Executive Summary
- Democratic lawmakers formally requested a DHS Inspector General investigation into a $220 million ad contract.
- Allegations center on the Strategy Group, a firm with ties to Secretary Kristi Noem, receiving undisclosed funds.
- The firm’s CEO is married to Noem’s top DHS spokesperson, raising conflict of interest concerns.
- DHS maintains that all contracting procedures were followed correctly and denied involvement in subcontractor selection.
A coalition of Democratic lawmakers has formally requested an investigation by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General regarding a $220 million advertising contract. The inquiry follows reports that a consulting firm with close personal and professional ties to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem allegedly received taxpayer funds through the campaign without public disclosure.
The request, spearheaded by five U.S. Senators and two members of the House of Representatives, seeks to determine if DHS officials violated federal contracting regulations and ethics laws. According to a letter sent to the Inspector General, Senators Ruben Gallego, Gary Peters, Richard Blumenthal, and Andy Kim expressed concern that the arrangement might constitute self-dealing. Representative Bennie Thompson and Representative Robert Garcia issued a separate demand for communications between Secretary Noem’s office and the entities involved.
The scrutiny stems from a ProPublica investigation revealing that the Strategy Group, a Republican consulting firm, performed work on DHS advertisements featuring Secretary Noem. The report indicates that the Strategy Group’s CEO, Ben Yoho, is married to Tricia McLaughlin, who currently serves as the DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. Additionally, the firm has previous ties to Noem’s gubernatorial campaigns and her senior aide, Corey Lewandowski.
According to the lawmakers’ letters, DHS appears to have bypassed standard competitive bidding processes, directing funds to a Delaware-based limited liability company formed just days prior to the contract’s finalization. The Strategy Group was not listed on public documents related to the deal. DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin previously stated to ProPublica that she recused herself from the process and claimed no visibility into the subcontractor selection.
In response to the allegations, DHS issued a statement asserting that the agency adheres strictly to contracting regulations and does not influence subcontractor selection. The DHS Inspector General’s office declined to confirm the existence of an active investigation to ProPublica, citing standard policy regarding ongoing or potential inquiries.
Government Oversight and Ethical Standards
This request for a formal probe highlights the intensifying scrutiny over federal procurement processes within the department. The investigation, if launched, will likely focus on the transparency of the subcontractor selection process and whether conflict-of-interest protocols were sufficiently enforced regarding the relationship between the Strategy Group and DHS leadership. Under federal law, government officials are prohibited from using public office for private gain, and specific recusal mandates exist to prevent ethical breaches. It is important to note that while an investigation has been requested based on these allegations, all individuals and entities involved are presumed innocent of any legal wrongdoing until proven otherwise.