Smelling a potential victory in the midterms, House Democrats are starting to think about oversight investigations next year and how to wield the power of the purse to make the Trump administration comply. In short, Trump’s West Wing renovations and DC arch could be on the chopping block, sources tell Inner Loop.
The nature of any investigations, and where Democrats will try to wrestle back power from the executive, are still to be determined, in part because taking back the House majority is not a foregone conclusion.
But House Democrats have a slew of investigations planned if they do end up controlling the chamber come November. Congressional committee aides have already been exploring how to force recalcitrant officials and family in Trump’s orbit to answer subpoenas.
With Trump uniquely focused on personal vanity projects this term, among the ideas is to more aggressively wield the power of congressional appropriations and threaten funding for Trump’s construction projects.
If Trump tries to block an investigation or ignores Congress and renames more buildings, House Democrats might cut off funding for any of Trump’s future West Wing renovations or perhaps block money for Trump’s triumphal arch.
The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Jamie Raskin, also suggested this week that cutting off funding could be used to rein in projects Trump has already started.
“We have the power of the purse, and we will make sure Donald Trump doesn’t destroy any other federal buildings or landmarks,” Raskin told reporters when asked what recourse Democrats have after a sharply divided Supreme Court permitted Trump to keep building his ballroom.
“Congress established the appropriation for the White House, and it’s up to Congress to decide, and it’s not up to the president to decide to bulldoze half of the White House because he wakes up that day thinking it’s a good thing to do,” says Raskin.
Traditional enforcement of subpoenas through the courts can take years, as a case makes its way through the federal district court in Washington and then any inevitable appeals. In his first term, for instance, Trump asserted executive privilege for former White House counsel Don McGahn, who was subpoenaed but never testified while Trump was in office.
Democratic aides have also been weighing other ideas to make subpoena noncompliance unattractive, like adding cumulative monetary fines through an inherent contempt provision in the House rules, sources tell Inner Loop.
But legal experts have long believed the only way to give subpoenas teeth is for Congress to pass legislation that fast-tracks judicial review for contested subpoenas so they get resolved while the president is still in office.
The most viable idea kicked around in recent years has been a bill that sends a subpoena dispute to a federal district court panel, with an appeal that goes straight to the Supreme Court. Still, it is no panacea, given that the Justice Department prosecutes subpoena noncompliance, and it would never prosecute its own officials.
Trump might have to choose—subpoena or arch.
This is an edition of Hugo Lowell’s Inner Loop newsletter. Read previous newsletters here.
