Obama's White House isn't ready for the level of scrutiny it's about to receive, veteran Dems say. Memo to White House: Lawyer up

Democratic strategists say President Barack Obama needs to act fast to make sure that one of the most tangible consequences of the Republican takeover of the House — an army of GOP committee chairman seeking confidential executive branch deliberations — doesn’t swamp the day-to-day work of the White House.

Veterans of the contentious battles of the Clinton administration warn that the Obama White House is entirely unprepared for the level of scrutiny it is about to experience. “They’ve already been complaining that they’re beleaguered by Congress,” said one veteran Democratic strategist. “I don’t think [White House aides] have the slightest idea what they’re facing.”


Legislative gridlock may be the least of the White House’s worries over the next two years if its staff must respond to dozens of subpoenas seeking details on the implementation of the health care reform law, stimulus spending and the personnel issues that arise in every administration.

“There’s no question that just dealing with the subpoenas in and of themselves, finding the documents, the simple act of going around the White House collecting and organizing the documents, that’s an enormous effort and of course inevitably lead to fights with the Hill,” said Mark Fabiani, a lawyer who handled President Bill Clinton’s response to Whitewater and other controversies that congressional Republicans sought to investigate.

“Just managing the investigations, the inquiries and the subpoenas can consume a lot of the rest of what the White House is doing,” he said.

Sources say that White House Counsel Bob Bauer reached out in the past couple of weeks to possible candidates who could join an enhanced team of lawyers, spokespeople and legislative affairs personnel dedicated to responding to requests from the newly emboldened GOP House and others in Congress.

A White House spokesman had no comment Wednesday on any staff changes or hiring to accommodate Republican inquiries. However, one official said the White House would do what’s necessary to respond to congressional queries.

"We will of course support Congress in meeting its legitimate oversight responsibilities,” said a White House aide, who asked not to be named. “It's our hope that the administration and Congress can work together to ensure that this important function is not abused to score political points or for other improper purposes."

Some Democratic operatives pointed to the restructuring of Clinton’s staff after the Republican victory in 1994 as a model for the Obama White House. The plan, devised by then-deputy chief of staff Harold Ickes, called for personnel exclusively dedicated to handling investigations.

“In very broad brush, what we tried to do was to wall off or to some extent insulate the rest of the White House from what we called damage control,” Ickes said. “It was a blizzard of subpoenas and document production work that that really could have diverted attention.”

Fabiani said the net result of the Clinton White House’s approach was to help smooth dealings with Congress and divert press questions about the probes.

“By quarantining them, you don’t allow them to infect the daily press briefing because there’s always someone else to answer those questions and you don’t allow them to infect the other relationships you have to maintain on the Hill,” he said.

After spending months stoking stories about their newfound ability to police the Obama administration and put the brakes on key policies like health care reform, Republicans noticeably moderated their tone after Tuesday’s GOP victory.

The incoming chairman of the House’s main investigative panel, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) sounded downright conciliatory, insisting that his oversight efforts would be aimed at helping Obama govern effectively.

“I want to prove the pundits wrong. My job is not to bring down the president. My job is to make the president a success,” Issa said during an election night conference call with reporters.

As for potential investigative targets, Issa talked about using the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to police the new financial re-regulation law and federal food safety efforts.

But in another interview this week, Issa acknowledged, when asked, that he is interested in looking into a familiar GOP target — the defunct liberal group ACORN.

“I think it's very important that we look at ACORN as something that occurred,” he told MSNBC Wednesday. “It was criminal activity, and it used government money and nonprofit money both to do politics.”

While some ACORN employees have been charged with or admitted to fraud in submitting voter registration forms, a conservative-led video sting operation against the group last year has not resulted in any criminal charges.

Issa has said little in recent days about pursuing what he contends was an illegal White House job offer to Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) in an effort to persuade Sestak to drop out of a Senate primary challenge of the White House’s preferred candidate, Sen. Arlen Specter. The White House denied any wrongdoing, and outside experts disputed Issa’s interpretation of the law.

However, the California Republican turned up the heat a bit on the White House by saying he expects answers to all his outstanding inquiries — which apparently includes the Sestak controversy — “well before” the GOP formally takes over in January.

The likely chairman of the House Judiciary Committee chairman, starting in January — Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) — was similarly restrained, perhaps bowing to an effort by House leaders to keep the focus of the newly elected GOP team on jobs and the economy.

A longtime hawk on illegal immigration, Smith will be in a position to demand records of any Obama administration efforts to ease immigration enforcement if comprehensive immigration reform bills remain stalled in Congress. Smith also plans to use his panel’s power to slow or block any renewed efforts by Obama or Attorney General Eric Holder to bring Guantanamo prisoners to the U.S. for detention or trial.

“Oversight is not a game of cat and mouse between Congress and the White House as the media often paints it,” Smith said in a statement e-mailed to POLITICO Wednesday “Oversight is the legitimate and necessary work of Congress to improve the operation and function of the executive branch and ensure that federal agencies are operating in the best interests of the American people.

“I am committed to working with the Justice Department to ensure that our laws are equally enforced, criminals are prosecuted and American communities are kept safe,” Smith said.

Among the other Republicans looking to use their new posts to press intrusive investigations: Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), who is expected to chair the Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy.

“When it comes to the executive branch or the Federal Reserve, we should insist” on answers, Paul told Fox Business News Wednesday. “I think there is going to be a very serious effort because the attitude in the country has changed. The Congress is changing.”

Paul called the Fed’s leaders “dictators” and said he wouldn’t shy away from using subpoenas if the central bank or administration doesn’t comply with requests for information.

The likely investigative face-off with Congress could be particularly awkward for Obama, since he campaigned on a promise of transparency and blasted the Bush administration for excessive secrecy. A high-profile battle over executive privilege would be so uncomfortable for the Obama White House that it seems all but certain that GOP lawmakers will try to draw him into one.

However, some Democrats say Obama would be wise not to take the bait and, instead, should embrace the transparency he pledged in 2008. Documents Republicans want could be posted en masse on the Internet, draining some of the drama from any inquiries.

“Most documents end up being turned over. It’s just the way it is. Ultimately, you’re forced to turn things over. If you don’t realize that now, you’ll find out soon enough,” Fabiani said. “It’s a tremendous opportunity to use the technology and use your promise to turn things around on the other side.”

“If Darrell Issa wants every note and every document memorializing the discussion about the shocking idea that Joe Sestak might be talked out of running in a primary and might be offered a position in the administration, just turn it over,” said another former Clinton scandal spokesman, Lanny Davis.

Davis said the task of responding to congressional probes requires “a political lawyer with a media ear,” and that Bauer isn’t quite the right fit.

“Bob is a great lawyer,” Davis said, “but where handling politics and the media is necessary, I think he’d probably be the first to admit it’s not his strong point.”

Davis said one obvious candidate to head such an effort would be the White House’s current legislative affairs director, Phil Schiliro, who once served as chief counsel to one of the House’s most prolific investigators, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.).

“I’d take Phil Schiliro right in and name him special counsel,” Davis said.

Lobbying restrictions and intense scrutiny of personal finances have already made it difficult for the Obama administration to recruit experienced candidates for top posts. Talk of investigations and potential legal bills has the potential to make even more people shy away from joining the administration.

However, Ickes said he doesn’t think many people will be scared off — even if they should be.

“Nobody ever thinks it’s going to happen to them,” said Ickes, who added that he was subpoenaed “31 or 32 times to testify under oath” and appeared before six federal grand juries. “The White House still is and traditionally has been a very attractive place to work for people who are interested in public service.”

There are some clear differences from the Clinton era. That White House’s burden was increased by a series of criminal investigations of various officials, including Clinton. Many were triggered by or pursued under the independent counsel law, which expired in 1999.

But Davis said Republicans also run their own political risks if they’re perceived as being overly partisan, pointing to the experience of some of the bigger GOP players from the '90s.

“Remember what happened to Al D’Amato. Remember what happened to Fred Thompson. Remember what happened to Dan Burton,” Davis said. “The American people don’t have much patience for this nonsense. It can be great theater and great fodder for the press. But I think Republicans may be walking into a trap. They’re like kids in a candy store: They can’t resist.”

Sen. Al D’Amato (R-N.Y.) was voted out of office in 1998 after conducting high-profile hearings into the Whitewater scandal in 1995 and 1996. After conducting hearings in 1997 into alleged Chinese fundraising for the Democratic National Committee under Clinton, Sen. Fred Thompson saw the Senate slip back into Democratic control, forcing him to give up chairmanship of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee.

And Burton, after using some odd tactics to investigate Clinton, was pushed aside in 2003 as chairman of the House Government Reform and Oversight panel.