ensure that public resources are not used for partisan purposes. Under its rules:
- Federal employees may not use their official authority of influence to interfere with or affect the outcome of an election.
- They are barred from engaging in political activity while on duty or in a federal building, among other restrictions.
- he law aims to preserve neutrality in government operations so that citizens are not pressured by public employees to support political cause or candidate.
Officials aligned with the administration argue that the messages are factual statements of responsibility. The office of Senator Steve Daines released a statement in support of the message, saying:
“Montana farmers and ranchers put food on the table for millions of families across our nation. Chuck Schumer and Senate Democrats have ignored the best interests of the American people and continuously voted to keep the government shut down; despite fully knowing the impact it has on those in the agriculture industry.”
Senator Tim Sheehy echoed the messaging in his own statement:
“Everything in their statement is correct. Chuck Schumer shut down the government and Senate Democrats have now voted against a nonpartisan government funding bill ten times in a row. I agree with the Trump Administration’s decision to inform the American people exactly who is responsible for shutting down the government.”
Not all in agriculture or rural communities agree with that narrative, however. President of the Montana Farmers Union, Walter Schweitzer cautioned that using partisan messaging on official sites violates the Hatch Act. He also expressed concern about the uncertainty facing Montana farmers and ranchers during the shutdown. “It's causing a lot of uncertainty. Political officials are not to use their position to campaign partisan.”
With USDA offices closed and payments delayed, many fear they’re caught in the middle of a political fight that affects their livelihoods. “Two sides of the government aren't even talking to each other,” explained Steve Sheffels, the vice president of the Montana Grain Growers Association. “It’s been a long time since the government has worried about doing the right thing. They're worried about who is right, not what is right.”
The office of Steve Daines in their statement added:
“Senator Daines recognizes that farmers are struggling and need certainty, and he will keep fighting to re-open the government as soon as possible so we can get back to work delivering wins for farmers, ranchers, and families in Montana and across the nation.”
As the shutdown stretches on, questions remain, not only about when the government will reopen, but whether partisan messages like these will change how Americans view their public institutions.
