Mediaboss Marketing

The White House is telling federal agencies to blow off Democratic lawmakers' oversight requests, as Republicans fear the information could be weaponized against President Donald Trump.

At meetings with top officials for various government departments this spring, Uttam Dhillon, a White House lawyer, told agencies not to cooperate with such requests from Democrats, according to Republican sources inside and outside the administration.

Story Continued Below

It appears to be a formalization of a practice that had already taken hold, as Democrats have complained that their oversight letters requesting information from agencies have gone unanswered since January, and the Trump administration has not yet explained the rationale.

The declaration amounts to a new level of partisanship in Washington, where the president and his administration already feels besieged by media reports and attacks from Democrats. The idea, Republicans said, is to choke off the Democratic congressional minorities from gaining new information that could be used to attack the president.

"You have Republicans leading the House, the Senate and the White House," a White House official said. "I don't think you'd have the Democrats responding to every minority member request if they were in the same position."

A White House spokeswoman said the policy of the administration is to accommodate the requests of chairmen, regardless of their political party. There are no Democratic chairmen, as Congress is controlled by Republicans.

The administration also responds to all non-oversight inquiries, including the Senates inquiries for purposes of providing advice and consent on nominees, without regard to the political party of the requester, the spokeswoman said. Multiple agencies have, in fact, responded to minority member requests. No agencies have been directed not to respond to minority requests.

Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning in your inbox

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Republicans said that President Barack Obamas administration was not always quick to respond to them and sometimes ignored them. However, the Obama White House never ordered agencies to stop cooperating with Republican oversight requests altogether, making the marching orders from Trumps aides that much more unusual.

What I do not remember is a blanket request from the Obama administration not to respond to Republicans, said a former longtime senior Republican staffer.

There are some exceptions to the Trump administration order, particularly from national security agencies, Democrats and Republicans said. Agencies will also comply if a Republican committee chairman joins the Democratic requests, but ranking members oversight requests are spurned.

Congressional minorities frequently ask questions of the administration intended to embarrass the president or garner a quick headline. And Democrats have fired off requests they surely knew the administration would not answer, such as asking the White House in March to make visitor logs of Trump Tower and Mar-A-Lago publicly available.

But House and Senate lawmakers also routinely fire off much more obscure requests not intended to generate news coverage. And the Trump administrations plans to stonewall Democrats is in many ways unprecedented and could lead to a worsening of the gridlock in Washington.

Austin Evers, a former Obama administration lawyer in the State Department who runs a watchdog group called American Oversight, said the Trump administration has instituted a dramatic change in policy from Reagan-era congressional standards in which the government provided more information to committee chairman but also consistently engaged in oversight with rank-and-file minority members.

Instructing agencies not to communicate with members of the minority party will poison the well. It will damage relationships between career staffers at agencies and subject matter experts in Congress, Evers said. One of the reasons you respond to letters from the minority party is to explain yourself. It is to put on the record that even accusations that you find unreasonable are not accurate.

One month ago, Rep. Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.) and other Democrats sent a letter to the Office of Personnel Management asking for cybersecurity information after it was revealed that millions of people had their identities compromised. The letterasked questions about how cybersecurity officials were hired, and in Rices view, it was not a political letter at all.

"The answer we got back is, We only speak to the chair people of committees. We said, That's absurd, what are you talking about? Rice said in an interview. I was dumbfounded at their response. I had never gotten anything like that The administration has installed loyalists at every agency to keep tabs on what information people can get.

At a House Appropriations hearing in May, Rep. Matt Cartwright (D-Pa.) asked acting General Services Administrator Tim Horne about a briefing House Oversight Committee staffers had received from the GSA, in which they were informed that the GSA has a new policy only to respond to Republican committee chairmen.

The administration has instituted a new policy that matters of oversight need to be requested by the committee chair, Horne responded.

In February, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asked for information on changes to healthcare.gov from the Health and Human Services Department. Theyre still waiting for an answer. In early May, Murray and six other senators asked the president about why Vivek Murthy was dismissed as surgeon general. There was no response, and her staff said those are just a couple of the requests that have gone unanswered.

Its no surprise that they would try to prevent Congress from getting the information we need to make sure government is working for the people we represent, Murray said when asked about the lack of cooperation.

The Senates Homeland Security and Government Accountability Committee, the primary investigator in that chamber, has received some responses from the Trump administration but has seen several letters only signed by Democrats ignored. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) wrote Education Secretary Betsy DeVos asking for help addressing the challenges of rural schools and joined with Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) to question the security of Trumps use of a personal cell phone as president. Neither was answered, an aide said.

A senior Democratic aide said that of the Senate Democrats 225 oversight letters sent to the Trump administration since January asking for information, the vast majority have received no response.

When it comes to almost anything weve done at a federal agency, very close to 100 percent of those we havent heard anything back. And at the White House its definitely 100 percent, said a second senior Democratic aide. This is rampant all over committee land.

Missing out on the latest scoops? Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning in your inbox.

Read more here:
White House orders agencies to ignore Democrats' oversight requests - Politico

Jesse Ferguson, in an extraordinarily timely piece, writes:

Romney-Clinton voters are, generally speaking, college-educated suburban professionals: lawyers, doctors and businesspeople. They voted for Mitt Romney in 2012, but switched to Hillary Clinton in 2016. They abhor xenophobia, the alt-right and racists, but they also mostly socialize within their own race and theyre mostly white. Theyre socially liberal but not obsessed with a political agenda. They value fiscal responsibility but also believe in investing in the future, especially education. They remain deeply worried about Trumps qualifications, scared about his temperament and alienated by his misogyny and ties to extremists. For the first time in a long time, theyre willing to hear about and vote for Democrats.

Oh boy, are they.

Who are these people, and what do they want? Some used to call them Country Club Republicans or Main Street Republicans. After 2001, female voters in this group were the soccer moms. They desire ordered liberty, a dependable and rule-based system that allows them to thrive. The party that theyve called home once upon a time featured smart Republicans (William F. Buckley Jr., Irving Kristol, etc.),responsible legislators (e.g. Sen. Bob Dole, Sen. Howard Baker) and constructive reforms (e.g. welfare reform, charter schools). It was the party that finally helped bury the Soviet Union. Now the party asks them to buy into alternative facts and take Sean Hannity seriously. It advances stunning falsehoods about economics, cities, crime, immigration, science, budgets and most every public policy topic.

The GOP asks them to denounce elites Hey, thats voters like them! and requires them not to believe in climate change. To be a real Republican now means to be economically illiterate on trade and immigration. These voters know immigrants arent stealing their jobs and that crime is substantially down in most American cities. (After all they workin increasingly diverse workplaces and live in diversifying suburbs or have returned to gentrified cities.)

In sum, the GOP offends their intelligence and runs headlong into their hard-earned educational accomplishments and life experiences. These educated voters live in 21st-century America, but the loudest voices in the GOP including the president and elected congressional leaders do not. The latter believe government is evil, the world can be shut out, climate change is debatable and white Christian America is under assault (because we say Happy Holidays?!).

In controversy after controversy, Republican lawmakers have defended President Trump's actions. But with his disclosure of highly classified information to Russian diplomats, they've floundered to explain the decision. (Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)

If the GOP were going to be the party of fiscal sobriety, international leadership and free markets, these Romney-Clinton voters were willing to put up with a lot. Theyve gotten by for years saying, Well its not like Sean Hannityis the partyor by self-identifying as Jack Kemp Republicans. Unfortunately, Sean Hannity is very much the GOP these days, and Jack Kemp, R.I.P., has been dead for eight years.

However, along with reason, science and respect for democratic norms, the GOP jettisoned much of the real-world agenda such voters had come to associate with their party. If they are going to be asked to associate with the flock of know-nothings who now populate the GOP and theyre not going to get a functional government, then why stick with the party?Many are not. They just do not know where to go.

There exists an opportunity, as Ferguson pointed out, for center-left Democrats to poach these voters. (They might vote in 2020 for a Joe Biden, but never for a Sen. Bernie Sanders.) A new party or sub-party of the old GOP may also work for these voters if the Democratic Party veers too far left.

What do Romney-Clinton voters want? Look at successful GOP governors whom these voters supported over the past decade. They chose governors perceived as inclusive and enlightened problem-solvers (John Kasich of Ohio, Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, Mitch Daniels of Indiana, etc.). These voters want agood education system, college tuition that does not break the bank, investment in R &D, a dynamic economy (which requires trade, immigration and U.S. leadership in the world), fiscal sanity and a spirit of sensible compromise. They want the U.S. to be respected in the world and not to bask in the approval of tyrants. Theydont want the government doing everything, but they know we arent going back to the pre-New Deal era. They support a safety net but want programs to work (meaning, result in fewer impoverished people). These are people who navigate in their daily lives by persuasion and compromise, not bullying and insults. They want, in short, some semblance of civil and effective government and international leadership grounded in American values.

The GOP used to give such voters these agenda items and embody their zeitgeist.It doesnt remotely do so now. Now its the Republican Party that looks irresponsible, irrational, clueless and afraid of the modern world. Romney-Clintonvoters are dismayed and conflicted. They will have to decide if they should vote Democratic in 2018 elections because the darned Republicans sit there like lumps on a log while President Trump and his kin run wild. Whos going to appeal to these voters? Well get a hint in Georgias 6th Congressional District, which is filled with Romney-Clinton voters.

See the article here:
Yes, Democrats have a real shot to win Romney Republicans - Washington Post (blog)

Clinton said Wednesday in an interview with Recode's Kara Swisher that once she became the Democratic nominee, she inherited "nothing." The Democratic National Committee's data, she said, "was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it."

People and things Clinton blames for her loss 02:01

Many Democrats noted that Clinton -- just like her opponent Bernie Sanders -- had access to the DNC's data from the outset of her campaign. Therefore, they said, if there was trouble with the data, her staff would have known long before she won the Democratic presidential nomination.

Tom Bonier, the chief executive officer of TargetSmart, a Democratic voter-targeting firm, said in using the DNC's data, the Clinton campaign was "absolutely standing on the shoulders of the Obama data juggernaut. There's just no question."

"I can tell you, having worked with the DNC from the outside over that time period, the DNC not only maintained what was built as part of the Obama 2008 and 2012 campaigns, but they built upon it," he said. "And that meant more staff and that meant better data. They built an in-house analytics team, which they had not had in the past. And they were constantly adding data to the file."

Bonier added: "You can argue about whether or not they were behind Republicans. ... But it's absurd to suggest that any Democratic candidate who was using the DNC data in 2016 was inheriting nothing, as Secretary Clinton said. What they were inheriting was the best data operation the Democratic Party has ever seen."

Several Democrats pointed to the Clinton campaign's use of the data in making decisions about which voters to target, where to send the candidate and where to devote its advertising dollars.

That element of the campaign -- analytics -- is built on top of the party-provided data.

Speculating about why Clinton might have complained about the DNC's data, Bonier said: "The modeling's built on data, right, so maybe it's a stone's throw from there where you don't want to blame your own staff who build the models, who told you, you don't need to go to Wisconsin ... so you go a little bit further upstream and say it was the data that that was built upon."

Still, there were elements of Clinton's argument that are difficult to dispute.

Much of her criticism of the DNC was an implicit shot at former President Barack Obama, who many Democrats have complained kept his own campaign's data and analytics housed separately and allowed the party's infrastructure to lapse under former chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz's leadership.

The Republican National Committee made improving its data and analytics a priority between 2012 and 2016, erasing the advantage Obama had in previous elections.

Clinton also cited the Trump campaign's use of the controversial GOP firm Cambridge Analytica, which boasts of "psychographic" profiles of voters based heavily on Facebook information.

Clinton's campaign did not hire a similar outside data firm, but she said Cambridge Analytica helped Trump.

"You can believe the hype on how great they were or the hype on how they weren't, but the fact is, they added something," she said.

Tom Perez, the new Democratic National Committee chairman, also complained about the party's data operation in his campaign for the job over the winter. However, when asked on CNN's "Erin Burnett Outfront" on Thursday about Clinton's remarks, Perez said, "There are a lot of reasons for not winning that election."

"We're totally focused on the future of the DNC," he told Burnett. "We're totally focused on building an infrastructure for success."

"We have to up our game at the DNC," he added, noting the organization is "getting back to basics" by investing in organizing, training of candidates and technology.

DNC spokesman Michael Tyler said the party is in the process of overhauling its data and technological operations.

"Tom has said before that the DNC was not firing on all cylinders and that's why he did a top to bottom review that included technology. The DNC is now undergoing an organizational restructuring that will include a new chief technology officer, who will do an in-depth analysis and maintain the party's analytics infrastructure needs," Tyler said in a statement.

"Tom is already deeply engaged with the outpouring of support from Democrats across the country, from Silicon Valley to suburban Georgia, who want to help improve the data and tech, get it in the hands of more organizers everywhere, and build the grass-roots funding stream required to support those efforts."

Clinton's allies say her joint fundraising efforts helped improve the DNC's positioning.

"She was intent on leaving the party in the black," a Clinton associate said Thursday.

Despite her loss, the associate said, she was pleased to leave the party without a debt "and she turned over her email list and her data, something that Bernie Sanders did not do and has not done. Because we've got to have this in one place so people can utilize it."

CNN's Saba Hamedy contributed to this report.

Read more here:
Democrats to Clinton: The DNC's data was fine -- you just used it wrong - CNN International

Brad Petrishen Telegram & Gazette Staff @BPetrishenTG

WORCESTER On the eve of their annual convention, Democrats Friday will have an array of places in the city to grab cocktails and mingle.

Women politicians and supporters will gather on Millbury Street; young Democrats at Kelley Square. AtMezcal Cantina, party powerhouses such as U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren and U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern will meet with the mayor and several gubernatorial hopefuls.

And across the street, at the Hilton Garden Inn, there will be a group that has never been to the convention before but hopes to make its presence felt. At a low-budget party, in between sets of nu-jazz and techno, Our Revolution Massachusetts volunteers will make their case for a more progressive party.

Born from the Bernie Sanders movement, conceived in Worcester and armed with a spate of amendments and charter changes, the group boasts 700 delegates and hopes to reform the party from within. It figures to be a bit of a wild card Saturday afternoon, and a tangible reminder of the challenge that state Democrats face: a progressive wing that was restless even before Republican Donald Trumps election and whose policy leanings may or may not align with many independent voters who, polls show, largely support their Republican governor.

The group, which includes Sanders supporter and uber-progressive State Sen. James B. Eldridge, D-Acton, will look to push an already progressive platform to the left. Beyond that, it has proposed charter changes it says will make the Democratic party more democratic.

The Sanders-backed group will ask that Massachusetts super-delegates be abolished. It will also call for 80 additional elected state committee members arguing that just 40 percent are currently elected and request that the party align its funding with candidates who support what they believe will be the partys most progressive platform ever.

Produce a press release in advance, for immediate release at the close of the convention that gives (ourselves) credit for 'the most progressive state platform ever,'" the organization wrote in planning notes posted to its website. At the convention, it plans to ensure it "is seen as the group that is pushing for party reform/democratization of the DSC" as well as the group "fighting corporate control of our government."

Democrat Chairman Gus Bickford noted the group is one of several advocacy groups that have made their voices heard since the election.

This group is branded, and they should be proud of that, he said, but there are many other grass-roots groups whose voices are "just as strong."

Mr. Bickford said the storyline for this years convention is not any one group. Its that there are more than 5,000 delegates and alternates the most ever in a nonelection year, and roughly double the normal figure 1,000 of which are newcomers.

The goal on Saturday is to create a party platform for the next four years, and, Mr. Bickford said, and the wealth of enthusiasm is welcomed.

Mr. Bickford declined to get into Our Revolutions specific amendments, but acknowledged there will be a fair amount of differences aired.

Im proud of that, he said.When you look at them, theyre not big differences. But we want to debate them and debate them in public.

Mr. Eldridge is a member of Our Revolution but said he did not assist in shaping their amendments. He caused a bit of a firestorm last summer when The Boston Globe reported that he sent an email to Sanders supporters urging the unseating of conservative Democrats.

I personally think the time is ripe for Sanders supporters/progressives to take over the Massachusetts Democratic Party, and have a serious influence on its platform, candidates and policies, the Globe quoted him as writing.

In a Facebook post on Tuesday, Our Revolution Massachusetts wrote it is "(Three) days until #OurRevMA takes over Massachusetts Democratic Party convention! Andrea Burns, a spokeswoman for the group - which held its first meeting in January in Worcester - said the post was innocuous.

Were there to make friends, she said. But the truth is that money in politics does have a corrupting influence.

Ms. Burns said the leadership of her group is looking to work within the party, noting Mr. Trumphas been a uniting force for Democrats of all stripes.

State Sen. Michael O. Moore, D-Millbury, a self-described fiscal moderate, stressed that Democrats need unity. He said while he doesnt agree with everything in the proposed party platform including free public college tuition his differences are largely practical, not ideological.

(I hope) we can focus on what we all have in common, he said. I dont want to see us attacking each other when we all have some core beliefs that I do think resonate with the general public.

Mr. McGovern, D-Worcester, who plans to speak Saturday about the importance of the party better explaining its progressive values, said he sees enhanced interest among Democrats as exciting.

Politics is about addition, he said. We constantly have to be growing.

The longtime Congressman has long believed the party should embrace its progressive roots more openly.

We ought to stand for things," he said, as opposed to just denouncing Mr. Trump.

Mr. Eldridge said he sees the platform due to be proposed Saturday as the most progressive in the states history.

The draft, which delegates will vote on Saturday, supports a $15 minimum wage, a $4 boost, along with free public college education. It also supports Massachusetts becoming a sanctuary state, providing a pathway to citizenship for all immigrants and drivers licenses issued regardless of immigration status.

Id be the first to say theres a divide amongst some Democrats in the Legislature, and in general, but I would say the platform process, in general, brought people together, Mr. Eldridge said. By the same token, I would say there are a lot of Democrats that are frustrated the Legislature isnt passing more progressive legislation, so it will be interesting to see how things go (Saturday).

Mr. Bickford expressed confidence that the wave of anti-Trump sentiment driving Democrats will lead to gains in the state chambers.

Are we going to have some primaries? Yeah, we are, he said. But are we going to have more Democrats in the House and Senate? I believe so.

Mr. Bickford also took aim at the corner office, accusing Gov. Charlie Baker and other GOP politicians of hiding from the public.

They are out there hiding because they cannot defend this president, he said. We have someone (Mr. Baker) who doesnt have a backbone, he has no vision, he has no direction.

In an email, a state GOP spokesman responded, "It's not surprising that the party whose leaders voted to give themselves a massive pay raise at taxpayers' expense is grasping at straws given that Governor Baker has become the most popular governor in the country.

As the party of higher taxes and pay raises for politicians gathers in Worcester this weekend, maybe they can focus on rescuing Senator Warren's tanking poll numbers."

Excerpt from:
Democrats expect large turnout for Worcester convention - Worcester Telegram

MSNBC

Democrats face an unprecedented silent treatment from Trump ... MSNBC When it comes to congressional oversight, Donald Trump has adopted an approach to transparency one wouldn't expect to see in a modern democracy. Federal Agencies Turn Deaf Ears on Information Requests From Democrats in CongressNew York Magazine FEDERAL AGENCIES OK to ignore Democrats' info requests Justice Dept.E&E News The White House Ordered Federal Agencies to Ignore Information ...Jezebel UPROXX -Politico all 18 news articles »

Read the original:
Democrats face an unprecedented silent treatment from Trump ... - MSNBC