# Did WH "political landscape" briefings of agency officials violate the Hatch Act? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 26, 2007, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200 "2007-07-26T07:28:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/1 "2007-07-26T07:28:49Z")
There’s already a [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=430036) on [this story,](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/25/AR2007042503046_pf.html) but it’s mainly about whether Rove is impeachable. I want to focus on whether it violates the [Hatch Act,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939) or any other law, and, if so, what are the legal implications/consequences. And, more broadly, apart from the Hatch Act, and as a matter of public policy, should this sort of thing be tolerated or not? Is it simply coordination for advancement of the Administration’s policy goals, as the WH claims, or is it partisan politicization of the civil service? > [@](#): > > White House officials conducted 20 private briefings on Republican electoral prospects in the last midterm election for senior officials in at least 15 government agencies covered by federal restrictions on partisan political activity, a White House spokesman and other administration officials said yesterday. > > The previously undisclosed briefings were part of what now appears to be a regular effort in which the White House sent senior political officials to brief top appointees in government agencies on which seats Republican candidates might win or lose, and how the election outcomes could affect the success of administration policies, the officials said. > > The existence of one such briefing, at the headquarters of the General Services Administration in January, came to light last month, and the Office of Special Counsel began an investigation into whether the officials at the briefing felt coerced into steering federal activities to favor those Republican candidates cited as vulnerable. > > \ > > In the GSA briefing – conducted like all the others by a deputy to chief White House political adviser Karl Rove – two slides were presented showing 20 House Democrats targeted for defeat and several dozen vulnerable Republicans. > > At its completion, GSA Administrator Lurita Alexis Doan asked how GSA projects could be used to help “our candidates,” according to half a dozen witnesses. The briefer, J. Scott Jennings, said that topic should be discussed “off-line,” the witnesses said. Doan then replied, “Oh, good, at least as long as we are going to follow up,” according to an account given by former GSA chief acquisition officer Emily Murphy to House investigators, according to a copy of the transcript. > > \ > > White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said that he was not familiar with the details of the briefings for other agencies, but that the projected fate of specific candidates was “certainly” discussed. He also said that in addition to the 20 briefings given in 2006-2007, “there were others throughout the last six years,” making clear that this was a common Bush administration practice during each election cycle. [Related story:](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/23/AR2007072301907_pf.html) Similar briefings were given to diplomats and Peace Corps staffers. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/2 "2007-07-26T15:02:06Z")
[Relevant article.](http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?bid=15) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/3 "2007-07-26T18:12:13Z")
The Hatch Act (5 USC § 7321 et seq) provides an exemption for senior, policy-making officials. It also permits most federal employees to enagage in activities like campaigning for or against referendum questions, constitutional amendments, municipal ordinances and for or against candidates in partisan elections. As with any “is it illegal?” question, the burden is on the person claiming an activity is illegal to identify what specific conduct violates what specific statute. So … you tell me. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/4 "2007-07-26T18:29:27Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] As with any “is it illegal?” question, the burden is on the person claiming an activity is illegal to identify what specific conduct violates what specific statute. [/QUOTE] Did I take that position? I am putting the question out there for discussion. (Beyond what Wiki sez, I don’t really know a lot about the Hatch Act, not even whether it provides for criminal penalties for violation.) And reread the OP – I am **also** putting out for discussion whether this should be tolerated, as a matter of public policy, apart from the Hatch Act. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/5 "2007-07-26T18:41:59Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Did I take that position? I am putting the question out there for discussion. (Beyond what Wiki sez, I don’t really know a lot about the Hatch Act, not even whether it provides for criminal penalties for violation.) And reread the OP – I am **also** putting out for discussion whether this should be tolerated, as a matter of public policy, apart from the Hatch Act. [/QUOTE] OK. I am also taking no position on the Hatch Act issue – it seems be somewhat complex. As a matter of public policy, I am not hearing anything just yet that would cause me to say that anything was done that should be prohibited. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/6 "2007-07-26T18:45:33Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] As a matter of public policy, I am not hearing anything just yet that would cause me to say that anything was done that should be prohibited. [/QUOTE] Don’t you think the GSA Administrator telling her subordinates about all the chances they have to help “our candidates” undermines the political independence of the professional civil service? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/7 "2007-07-26T18:48:01Z")
What legitimate policy goal do briefings on particular candidates serve? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/8 "2007-07-26T19:17:02Z")
[More about that there professional civil service, and its experiences under the Bush Admin.](http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070709/hayes) ---
**Author:** ![OttoDaFe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ottodafe/32/356_2.png) [@OttoDaFe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OttoDaFe)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/9 "2007-07-26T21:29:49Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] [More about that there professional civil service, and its experiences under the Bush Admin.](http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070709/hayes) [/QUOTE] And the parallels to the Nixon administration just keep on coming. From **Watergate: The Full Inside Story** (a book by a team from the London _Sunday Times_, and IMHO the best of the analyses): > [@](#): > > Of all the Watergate ironies, perhaps the most curious is the fact that the country owes a large debt to the taxman. For the petty and pathetic end of the “enemies” enterprise was due not to any outraged public debate but to the subtle obstructions of career civil servants. It is still an almost standard refrain of radical rhetoric, from both the left and the right, that the bureaucracy is bad news: a monstrous regiment of grey men armed with infinite lengths of red tape which they use to throttle any hint of change. But that part of the able bureaucrat’s equipment that makes him suspicious of novel ideas, however praiseworthy, has more than a negative function: he can spot a really lousy idea almost immediately. Fortunately for the radicals, as well as everyone else, the IRS bureaucracy had such men during Nixon’s first term as President. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/10 "2007-07-26T23:53:02Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Don’t you think the GSA Administrator telling her subordinates about all the chances they have to help “our candidates” undermines the political independence of the professional civil service? [/QUOTE] I don’t agree that the “professional civil service” at that level has ever had political independence, and I think seeking same is an unrealistic goal. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2007, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/11 "2007-07-27T00:08:17Z")
Um, what do you think a professional civil service _is_? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2007, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/12 "2007-07-27T00:30:54Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] I don’t agree that the “professional civil service” at that level has ever had political independence, and I think seeking same is an unrealistic goal. [/QUOTE] At what level, **Bricker**? Political appointees or high-rankiing career government employees? Was a political presentation made by the former to the latter? 'Cause frankly, I have a problem with that, and I’d like to know if the Hatch Act also has a problem with it. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2007, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/13 "2007-07-27T00:35:27Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] Um, what do you think a professional civil service _is_? [/QUOTE] I’ll add that while certainly a professional civil service is controlled and swayed by their political masters, they should have no interest or partisan feelings as to who those masters are. They should serve Republicans as evenly, fairly, and competently as they do Democrats and vice versa. This is intended as an addendum to my above post directed to **Bricker**. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2007, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/14 "2007-07-27T01:16:52Z")
[QUOTE=Frank] At what level, **Bricker**? Political appointees or high-rankiing career government employees? Was a political presentation made by the former to the latter? 'Cause frankly, I have a problem with that, and I’d like to know if the Hatch Act also has a problem with it. [/QUOTE] I mean Schedule C individuals, or those appointed by the President to a civilian position in the Executive branch at a salary that is at least that of Executive Level V. I don’t mean GS-15’s. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2007, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/15 "2007-07-27T18:17:54Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] I mean Schedule C individuals, or those appointed by the President to a civilian position in the Executive branch at a salary that is at least that of Executive Level V. I don’t mean GS-15’s. [/QUOTE] The officials you are talking about, are they the kind who typically stay on from one administration to the next? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2007, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-wh-political-landscape-briefings-of-agency-officials-violate-the-hatch-act/413200/16 "2007-07-31T20:30:31Z")
Are you talking, perhaps, about the Senior Executive Service? (See [here.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_service))