DOCSLIB.ORG

The 2016-2017 Transition Into the Donald J. Trump Administration

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The 2016-2017 Transition Into the Donald J. Trump Administration The 2016-2017 Transition into the Donald J. Trump Administration by James D. King James W. Riddlesperger, Jr. Department of Political Science Department of Political Science University of Wyoming Texas Christian University Laramie, WY 82071 USA Fort Worth, TX 76129 USA [email protected] [email protected] Prepared for presentation at the Conference on the U.S. Presidential Election of 2016: Domestic and International Aspects, hosted by the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya, Israel, January 8-9, 2017. © 2017 by James D. King and James W. Riddlesperger, Jr. “Though this be madness, yet there is mthod in ‘t” --William Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act II, Scene II Throughout the long, contentious presidential campaign of 2016 there was one undeniable fact: with President Obama term-limited from seeking another term, a new president would enter office on January 20, 2017. The campaign became a drama in many ways unprecedented in the nation’s history, with rhetoric taking on historically polarizing characteristics. And the election of Donald Trump gave the nation a president-elect with no public sector experience for the first time in history. Trump’s campaign theme was one of “disruption” politics, promising to give the government an entirely new direction—moving away from the “extreme incompetence” Trump saw in the conduct of government and “draining the swamp” of Washington, D.C. by bringing new faces and a fresh decision-making style to the nation’s capital. His message was aimed primarily at his opponent Hillary Clinton, who he promised to prosecute for criminal violations of the law in her email scandal, but also involved excoriating the decisions made by previous Republican presidents, including explicitly his two Republican predecessors—the George Bushes, Sr. and Jr. In so doing, he alienated himself not only from Democrats, but also from the Republican establishment, with four of the five the most recent nominees of the GOP explicitly avoiding endorsing his candidacy. Only Robert Dole, the 1996 nominee, stood by the Trump candidacy. A singular election might give way to an unusual transition. Yet, the core positions of government still had to be staffed, and the routine functions of government still had to be managed. In other words, while President-elect Trump is a larger-than-life personality who wants to impose his will on government, he still faces issues common to all incoming presidents. As president-elect, Donald Trump has seventy-three days to prepare for his administration with a 1 host of tasks to accomplish during that narrow window of time. In this paper we explore the challenges facing Trump as he prepares for the assumption of office. How did his disruption candidacy yield a transition different from previous presidents, and in what ways did the common problems faced by all presidents elect constrain him to similar approaches to previous presidents?1 Previous Interparty Transitions The Obama-to-Trump transition reflects the most common type of transition in the modern era, a transition that occurs when a new president representing the opposing political party is elected. These interparty transitions represent clean breaks with the incoming president having the freedom to build a team from the ground up. In the post-World War II era, the Truman-to-Eisenhower, Eisenhower-to-Kennedy, Johnson-to-Nixon, Ford-to-Carter, Carter-to- Reagan, G.H.W. Bush-to-Clinton, Clinton-to-G.W. Bush, and G.W. Bush-to-Obama transitions were of this nature. Successful interparty transitions occur when presidents-elect carefully assess their strengths and weaknesses, cooperate with the outgoing president, learn from their predecessors, move quickly in selecting personnel and developing budget proposals, avoid raising expectations regarding the role of the cabinet in the new administration, and establish a working relationship with Congress from the outset of the administration. After a successful election campaign, presidents-elect are not immediately inclined to take advice from their predecessors. Implicitly or explicitly, the outgoing president has been the target of the incoming president’s campaign. Historian Carl Brauer notes: 1 Had she prevailed in the election, Hillary Clinton would have faced a somewhat different set of challenges as a president-elect in an intraparty transition, that is, following a president of the same political party. The principal challenge in these situations is establishing an identity distinguishable from the current administration in terms of policies and personnel, without severing linkages to the incumbent president. See: James D. King and James W. Riddlesperger, Jr., “Getting Started in the White House: Transitions in the Modern Presidency,” White House Studies 3 (#2, 2003):115-131. 2 The weeks and months after a Presidential election are not times when humility reigns in the victor’s camp. Rather, it is one when confidence, hope, hubris and infallibility run high, characteristics that contribute to, if they do not directly cause, some of the mistakes that are made.2 Examples of this attitude are common. Bill Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos (1999, 121) wrote later that “we saw ourselves as smart and tough and good; we had won, deposed an incumbent president.” Perhaps even more striking was the transition of Jimmy Carter in 1976 when, being determined to chart a course different from the Nixon and Ford administrations, the president-elect openly rejected recommendations from the Ford team about the necessity in the modern White House of having a strong chief of staff. Instead, Carter returned to the less- structured “spokes-of-the-wheel” model that had been used by previous Democratic presidents. Speechwriter James Fallows acknowledged that the failure to listen to Ford administration people meant that “a year was wasted as we blindly groped for answers.”3 During the third year of his presidency, struggling to advance a policy agenda, Carter abruptly changed to a chief of staff model. His new chief of staff, Hamilton Jordan (1979), sent a note to Dick Cheney, Ford’s chief of staff, acknowledging that the hubris of the Carter people at the beginning of the term had not served them well: “Dick—If I’d only listened to you—A Former Spoke.”4 The perspectives of Fallows and Jordan on the Carter transition reflect an early decision a president-elect must make: how should the White House staff be organized? The growth of the institutional presidency that began with Franklin Roosevelt’s administration has continued with expansion of the Executive Office of the President and White House staff. Dwight Eisenhower, 2 Carl M. Brauer, Presidential Transitions: Eisenhower through Reagan (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), p. 258. 3 James Fallows, “The Passionless Presidency,” Atlantic, May 1979, p. 39. 4 Hamilton Jordan, Note to Richard Cheney, July 21, 1979. White House Staff folder, Chief of Staff Files, Carter Presidential Library. 3 drawing upon his experience in the military command structure, created the position of chief of staff to manage the expanded organization. For a time this arrangement was considered the Republican approach to White House organization, as Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford adopted similar arrangements for the White House while John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson utilized less structured staff arrangements. Carter’s failed experiment of returning to the Kennedy and Johnson approach marked the end of administrations with loose White House structures. Each president since Ronald Reagan has started his administration with a chief of staff commanding the White House operation.5 Success of the White House operation and hence of the administration stems from the president’s choice for chief of staff. More than any other factor, having a chief of staff experienced in the Washington policy-making environment is key to an effective White House operation.6 Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama had success during their first years in office, in part, due to the White House leadership demonstrated by James A. Baker III, Andrew Card, and Rahm Emanuel as their respective chiefs of staff. Bill Clinton chose Mack McLarty, a lifelong friend from Arkansas, as his first chief of staff and preferred separate meetings with various staff members. This arrangement hindered systematic, coordinated policy development in the Clinton White House and led to McLarty being replaced midway through Clinton’s second year by Leon Panetta, the administration’s budget director and a former member of Congress and executive branch officer. The later arrangements of the Clinton administration, with a chief of staff with substantial experience in the nation’s capital paired with 5 Stephen Hess and James P. Pfiffner, Organizing the Presidency 3d ed. (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 2002), and Shirley Anne Warshaw, The Domestic Presidency: Policy Making in the White House (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997). 6 On the characteristics of successful chiefs of staff in the modern presidency, see James P. Pfiffner, “The President’s Chief of Staff: Lessons Learned,” Presidential Studies Quarterly 23 (Winter 1983): 77-102. 4 senior advisors with strong personal ties to the president mirrored the very successful first term of the Reagan presidency, when Baker teamed with long-time Reagan associates Edwin Meese, who led domestic policy development, and Michael Deaver, who coordinated the president’s public activities. Obama utilized a similar model by bringing together in the White House Emanuel, Peter Rouse (Senate staff), Valarie Jarrett (friend and advisor from Chicago), and David Axelrod (2008 campaign manager). Most visible for a president-elect are the choices for other key positions in the administration, notably the men and women selected to lead the various cabinet departments. Choices that are made regarding who will serve in the president’s cabinet, in the Executive Office of the Presidency, and in the White House Staff are key, for as Senator Elizabeth Warren reminds us: “Personnel is policy.”7 These are the people who will advise the president on policy, will promote the administration’s policy initiatives, and ultimately will implement policy.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2015-0035-S Finding
    Presidential Materials Division 700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Room G-7 Washington, DC 20408-0001 Phone: (202) 357-5200 Fax: (202) 357-5941 [email protected] Records of the White House Photograph Office Vice Presidential Photographs taken at Camp David and the White House, September 12, 2001 Extent 455 photographs Access Collection is open to all researchers. Access to Cheney Vice Presidential records is governed by the Presidential Records Act (PRA) (44 USC 22, as amended) and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 USC 552, as amended) and therefore may be restricted in whole or in part in accordance with legal restrictions and exemptions. Copyright Records in this collection that were prepared by officials of the United States Government as part of their official duties are in the public domain. Researchers are advised to consult the copyright law of the United States (Title 17, USC) which governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Provenance Official records of the Richard Cheney vice presidency are in the custody of the Presidential Materials Division in Washington, DC and are administered by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) under the provisions of the Presidential Records Act (PRA). Processed By Staff Archivists, October 2015. Previously restricted materials are added as they are released. Scope and Content This body of records consists of photographs of Vice President Cheney abroad Marine Two and his activities at Camp David and the White House the day after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center in New York City.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall 2010 U.S
    178451_Cover_B.qxd:178451_Cover_B 12/6/10 10:04 PM Page 1 Nonprofit Org. FALL 2010 U.S. Postage IN THIS ISSUE FALL 2010 FALL 421 Mondale Hall PAID New Environmental Courses • Q&A: Anderson & Rosenbaum • Super CLE Week • Don Marshall Tribute 229 19th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN Minneapolis, MN 55455 Permit No. 155 Perspectives E NVIRONMENTAL C APRIL 15—16, 2011 OURSES • Q&A: A PLEASE JOIN US AS WE CELEBRATE THE LAW SCHOOL AND ITS ALUMNI IN A WEEKEND OF ACTIVITIES FOR THE ENTIRE LAW SCHOOL COMMUNITY. NDERSON Friday, April 15: All-Alumni Cocktail Reception Saturday, April 16: Alumni Breakfast & CLE & R OSENBAUM SPECIAL REUNION EVENTS WILL BE HELD FOR THE CLASSES OF: 1961, 1971, 1976, 1981, 1986, 1991, 1996, 2001, and 2006 • CLE • D FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN ON M THE PLANNING OF YOUR CLASS REUNION, PLEASE CONTACT EVAN P. JOHNSON, ARSHALL Alumni Relations & Annual Giving Program Manager T 612.625.6584 or [email protected] RIBUTE Spring Alumni Weekend is about returning to remember your years at the Law School and the friendships you built here. We encourage those of you with class reunions in 2011 to “participate in something great” by making an increased gift or pledge to the Law School this year. Where the Trials Are www.law.umn.edu WWW.COMMUNITY.LAW.UMN.EDU/SAW Criminal law is challenging but satisfying, say alumni from all sides of the courtroom. 178451_Cover_B.qxd:178451_Cover_B178451_Cover_B.qxd:178451_Cover_B 12/6/10 12/6/10 10:04 10:04 PM PagePM Page2 2 178451_Section A FrMatter.qxd:178451_Section A FrMatter 12/3/10 11:56 AM Page 1 Securing Our Future his fall we welcomed 260 first-year students, along with 36 LL.M.
    [Show full text]
  • If It's Broke, Fix It: Restoring Federal Government Ethics and Rule Of
    If it’s Broke, Fix it Restoring Federal Government Ethics and Rule of Law Edited by Norman Eisen The editor and authors of this report are deeply grateful to several indi- viduals who were indispensable in its research and production. Colby Galliher is a Project and Research Assistant in the Governance Studies program of the Brookings Institution. Maya Gros and Kate Tandberg both worked as Interns in the Governance Studies program at Brookings. All three of them conducted essential fact-checking and proofreading of the text, standardized the citations, and managed the report’s production by coordinating with the authors and editor. IF IT’S BROKE, FIX IT 1 Table of Contents Editor’s Note: A New Day Dawns ................................................................................. 3 By Norman Eisen Introduction ........................................................................................................ 7 President Trump’s Profiteering .................................................................................. 10 By Virginia Canter Conflicts of Interest ............................................................................................... 12 By Walter Shaub Mandatory Divestitures ...................................................................................... 12 Blind-Managed Accounts .................................................................................... 12 Notification of Divestitures .................................................................................. 13 Discretionary Trusts
    [Show full text]
  • Ethics and Government Lawyering in the Age of Trump with Richard Painter
    Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law LARC @ Cardozo Law Event Invitations 2018 Event Invitations 2-19-2018 Ethics and Government Lawyering in the Age of Trump With Richard Painter Jacob Burns Center for Ethics in the Practice of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/event-invitations-2018 Recommended Citation Jacob Burns Center for Ethics in the Practice of Law, "Ethics and Government Lawyering in the Age of Trump With Richard Painter" (2018). Event Invitations 2018. 6. https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/event-invitations-2018/6 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Event Invitations at LARC @ Cardozo Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Event Invitations 2018 by an authorized administrator of LARC @ Cardozo Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. The Jacob Burns Center invites you to: Ethics and Government Lawyering in the Age of Trump with Richard Painter The Jacob Burns Center for Ethics in the Practice of Law invites you to the third event in its Speaker Series on Ethics and Government Lawyering in the Age of Trump. The series probes the ethical challenges confronting government lawyers in the Trump era and features prominent members of former Presidential Administrations and leading scholars of legal ethics. Richard W. Painter is the S. Walter Richey Professor of Corporate Law at the University of Minnesota Law School. From 2005 to 2007, he was the chief White House ethics lawyer in the Administration of President George W. Bush. His book, Getting the Government America Deserves: How Ethics Reform Can Make a Difference was published by Oxford University Press in January 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • “Mcconnell Majorities” in Supreme Court Decision-Making
    PRESIDENT-SHOPPING FOR A NEW SCALIA: THE ILLEGITIMACY OF “MCCONNELL MAJORITIES” IN SUPREME COURT DECISION-MAKING J. Stephen Clark* WASHINGTON, June 29—By the slimmest of margins, the Supreme Court today ended its decades of protecting abortion rights and overruled Roe v. Wade,1 the 1973 decision that established abortion as a constitutional right.2 The breaking news one day in June 2019 is the demise of Roe v. Wade. By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court has overruled the precedent and left the protection of abortion rights to the sole discretion of lawmakers. There had been no majority for such a decision until President Trump had the chance to make two appointments to the Court. One of those appointees wrote the majority opinion. Perhaps fittingly, the author of the opinion was the successor to the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who strove for this goal more vigorously than any member of the Court since 1973. Of course, every supporter of abortion rights realizes that the Trump appointee now sits on the High Court only because President Obama’s nominee for the same seat was ignored by the Senate for eleven months. The overruling of Roe is directly traceable to that stonewalling and its mastermind—the majority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. Why should supporters of abortion rights accept the legitimacy of a Court decision handed down by a bare majority that owes its fifth vote to Mitch McConnell’s Supreme Court Justice? The answer is that they would not, nor should they. Contrary to McConnell’s repeated claims, his posture of determined inaction * Professor of Law, Albany Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter of Complaint to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics
    Letter of Complaint to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics Request for Investigation of Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, for Alleged Ethics Violations by Claire Finkelstein, Algernon Biddle Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, Richard Painter, S. Walter Richey Professor of Corporate Law, University of Minnesota Law School; and Walter Schaub, former Director, U.S. Office of Government Ethics November 18, 2020 The views expressed in this writing are the authors' own and do not necessarily represent those of any university or organization. Claire O. Finkelstein Algernon Biddle Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy Faculty Director, Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law University of Pennsylvania Law School 3501 Sansom Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 Richard W. Painter S. Walter Richey Professor of Corporate Law University of Minnesota Law School 229 19th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55455 Walter M. Shaub, Jr. former Director, U.S. Office of Government Ethics November 18, 2020 Chairman James Lankford Vice Chairman Christopher Coons U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics 220 Hart Building United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Via email to: [email protected] Re: Request for Investigation of Senator Lindsey Graham Dear Chairman Lankford and Vice Chairman Coons: We write to urge the Senate Select Committee on Ethics to investigate whether Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called Georgia’s Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, to discuss his ongoing count of votes for the office of president. We further urge the committee to investigate whether Senator Graham suggested that Secretary Raffensperger disenfranchise Georgia voters by not counting votes lawfully cast for the office of president.
    [Show full text]
  • John Mitchell and the Crimes of Watergate Reconsidered Gerald Caplan Pacific Cgem Orge School of Law
    University of the Pacific Scholarly Commons McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles McGeorge School of Law Faculty Scholarship 2010 The akM ing of the Attorney General: John Mitchell and the Crimes of Watergate Reconsidered Gerald Caplan Pacific cGeM orge School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/facultyarticles Part of the Legal Biography Commons, and the President/Executive Department Commons Recommended Citation 41 McGeorge L. Rev. 311 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the McGeorge School of Law Faculty Scholarship at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Book Review Essay The Making of the Attorney General: John Mitchell and the Crimes of Watergate Reconsidered Gerald Caplan* I. INTRODUCTION Shortly after I resigned my position as General Counsel of the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department in 1971, I was startled to receive a two-page letter from Attorney General John Mitchell. I was not a Department of Justice employee, and Mitchell's acquaintance with me was largely second-hand. The contents were surprising. Mitchell generously lauded my rather modest role "in developing an effective and professional law enforcement program for the District of Columbia." Beyond this, he added, "Your thoughtful suggestions have been of considerable help to me and my colleagues at the Department of Justice." The salutation was, "Dear Jerry," and the signature, "John." I was elated. I framed the letter and hung it in my office.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter One: Postwar Resentment and the Invention of Middle America 10
    MIAMI UNIVERSITY The Graduate School Certificate for Approving the Dissertation We hereby approve the Dissertation of Jeffrey Christopher Bickerstaff Doctor of Philosophy ________________________________________ Timothy Melley, Director ________________________________________ C. Barry Chabot, Reader ________________________________________ Whitney Womack Smith, Reader ________________________________________ Marguerite S. Shaffer, Graduate School Representative ABSTRACT TALES FROM THE SILENT MAJORITY: CONSERVATIVE POPULISM AND THE INVENTION OF MIDDLE AMERICA by Jeffrey Christopher Bickerstaff In this dissertation I show how the conservative movement lured the white working class out of the Democratic New Deal Coalition and into the Republican Majority. I argue that this political transformation was accomplished in part by what I call the "invention" of Middle America. Using such cultural representations as mainstream print media, literature, and film, conservatives successfully exploited what came to be known as the Social Issue and constructed "Liberalism" as effeminate, impractical, and elitist. Chapter One charts the rise of conservative populism and Middle America against the backdrop of 1960s social upheaval. I stress the importance of backlash and resentment to Richard Nixon's ascendancy to the Presidency, describe strategies employed by the conservative movement to win majority status for the GOP, and explore the conflict between this goal and the will to ideological purity. In Chapter Two I read Rabbit Redux as John Updike's attempt to model the racial education of a conservative Middle American, Harry "Rabbit" Angstrom, in "teach-in" scenes that reflect the conflict between the social conservative and Eastern Liberal within the author's psyche. I conclude that this conflict undermines the project and, despite laudable intentions, Updike perpetuates caricatures of the Left and hastens Middle America's rejection of Liberalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Nixon's Caribbean Milieu, 1950–1968
    Dark Quadrant: Organized Crime, Big Business, and the Corruption of American Democracy Online Appendix: Nixon’s Caribbean Milieu, 1950–1968 By Jonathan Marshall “Though his working life has been passed chiefly on the far shores of the continent, close by the Pacific and the Atlantic, some emotion always brings Richard Nixon back to the Caribbean waters off Key Biscayne and Florida.”—T. H. White, The Making of the President, 19681 Richard Nixon, like millions of other Americans, enjoyed Florida and the nearby islands of Cuba and the Bahamas as refuges where he could leave behind his many cares and inhibitions. But he also returned again and again to the region as an important ongoing source of political and financial support. In the process, the lax ethics of its shadier operators left its mark on his career. This Sunbelt frontier had long attracted more than its share of sleazy businessmen, promoters, and politicians who shared a get-rich-quick spirit. In Florida, hustlers made quick fortunes selling worthless land to gullible northerners and fleecing vacationers at illegal but wide-open gambling joints. Sheriffs and governors protected bookmakers and casino operators in return for campaign contributions and bribes. In nearby island nations, as described in chapter 4, dictators forged alliances with US mobsters to create havens for offshore gambling and to wield political influence in Washington. Nixon’s Caribbean milieu had roots in the mobster-infested Florida of the 1940s. He was introduced to that circle through banker and real estate investor Bebe Rebozo, lawyer Richard Danner, and Rep. George Smathers. Later this chapter will explore some of the diverse connections of this group by following the activities of Danner during the 1968 presidential campaign, as they touched on Nixon’s financial and political ties to Howard Hughes, the South Florida crime organization of Santo Trafficante, and mobbed-up hotels and casinos in Las Vegas and Miami.
    [Show full text]
  • November 1-15, 1971
    RICHARD NIXON PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD DOCUMENT DOCUMENT SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS DATE RESTRICTION NUMBER TYPE 1 List Page 3 – Appendix “A” – Members of the 11/4/1971 A Official Party 2 List Page 4 – Appendix “A” – Members of the 11/4/1971 A Official Party 3 Manifest Helicopter Passenger Manifest – 11/5/1971 A Appendix “C” 4 Manifest Helicopter Passenger Manifest – 11/8/1971 A Appendix “A” 5 Manifest Helicopter Passenger Manifest – 11/9/1971 A Appendix “A” (p. 2) 6 Manifest Helicopter Passenger Manifest – 11/10/1971 A Appendix “A” 7 Manifest Helicopter Passenger Manifest – 11/12/1971 A Appendix “B” COLLECTION TITLE BOX NUMBER WHCF: SMOF: Office of Presidential Papers and Archives RC-9 FOLDER TITLE President Richard Nixon’s Daily Diary November 1, 1971 – November 15, 1971 PRMPA RESTRICTION CODES: A. Release would violate a Federal statute or Agency Policy. E. Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or B. National security classified information. financial information. C. Pending or approved claim that release would violate an individual’s F. Release would disclose investigatory information compiled for law rights. enforcement purposes. D. Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material. or a libel of a living person. H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material. DEED OF GIFT RESTRICTION CODES: D-DOG Personal privacy under deed of gift --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • George W. Bush Presidential Records in Response to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Requests Listed in Attachment A
    VIA EMAIL (LM 2016-037) April 15, 2016 The Honorable W. Neil Eggleston Counsel to the President The White House Washington, D.C. 20502 Dear Mr. Eggleston: In accordance with the requirements of the Presidential Records Act (PRA), as amended, 44 U.S.C. §§2201-2209, this letter constitutes a formal notice from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to the incumbent President of our intent to open George W. Bush Presidential records in response to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests listed in Attachment A. This material, consisting of 8,072 pages, 3,159 assets, and 1 video clip, has been reviewed for the six PRA Presidential restrictive categories, including confidential communications requesting or submitting advice (P5) and material related to appointments to federal office (P2), as they were eased by President George W. Bush on November 15, 2010. These records were also reviewed for all applicable FOIA exemptions. As a result of this review, 4,086 pages and 1,470 assets in whole and 582 pages and 186 assets in part have been restricted. Therefore, NARA is proposing to open the remaining 3,404 pages, 1,503 assets, and 1 video clip in whole and 582 pages and 186 assets in part that do not require closure under 44 U.S.C. § 2204. A copy of any records proposed for release under this notice will be provided to you upon your request. We are also concurrently informing former President George W. Bush’s representative, Tobi Young, of our intent to release these records. Pursuant to 44 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • November 2017 OFFICERS DIRECTORS Andrew H. Card Jr
    10/16/2017 November 2017 Newsletter You're receiving this email because of your relationship with Forum Club of Southwest Florida. Please confirm your continued interest in receiving email from us. You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails. November 2017 In This Issue Andrew H. Card Jr. 2017-2018 Speakers Former White House Chief of Staff Naples Beach Hotel, Everglades Dining Room Card Biography Friday, November 10, 2017 Card Guest Ticket Request Welcome New Members Andrew H. Card, Jr. served as President of Franklin Pierce University of New Hampshire from January 2015 OFFICERS through July 2016. Prior to this, Mr. Card served as Executive Director of the Office of the Provost and Vice President President for Academic Affairs at Texas A&M Richard S. Bodman University from August 2013 until December 2015. He served as Acting Dean of The Bush School of President-Elect Government and Public Service at Texas A&M from Verne G. Istock July 2011 until August 2013. The Bush School was founded by President George H. W. Bush and is located Vice President near the George Bush Presidential Library and Museum Joseph G. Fogg III Center on the west campus of Texas A&M University in College Station, Texas. Past President Melvin C. Short Jr. Mr. Card, the second longest tenured White House Chief of Staff, has served in senior government roles under three U.S. Presidents. Card serves on the Board of Secretary Directors of public corporation Union Pacific, on the Business Advisory Board of David A. Rismiller BrainStorm Cell Therapeutics, on the Advisory Board of the U.S.
    [Show full text]