June 1, 2026

Election-year communications is the highest-stakes test any government agency will face. It is not just about what you say; it is about whether the public still believes you after you say it. During an election year, stakeholders read every agency statement through a political lens. Citizens, journalists, advocacy groups, and legislators all ask the same question. Is this information, or is this politics? If you cannot answer that question clearly, through your communications, not just your intentions, you risk the one thing that makes your agency function: institutional credibility. The events of 2025 proved this is not a theoretical risk. When federal agency websites displayed partisan messaging blaming opposition politicians for a government shutdown, the line between institutional communication and political campaigning collapsed publicly. Individuals filed complaints alleging Hatch Act violations. Airports refused to display official agency messaging because it read as propaganda. The credibility damage extended to agencies that had nothing to do with the original incident. That is the cost of absent or broken election-year communications frameworks. This guide shows you how to build one that protects your agency in every election cycle. Why Election Year Communications Break in Election Year The 2025 federal government shutdown became a case study in what happens when election-year communications frameworks fail. Official agency websites, automated email replies, and public information portals displayed messages blaming opposition politicians for closing the government. Airports across the country refused DHS Secretary Kristi Noem’s airport messaging because they viewed it as partisan propaganda rather than public information. In October 2025, individuals filed formal complaints alleging Hatch Act violations after the official HUD website posted statements accusing Democrats of pursuing a “$1.5 trillion wish list” and labeling them the “Radical Left.” Legal experts described the scale and coordination of the messaging as “a systematic campaign to transform nonpartisan federal agencies into partisan political messengers,” according to reporting in Honolulu Civil Beat. Furthermore, legal experts warned this could be a test run for similar tactics during an actual election year. The Hatch Act, enacted in 1939 to prevent federal agencies from functioning as political machines, prohibits executive branch employees from using official authority to interfere with or affect election results. It defines political activity as anything directed toward the success or failure of a partisan candidate or political group. The problem, however, is not just legal. It is reputational. Even where the Hatch Act’s formal reach remains limited, as it does for certain senior political appointees, perceptions of partisan messaging cause institutional damage that outlasts any legal ruling. Related: How Government Communications Builds Proven Public High Trust The Non-Partisan PR Framework A non-partisan PR framework is not silent. It is not the absence of communication. It is a disciplined, pre-built approach to election year communications that protects your agency’s institutional independence while allowing you to continue fulfilling your public mission. A robust non-partisan PR framework includes: A clear communications policy should be reviewed before the election season begins. Your agency needs a written, leadership-approved communications policy that defines the line between institutional information and political content, specifically in the context of an election year. That policy must cover all channels: website content, automated messages, social media, press releases, and external spokesperson statements. Additionally, the policy must be reviewed, not just maintained. The 2025 shutdown messaging demonstrated that gaps between policy and practice can open quickly under political pressure. Pre-season review closes those gaps before the election cycle creates the pressure. A content audit of all public-facing channels Before an election cycle intensifies, audit every public-facing communication asset your agency maintains. Website banners, out-of-office replies, press release templates, social media profiles, and FAQ pages can all contain messaging that attracts additional scrutiny during an election year. As a result, readers may interpret that messaging differently from how communicators originally intended or drafted it. Conduct this audit with external eyes. Internal teams often miss framing problems that outside communicators catch immediately. A designated non-partisan review checkpoint Every significant public communication produced during election season deserves additional scrutiny. This includes press releases, policy announcements, regulatory guidance, and public service campaigns. That checkpoint asks one question. Could a reasonable citizen interpret this communication as supporting or opposing a partisan candidate or political party? If the answer is yes, or even possibly, the communication needs revision before it goes public. The Hatch Act and Your Communications Team Every government communicator needs to understand the Hatch Act’s reach and its limits before an election cycle begins. The Hatch Act applies to civilian employees in the executive branch, with exceptions for the President, Vice President, and certain other senior officials. It prohibits using official authority or influence to interfere with or affect election results. It also prohibits using official titles, agency emails, or government resources to support a candidacy or partisan political activity. In April 2025, the Office of Special Counsel rescinded advisory opinions from 2024 and reverted to guidance last published in November 2020, according to KnowledgeCity’s 2026 Hatch Act analysis. That change means many agency communications teams are operating on guidance that predates the communications channels and political dynamics of the current environment. Key Hatch Act rules every government communicator must know: Consequently, your election year communications framework must address not just institutional messaging, but the behaviour of individual staff who communicate publicly on behalf of the agency. Protecting Institutional Independence Through Strategic Communications Beyond legal compliance, the election year communications strategy must address the broader reputational goal. Protecting the public’s perception of your agency as an independent institution. This is a distinct challenge from Hatch Act compliance. An agency can stay within the legal limits of the Act while still producing communications that read as politically motivated and suffer serious credibility damage as a result. Here is how the strongest agencies protect institutional independence through communications strategy: Lead with mission, not controversy During election season, anchor all agency communications to your core mission and statutory responsibilities. Every press release, every public statement, every social media post should clearly connect to what