So, I'm starting a newsletter
Five points.
1. I'm starting a newsletter about politics. Now that I'm leaving CRS, I'll be free of some of the writing restrictions that come with congressional employment. I may go back to blogging, I'll probably be writing in traditional outlets around town, and I'll still be producing those goddam tweetstorms. But I like the way the newsletter form fits into the contemporary information environment, so I'm going to give it a shot.
2. You'll probably recognize the content. I'm not much of a partisan and don't have any intention of becoming one. The content of the newsletter will reflect my usual focus: institutional analysis that sits at the crossroads of political science and current events in Washington. And maybe some glam rock or cardplaying.
3. I want it to be quick hit format. You're not going to find any 4,000 word blasts on the appropriations subcommittee selection process here. The idea will be to hit the sweetspot between tweetstorm and blog post: something you can read in 3 minutes that cuts to the heart of the matter. That you can finish before you get distracted by your Facebook feed again.
4. Here's an example of what you might get. This past weekend, George Will wrote about a silver lining to the Trump presidency:
Fortunately, today’s president is so innocent of information that Congress cannot continue deferring to executive policymaking. And because this president has neither a history of party identification nor an understanding of reciprocal loyalty, congressional Republicans are reacquiring a constitutional — a Madisonian — ethic. It mandates a prickly defense of institutional interests, placing those interests above devotion to parties that allow themselves to be defined episodically by their presidents. Furthermore, today’s president is doing invaluable damage to Americans’ infantilizing assumption that the presidency magically envelops its occupant with a nimbus of seriousness.
I agree. This is both a welcome development and a surprising one. The institutional weakness of the Trump presidency and the chaos of the WH right now has created a leadership and power vacuum. And Congress is responding by asserting its authority and shedding---at least temporarily---it's reputation as a rubber-stamp for presidential power. Legislative leadership and agenda setting seem to be emanating from the Hill. Republican members are threatening the WH about nomination in unusual ways. And Congress is specifically stripping the president of statutory powers. Remarkable.
Normally, because major institutional developments in separation of powers spring from actual inter-branch conflict, we associate them with divided government. Especially when it's congressional (re)assertions of power, like the Budget Act or the War Powers Act. That the current congressional reawakening is occurring in unified government is striking; the parallel that comes to mind is the Radical Republican moves to hem-in Andrew Johnson, who perhaps was more of a RINO than Trump himself. The public legacy of a presidency that fails on its current trajectory will be a story of individual embarrassment. But institutionally, it will probably be a story of congressional resurgence.
But all is not well. It is indeed good if citizens see that the president of the united states, whoever it is and contrary to election campaign dicta, can no more make law than walk on water. And I'm am certainly a huge fan of congressional power. But our system, especially in the modern age, more or less demands a competent executive. Hamilton's call for "energy in the executive" is more relevant than ever; the size of the administrative states makes effective executive governance vital. Congress can regain power, take the lead in lawmaking, and dictate the President's cabinet. But no amount of congressional power will reduce the need for a president effective at at the implementation of law. Most Americans think of the president in the legislative context, but that's truly his least important function. The executive function, first and foremost, is about governance and foreign policy. And both of those involve tremendous discretion, which in turn demands skill. The silver lining casts a black shadow.
5. I'm thinking of writing this once a week. In the format of five quick items: one or two in the format of the example above, plus three other super-quick hits, like a link to a good article or a recommendation for an incredible book.
See you next time. Thanks for reading!