2020 Is a Pivot Point for Political Corruption
Newsletter 26: Will political corruption continue its seemingly inexorable rise in America? And a ton of December RDP clips.
Happy New Year! As your inbox might be emptyish this morning… here’s our 26th & final newsletter of 2020!
2020 (and Potentially 2021)
So the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination ended 2019 much like how it began -- with the media leading a national conversation that is largely orthogonal to the job of being the president. Consider Judy Woodruff’s first question of 2019’s last debate:
“But unlike 1974 and President Nixon, congressional Democrats have, so far, not convinced a strong majority of Americans to support impeachment of President Trump. Why do you think that is, and what can you say or do differently in the coming weeks to persuade more Americans that this is the right thing to do?”
Put aside the question’s somewhat debatable premise and consider whether requesting candidates play pundit about Trump’s impeachment is likely to yield anything relevant to voters about how the candidates would run the executive branch. Most of the debate “questions” were similarly unrelated to the day to day responsibilities of the office the candidates are seeking. The word “executive” came up in the debate, questions or answers,… twice. “Regulation”... not at all. No variation on “enforce” was used, and “prosecute” only came up once.
We and a coalition of 18 groups — including Americans for Financial Reform, Demand Progress, Center for Popular Democracy, Open Markets Institute, Progressive Change
Campaign Committee, and Public Citizen — had once again appealed directly to the debate’s moderators to ask that they push candidates to explain “how they would wield powers specific to the executive branch at the next debate.”
We will continue this push in 2020.But will the media be better in 2020? Who knows?!? However, rest assured that RDP remains a resource for interested reporters interested in issues about executive branch personnel (and if you dislike chatting on the phone, read our debate watch guide!)
Unprompted by the mainstream media, however, some candidates are slowly rolling out more executive branch and personnel-focused commitments. For example, at a Teamsters candidate forum earlier this month, Joe Biden said that his administration would consider criminal prosecutions for companies that impinged on workers’ right to organize. At a time when employers from McDonalds to Google seem increasingly emboldened by their apparent right to violate labor law with impunity, this is a welcome commitment.
At that same forum, Elizabeth Warren promised to appoint Federal Reserve Board Governors, “who believe in full employment, who recognize that inflation fears have been overblown for years, and who are willing to let wages grow.” (A side note: It may have taken a while, but the work of Fed Up, our CEPR colleague Dean Baker, and many others, including the recently deceased William Greider, has definitely paid off.)
Commendably, a few news outlets are starting to get clued in to the need for more discussion of how the next president will wield executive branch power. Last week, Politico published an in-depth consideration of what a Bernie Sanders administration would actually look like, mixing reporting and speculation. While the piece is specific to Sanders, the questions it poses about appointments, priorities, executive orders, and more, are certainly not. And we would all benefit if they were posed more widely.
Meanwhile, Buttigieg belatedly disclosed the names of his bundlers earlier this month (under pressure fulfilling Lis Smith’s promise from... April). But, as we brought to the attention of Politico, Buttigieg’s list was obviously incomplete.
Given that Buttigieg track’s “investor circle” support meticulously…. That’s not good!
Buttigieg’s list, even after being updated following the Politico article, remains conspicuously vague. Unlike Barack Obama in both 2008 and 2012, the Buttigieg campaign breaks bundlers into ranges internally without sharing that information from the public. Is it because transparency would underscore the centrality of Big Tech and private equity to his campaign?
Following Buttigieg’s bad news cycle, Biden belatedly provided his bundlers -- but still no transparency from Amy Klobuchar. Given Klobuchar’s strength in Iowa and in debates, and her promise in April of 2019 to release her bundlers, the media should treat Klobuchar like the serious candidate she is and demand transparency.
Bundler disclosures or no, we will be doing some deeper dives into candidates big fundraisers and donors next year (happy to preview this to reporters!). And as previewed in this interview of our founder in the Washington Post, we have a particular focus on what bundlers might want out of the next administration--i.e., influence into choosing the people who shape the executive branch’s regulatory and enforcement priorities.
Congressional Oversight of the Executive Branch
Sadly, the dominant storyline from 2019 to us is that the steadfast activists who have been organizing as if Trump is an existential threat from day one have not seen their passion and intensity matched by Democratic Party leadership. We described in March how Pelosi et al were urging a catastrophic stand down last winter, and...we stand by that take. Even as activists across the country continue to do what they can to fight against the tide of #LearnedHelplessness from Democratic Leaders, it becomes harder to get people into the streets when elected leaders tell the media and activists that Washington is operating business as usual (e.g., trade deals and continuing resolutions passing with no drama).
We continue to believe that Trump’s corruption is the central theme of the moment and Democrats would be wise to embrace it, a theory we recently discussed further with HuffPost.
One recent example of the type of oversight that is necessary from House Democrats but not forthcoming: Investigating how and why Trump’s Department of Labor is fighting for… employers against tipped workers, It strikes us that tipped workers and their families might well exist in states like Wisconsin, Arizona, and Michigan -- as well as House & Senate battlegrounds like Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas.
And in general, we continue to argue that the lack of momentum in favor of the narrowly Ukraine-based impeachment does not stem from insufficiency of evidence. Indeed, the evidence of despicably impeachable conduct is vast and, honestly, uncontroverted! What's needed is a lot more explanation about why a matter esoteric to many of the least politically engaged Americans (distribution of foreign aid, "rule of law," mistreatment of Joe Biden) is indeed quite relevant.
The relevance of the Ukraine story, then, is how it is of a pattern with how Trump is intentionally and explicitly undermining many laws. Consider the implementation of Obamacare and so many other economically meaningful assaults on Trump’s constitutional obligation to execute the law faithfully. Such a broad based approach to the basis of “why impeach” would explain why impeachment in year 4 is merited -- illegality is not a mere one off issue and the victims are not “just” Democratic politicians & “norms.”
Independent Agencies
American labor law has long been one of those unseen scandals that impact millions of Americans with limited media focus… and now the key independent organization protecting the right of workers to organize has become even more opposed to… workers organizing. The National Labor Relations Board is now 3 Republicans to 0 Democrats (by longstanding practice, it is supposed to be 3-2) as Member Lauren McFerran’s term expired in December.
As we have argued in conjunction with Demand Progress, Democrats must confront GOP attacks on Democratic Seats at the Independent Agencies. Ask yourself -- how loud has Schumer been about the end of Democratic representation at the NLRB or across independent agencies? Do leading Democrats discuss the lack of a quorum at the FEC?
Without a dissenting voice at the NLRB, there is no one inside the agency to draw attention in real time to attacks on workers at odds with pro-worker statutes, rampant conflicts of interest, and other assaults on the agency’s purpose. That denies courts, the press, and civil society needed information and perspective.
Look for more from RDP in 2020 clarifying McConnell and Trump’s assault on independent agencies.
Tech & Antitrust More Generally
In 2020 RDP will be expanding our work monitoring the federal government’s competition regulators. We will examine how the critical work of the FTC and DOJ Antitrust Division is or is not undermined by the revolving door. Our work in this area was one of the initial recipients of support from the Anti-Monopoly Fund -- our project is one of those described here, and the broader project was written up in the New York Times.
In general -- RDP is looking forward to growing ever more useful to you in 2020… including finally having a permanent website!
Please do not hesitate to be in touch with tips, questions, and suggestions, and here's to us all enjoying a happy and healthy New Year!
Want more?Check out some of the pieces that we have published or contributed research or thoughts to in the last couple of weeks:
Buttigieg omitted high-powered bundlers from disclosure
What Buttigieg and Warren are really fighting about
Fighting Corruption Is The Most Electable Thing A Democrat Can Do In 2020
Anti-Monopoly Fund announces first round of investments
; context in America’s Top Foundations Bankroll Attack on Big Tech
A Great Big Gift Not on Trump’s Disclosure Form: Giuliani’s Legal Advice; our role explained here
Pete Buttigieg Won’t Talk About His Secret Work At McKinsey
Did Pete Buttigieg Get Hidden Campaign Support From a Real-Estate Developer?
The Democrats Handed Trump a Huge 2020 Policy Win Just After Moving to Impeach Him
The wrong people are really excited about Pete Buttigieg’s campaign
Pete Buttigieg Is Disclosing His Bundlers. What About The Other 2020 Candidates?
Elizabeth Warren Built the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. It Became a Revolving Door
Pete Buttigieg’s McKinsey Client List And A Canadian Grocery Scandal
Rural America Must Be Contested
Bloomberg News’s Curious Interpretation of Editorial Independence