House Dems Should Regret Sluggishness, Not Overzealousness
Democrats have only just gotten started on oversight, but already they are assuming an apologetic stance for “going too far.” They should not, however, apologize for taking initial, and honestly likely still insufficient, steps to protect the US from a dangerously corrupt and plausibly disloyal president.
Instead of acting guilty, Democrats should be taking pride in the important constitutional responsibility that they are beginning to undertake. There will always be voices arguing that oversight is going too far - indeed a chorus shouted “overreach” before the Democrats had even won the midterms! Those voices, however, were and are dangerously wrong. The current state of affairs is not normal, and acting otherwise de-mobilizes “The Resistance,” making it far more likely that Trump and his associates get away with their con scot-free.
Housekeeping: RDP finally has an official twitter account! Follow us @revolvingdoorDC if you have not already.
Congressional Oversight:
Michael Cohen’s testimony effectively outlined the President’s involvement in a laundry list of extra-legal activities, provided a roadmap for further investigations, and built pressure for Democrats to act, although some felt that pressure more than others. Following the testimony, reports indicated that Ways and Means Chair Richard Neal was preparing to make his request for the President’s tax returns soon (maybe in two weeks, maybe later, he still will not commit to a timeline despite the fact that he is now fully two and half months behind original expectations). In contrast, the House Judiciary Committee made requests for documents from 81 individuals and organizations, all with demonstrable connections to Trump’s wrongdoing.
Who do you think received more criticism from DC pundits? One would think that Richard Neal’s continued foot-dragging would earn him some much deserved ire since it is forestalling the long overdue moment when the American people have some understanding of the ways their president is compromised. Amazingly, however, most chose to wax poetic about how the Judiciary Committee was overstepping the bounds into the realm of “fishing.” Nevermind that this was the most basic, preliminary exercise of Congressional oversight powers or that there is more than enough evidence to justify these requests (a threshold that, legally speaking, is irrelevant since Congressional investigations merely require a connection to a single legislative purpose), according to the punditry, this latest step was unacceptable.
This narrative is dangerous nonsense and is best ignored or outright contested. Democrats have the evidence on their side; Trump and his allies, in government and outside of it, have continually flouted the law at the expense of the general public’s security and prosperity. It is Congress’ job to uncover the extent of this endangerment, as what is already known likely only scratches the surface.
Spotlight: The House Financial Services Committee, from leadership on down, has continued to model what unabashed oversight looks like. Chair Maxine Waters is tirelessly organizing hearings that put some of the country’s worst actors from corporate America and the executive branch alike under the microscope. Her new committee members have significantly bolstered these oversight efforts. One in particular, Rep. Katie Porter, has stood out for consistently turning up the heat on officials who are unaccustomed to answering for their actions. Unsurprisingly, Porter shines as a candidate particularly reliant on small dollar donors rather than Wall Street in a report we conducted in collaboration with Americans for Financial Reform.
That Waters understands the moment may be why she has refused to shrink away from impeachment, unlike so many other members of Democratic leadership. That brutal honesty about Trump may explain the sharp contrast in Waters’ approach to that of Neal. Our piece in The American Prospect demonstrates how Neal is unjustifiably shying away from requesting Trump’s taxes, while Chairwoman Waters is appropriately eager to acquire Trump’s mysterious Deutsche Bank records.
Hall of Shame: At this point, Richard Neal may deserve to have the Hall of Shame named after him. Much more than Trump’s tax requests are avoiding scrutiny. That’s why we organized a letter to Speaker Pelosi explaining why at some point, she needs to exert her leadership and ensure that the Ways and Means Committee does its wide-ranging job.
Executive Branch Personnel
Those abuses have real consequences that should be making people furious. It is the job of Democratic lawmakers to uncover and highlight those harms so that each subsequent scandal does not slide out of the public consciousness before those involved face any accountability. House Democrats, for instance, should shine a light on the Department of Transportation’s persistent negligence under the leadership of Secretary Elaine Chao. Chao’s mismanagement was and is important, but gained prominence this week following the emergence of serious questions surrounding the Boeing 737 Max 8’s safety. The DOT’s abdication of regulatory responsibilities has wide-reaching effects. Some of these might merely be annoying, like ever smaller seats with less leg room, but others could be fatal, like in the case of the Max 8. As the Washington Post noted,”the Federal Aviation Administration risked losing its status as the world’s aviation safety leader” by deferring to Boeing.
Of course, the deference to Boeing may be explicable.The CEO of Boeing reportedly spoke directly with the President, urging him not to ground the Max 8s. The fact that Boeing gave $1 million to Trump’s inaugural committee likely made that appeal more compelling.
One frequent question asked in DC is when will Trump corruption matter to voters seemingly inured to the endless scandals. Potentially, it might be clarifying that the Trump Administration was willing to endanger people on something as conspicuous as planes that might crash, what do you think they might allow friendly corporations to do to your food, savings, and medicine? While this is a particularly colorful example, it is not unique. Each of this administration’s corrupt decisions, from separating families at the border to destroying the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from within, has serious consequences. Anyone telling you otherwise is wrong.
In order to underscore that message… we wonder if the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure will follow through on threats to subpoena Boeing and the FAA and if it will expand its investigation into issues at the Department of Transportation more broadly.
Independent Agencies
The real harm stemming from this administration’s decisions helps us draw connections to subtle but harmful practices that have degraded our institutions of governance over the years. Some of these do not look like stereotypical corruption, so they are assumed to be less destructive. In this piece, however, we make the case that practices like former regulators’ frequent defection to corporate America dangerously entrench the advantage of special interests in the regulatory process. It is important that these insidious avenues of influence are not overlooked as we attempt to develop more resilient laws that make our governing institutions less vulnerable to abuse and corporate capture.
This effort will also require that we are more vigilant about ensuring that regulatory agencies have the leadership they need to function. As demonstrated by this piece on foreigners’ making donations to Trump’s inaugural committee hidden behind anonymous LLCs, lawmakers’ forgetfulness of independent federal agencies is not new. The Federal Election Commission, the body charged with regulating campaign finance, only has four of six seats filled. Only one of those seats is held by a Democratic commissioner; Trump has left the other two Democratic seats empty with minimal Democratic protest. Meanwhile, all four FEC commissioners are serving terms that expired before President Trump took office. As we pay more attention to our electoral and campaign finance system’s vulnerability to foreign influence, it is important to rectify persistent neglect of the FEC.
2020 (and Potentially 2021)
Elizabeth Warren made waves last week when she unveiled a plan to break up technology giants like Amazon, Facebook, and Google. We were most impressed that her plan to combat anti-competitive consolidations included not only legislative action but an explicit articulation of her intention to “appoint regulators committed to reversing illegal and anti-competitive tech mergers.” We are always interested in candidates h offering specifics about the types of people they intend to appoint and hope other candidates will follow her lead in articulating a personnel policy. We will be watching this debate on monopoly power in Iowa later this month to learn more from Warren and gauge the positions of other candidate participants, including Amy Klobuchar and Julian Castro.
If another candidate does something especially promising or alarming with respect to personnel, please email us.
We also want to recommend highly this piece by James Goodwin of Center for Progressive Reform for explicating how important personnel and administrative law will be to implementing the Green New Deal.
Want more?
Check out some of the pieces that we have published or contributed research or thoughts to this month:
Time to Panic, as Democrats Fail in the Fight Against Trump (behind Daily Beast paywall)
Small-Dollar Donors Are Playing a Growing Role in Congressional Campaigns and AFR-CEPR Research: Small Donations Show Growing Power of Grassroots Vs. Wall Street
Disappointing Revolving Door News Makes Clear H.R. 1 is Only a Start
NY State Lawmakers Show How We Can Advance Reform in Face of Federal Gridlock
Coalition Asks Pelosi: Make Ways and Means Committee Do Its Job
The case for getting Trump’s tax returns just got stronger -- and more urgent
Politico Morning Tax March 4, 2019
Why Did Four Top Democrats Just Say No to 2020?
Cory Booker: Ivy League elite or hunger-striking hero?
If you have been forwarded this newsletter and would like to subscribe, please click here.
Revolving Door Project is a project of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.