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Now OMB has rescinded the memo without comment just as suddenly, less than a day after its implementation was halted by a federal judge.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freeze that forced the administration to reverse direction, as Punchbowl News explained even before the OMB memo was rescinded: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.
The worst thing the Democrats could do is run as a Republican-lite party. National issues are going to be healthcare, taxes, corruption, and jobs, and the Democrats can make it work if they adopt Medicare-For-All, repeal tax cuts on bug business, continue to point out the naked corruption in the GOP/Trump run Washington, and push for a federal jobs guarantee.
There’s no need to play into “white identity politics.” There’s no need to roll back anything having to do with equal rights, protecting Dreamers, gay rights, or majority supported gun restrictions, or anything else. There’s absolutely no need to sit here and play to people who are ultimately going to just see the “Republican-lite” strategy as just a weak alternative to the “real thing.”
I thought we werent supposed to be backtracking about the previous election. How about not trying to make a kinder version of the Republican party? You got to go outside of their boxes if you want to get anywhere. Don’t be Republican lite, that is ultimately advertising yourself as 2nd choice and empowering them to go further.
The Democrat Party should be the party of family values – all families.
(I would also like to see it be antiwar, for those very same reasons–at least seeking a way out of this. There is no national conversation) their policies should be explained as how they are good for all families because that makes the most sense and has the highest priority.
Healthcare, the safety net, environment, education and so on.
The Republican party can try to use those words but everyone knows they are very selective in who they want to serve and how.
On the race issue and how some who identify as white working class judge the democrat party: politicians and their political parties job description doesnt involve choosing who they serve or decide who they won’t, certainly not for judging an individual or groups religion, who they marry, what color their skin is, what language they speak, what job they have or do not.
We don’t need a government to serve as the judge and executioner for religion, race, sex, language, nature. Democrats don’t want to be that.
There is no shame in a politician or political party working for all Americans
And also lets not forget being qualified for a job has never meant that you shouldn’t have the job. Who hires someone that says they’re going to destroy your business?
I was interested in your newletter and adovocacy efforts until I read the word “White”. Racism of any kind is not ok. Consequently, I’m unsubscribing.