White House Plans To Govern Boldly And Phrase The Emails Carefully

The White House has spent months preparing for a possible Democratic takeover of Congress, Reuters reports, citing an administration official and two people familiar with the plans. Officials have been studying executive actions, greater political control over federal grants and ways to handle the investigations a Democratic majority could launch.

This is reassuring evidence that the administration understands Congress has powers. It has devoted quite a lot of preparation to the unpleasant possibility that someone might use them.

According to Reuters’ sources, Stephen Miller, Russell Vought and White House lawyers have worked on the plans since April. Agencies have submitted proposals and legal reviews. The work includes figuring out what Trump can do himself, where he might push the limits and how to defend the results in court.

Seven months of preparation for an electoral outcome the White House accuses the media of promoting as a false narrative. The false narrative appears to have generated a substantial workload.

Contingency planning is normal. Elections are uncertain. A government should prepare for more than the result it prefers. But there is something magnificent about publicly swatting away a possibility while privately furnishing it with legal reviews. The prediction is irresponsible; the contingency binder is coming along beautifully.

The most concrete spending idea in the report is Vought’s proposed change to grant rules, giving political appointees more say over which programmes receive taxpayer money. He is also examining what can be done with funds Congress has already appropriated. These are plans under discussion, not a newly implemented grant system.

Congress has performed the funding part. The proposal would give the president’s people more control over the choosing part. Public money, with an extra layer of political taste applied before serving.

Meanwhile, White House lawyers have reportedly briefed officials on congressional inquiries, document requests and subpoenas. One source says they have advised appointees to be careful about what they put in writing. They also sought a Justice Department opinion that could support extending executive privilege to communications with private advisers.

More say over the money. Greater care over the sentences explaining the saying.

That is not a report of evidence destruction or an established right to hide every communication. Careful writing can be entirely proper, and a requested legal opinion is not a court order. It is still an arresting combination of ambitions: political discretion spreading out while the prose pulls its elbows in.

I want to see the style guide for that combination. Presumably it encourages active government and extremely passive voice. Funds were directed. Priorities were considered. Decisions occurred naturally in the vicinity of a political appointee.

The White House says it and Republicans will continue to deliver on borders, law and order, and Americans’ finances. Trump also says he expects deals with Democrats after an initial period of vetoes. None of the election outcomes is settled. Congress could block legislation and, with Senate control, appointments; its investigations remain a real obstacle. Courts can stop actions that exceed presidential authority.

Those constraints are not annoying punctuation in the presidency. They are other people’s jobs. You cannot perform theirs by putting a more determined expression on while doing yours.

The fresh reporting shows the administration preparing both to exercise more unilateral discretion and to withstand questions about it. A complete executive workout: strengthen the reach, tighten the explanation.

The taxpayers are allowed to want the two to develop together. If political appointees deserve a bigger role in distributing public money, their reasons should be capable of surviving verbs with subjects attached.

Somebody chose something. Start there. It is a useful sentence, even when the next election makes it inconvenient.