I was very closely watching the saga of OMB’s disastrous effort to freeze funding for a vast number of federal programs, and wrote about why it was actually revoked at New York.
This week the Trump administration set off chaos nationwide when it temporarily “paused” all federal grants and loans pending a review of which programs comply with Donald Trump’s policy edicts. The order came down in an unexpected memo issued by the Office of Management and Budget on Monday.
Now OMB has rescinded the memo without comment just as suddenly, less than a day after its implementation was halted by a federal judge. Adding to the pervasive confusion, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt immediately insisted on Wednesday that the funding freeze was still on because Trump’s executive orders on DEI and other prohibited policies remained in place. But there’s no way this actually gets implemented without someone, somewhere, identifying exactly what’s being frozen. So for the moment, it’s safe to say the funding freeze is off.
Why did Team Trump back off this particular initiative so quickly? It’s easy to say the administration was responding to D.C. district judge Loren AliKhan’s injunction halting the freeze. But then again, the administration (and particularly OMB director nominee Russell Vought) has been spoiling for a court fight over the constitutionality of the Impoundment Control Act that the proposed freeze so obviously violated. Surely something else was wrong with the freeze, aside from the incredible degree of chaos associated with its rollout, requiring multiple clarifications of which agencies and programs it affected (which may have been a feature rather than a bug to the initiative’s government-hating designers). According to the New York Times, the original OMB memo, despite its unprecedented nature and sweeping scope, wasn’t even vetted by senior White House officials like alleged policy overlord Stephen Miller.
Democrats have been quick to claim that they helped generate a public backlash to the funding freeze that forced the administration to reverse direction, as Punchbowl News explained even before the OMB memo was rescinded:
“A Monday night memo from the Office of Management and Budget ordering a freeze in federal grant and loan programs sent congressional Republicans scrambling and helped Democrats rally behind a clear anti-Trump message. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer blasted Trump as ‘lawless, destructive, cruel.’
“D.C. senator Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, warned that thousands of federal programs could be impacted, including veterans, law enforcement and firefighters, suicide hotlines, military aid to foreign allies, and more …
“During a Senate Democratic Caucus lunch on Tuesday, Schumer urged his colleagues to make the freeze “relatable” to their constituents back home, a clear play for the messaging upper hand. Schumer also plans on doing several local TV interviews today.”
In other words, the funding freeze looks like a clear misstep for an administration and a Republican Party that were walking very tall after the 47th president’s first week in office, giving Democrats a rare perceived “win.” More broadly, it suggests that once the real-life implications of Trump’s agenda (including his assaults on federal spending and the “deep state”) are understood, his public support is going to drop like Wile E. Coyote with an anvil in his paws. If that doesn’t bother Trump or his disruptive sidekick, Elon Musk, it could bother some of the GOP members of Congress expected to implement the legislative elements of the MAGA to-do list for 2025.
It’s far too early, however, to imagine that the chaos machine humming along at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will fall silent even for a moment. OMB could very well issue a new funding-freeze memo the minute the injunction stopping the original one expires next week. If that doesn’t happen, there could be new presidential executive orders (like the ones that suspended certain foreign-aid programs and energy subsidies) and, eventually, congressional legislation. Democrats and Trump-skeptical Republicans will need to stay on their toes to keep up with this administration’s schemes and its willingness to shatter norms.
It’s true, nonetheless, that the electorate that lifted Trump to the White House for the second time almost surely wasn’t voting to sharply cut, if not terminate, the host of popular federal programs that appeared to be under the gun when OMB issued its funding freeze memo. Sooner or later the malice and the fiscal math that led to this and other efforts to destroy big areas of domestic governance will become hard to deny and impossible to rescind.
yep… everyone has gotta tell someone.. .create the cells and keep talking… it works.
Even then, we’re going to have to feel the pain. Sort of like cutting a leg off to stop the gangrene before it kills the patient.
AlleyKat, I’m talkin to every one I can. I lost a job because my boss was a Republican. My bumbper sticker says”Left Wing Christian For Kerry” you be surprised how many of us out there. I was always pretty much middle of the road voter untill this guy got selected by the supreme court. I know it’s not cool to have one party in control of the whole thing but, this time I hope the Dems get control of the House and Senate with Kerry as President. It’s going to take at least 2 to 4 years to get this mess GW and rest of the R controled Congress has screwed-up…..
Sara, you’re a little off on your medieval history. Connally served in the Trickster’s first term, then got caught up in the AMPI scandal. He joined the Republican Party in the spring of 1974, which prompted the great line that it was the first known instance of a rat jumping onto a sinking ship.
Bless you, Ed. Please talk to any Bush-supporting friends. I wish I could understand how Republicans can support Bush when there are intelligent, consistent, well-informed Republicans (who I may not necessarily agree with) who could move their party forward with honor.
I was one of those misinformed voters who voted for Bush. I liked that compassionate conservative bull XXXX . Personally, I think the extrmeist religion thing he has going on is a big turn off with me and I was happy Kerry made reference to it in his speech. When did God become a Republican?
The bounce may not have shown up much in the first horse-race polls Monday, but all polls I’ve seen later in the week have shown at least some Kerry-ward movement, and various state polls (from ARG and not-so-credible Rasmussen) also look brighter. Plus, as many have said, the poll internals are all so solid Kerry that you have to figure many of the undecided are just Kerry votes waiting to happen.
I heard reports that on the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade this morning, traders seeing the job numbers broke into a chant of “Kerry! Kerry!”. Can anyone confirm this? We may view this as the day the back of the Bush administration was broken — a clear end to job growth (maybe going to negative territory), and renewed fierce fighting in Iraq.
Sara, that’s an extraordinary report if true. It reminds me of 1980, when Gene McCarthy and Ralph Abernathy came out and endorsed Reagan. It was obvious Carter was in unusually deep trouble. Any guesses on who these mystery statesmen are?
I understand plans are in the works for a leadership PAC made up of at least four retired GOP Senators, all with extensive Foreign Affairs experience, to announce a week before Bush’s Convention, a Republicans for Kerry effort. I gather the idea is full page ads in Wall Street Journal, Barrons, NYTimes and WaPo and maybe others with lots of recognized signatures, and with the theme being the need for significant changes in approach to Foreign Policy. (My source is someone who knows about one of these retired Senators efforts to solicit signers.) The advertisement would then be reprintable, and available for easy distribution in places where such “names” would influence things.
So — as we celebrate the 30th anniversary of the resignation of Richard Nixon, we can call it the Ghost of Nixon/Conally play — for those who remember John Connally’s leadership of Democrats for Nixon — for which he was paid off by being made Sec. of Treasury in Nixon’s second term — but the dastardly act was done in the 1972 McGovern race.
The Senators involved are so senion, they will not be looking at appointments — and well fixed enough that Bush cannot do them in.
The post ends with the comment that getting people to the polls is crucial. Yes it is but persuading moderate Republicans and independents is also crucal and possible. Many moderate REpublicans are open to the idea of not voting or voting for Kerry if apraoched politely one o one. There is a lot of dissatisfaction about Bush’s extremist religion, budgt deficets, and misiformation about the war.
The Kerry campaign needs to set up a means for us to write personal letters to undecideds. And we all need to talk to our Republican friends about how party loyalty might mean getting rid of a leader who is leading the party the wrong way.
This is what I postulated on the bounce threads before, that it didn’t really increase Kerry’s support so much as deepen it.
> I can’t wait to hear the spin from the White
> House and Treasury Security John Snow-job on
> these numbers. 32,000 new jobs in July is an
> absolute shocker and will change the dynamics
> of the race in terms of how many Americans will
> view the economy. The consensus number
> predicted from July from a cross section of
> economists prior to the report’s issuance was
> 243,000 new jobs. To top it all off, the already
> bad June numbers were downgraded from
> 112,000 new jobs to 78,000.
From WaPo:
‘We’re not satisfied,” Treasury Secretary John Snow told reporters in Pittsburgh. “We’re encouraged, though, by the fact that the unemployment rate came down.” ‘
So the “unemployment rate came down?” Let’s see what Karl Rove can make of that line, in the Chimp’s TV commercials.
—
I’m sitting here in Finland, thinking this is sweet on so many levels. 11 more weeks, and unless Kerry turns out to be absolutely abmysmally bad in the TV debates or Al Qaeda does “Shrub” a big favor, we are going to see America resume its leadership of the free Western world again. After four long years of Bushit.
Can’t wait.
MARCU$
On the basis of your analysis, Ruy, as well as my own gut feeling, I just left a message for my county Democratic Chair volunteering to help with our local GOTV efforts. This is something we need to start talking up among the party faithful.
I can’t wait to hear the spin from the White House and Treasury Security John Snow-job on these numbers. 32,000 new jobs in July is an absolute shocker and will change the dynamics of the race in terms of how many Americans will view the economy. The consensus number predicted from July from a cross section of economists prior to the report’s issuance was 243,000 new jobs. To top it all off, the already bad June numbers were downgraded from 112,000 new jobs to 78,000.
This is Bush’s worst nightmare. The economy needs to create 150-200,000 new jobs each month just to keep up with population growth.
Yup, we’ve certainly turned the corner with the economy. Bush has taken us down a blind alley. I’m seriously looking forward to observing how the Bush Admin will spin its “Stay The Course” economic message after two straight months of these horrible job numbers.
More goo- ,er, I mean *bad* news for “Shrub”:
http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/06/news/economy/jobless_july/index.htm?cnn=yes
Job growth shock
July payroll growth far shy of Wall Street forecasts; unemployment rate slips to 5.5%.
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) – Hiring by U.S. employers slowed significantly in July, according to a government report Friday, as the number of new jobs added to payrolls came in far below Wall Street expectations.