Congress has legislated new provisions to streamline presidential transitions by allowing early access to resources for leading candidates.
Yet, this adjustment raises concerns that Donald Trump might exploit these benefits without adhering to typical ethical constraints, Politico reported on Sunday.
Following Donald Trump's contentious election response in 2020, which hampered the subsequent presidential transition, lawmakers sought to mitigate future disruptions. They aimed to ensure that the new administration could efficiently handle national priorities such as security and public health immediately after inauguration.
The solution crafted by Congress in 2022 was to permit top presidential contenders to receive transition assistance before the final election results are confirmed. This arrangement was designed to prepare incoming leaders more effectively, avoiding the pitfalls experienced during the Biden transition.
However, unintended outcomes of this policy have surfaced. Notably, there is the possibility of Donald Trump using these government-provided transition resources while sidestepping the ethical guidelines typically required of presidents-elect.
Among the key concerns is Trump's potential refusal to sign the foundational agreements for using these resources, speculated by some experts to be a strategic move to avoid ethical oversight.
Emily Murphy, who faced significant public scrutiny and threats as the General Services Administration (GSA) administrator in the wake of the 2020 election, highlighted the GSA’s challenging position in ascertaining the apparent election winner—a crucial step in starting the official transition.
The new law attempts to diminish the GSA's politicized role by setting clearer guidelines for when and how resources are allocated to incoming administrations, hoping to reduce ambiguity and political pressure.
Emily Murphy stated:
The role of the GSA should not overpower the constitutional election processes, and my experience demonstrated an urgent need for a standardized procedure.
Concerns extend beyond domestic politics to issues of national security. If Trump's team opts out of federal transition assistance, they become more susceptible to external threats such as hacking and espionage—an anxiety vocalized by multiple experts.
The intricacies of the new transition system have sparked a flurry of discussions aimed at securing Trump's compliance with the necessary ethical standards. Michael Thorning, a political analyst, mentioned that both leading candidates would proceed with transition activities under the assumption of victory to maintain readiness.
Moreover, Heath Brown, a prominent scholar, illustrated the complex dynamics at play:
The Trump transition might be testing how far they can push the Biden administration, knowing that withholding access to essential resources post-election could have disastrous effects should Trump win.
This maneuvering underscores the ongoing challenges in fostering cooperation between transitioning administrations, as per Heath-Brown. Despite the adjusted legal framework, the risks lingering from the 2020 transition have not been entirely eradicated. Advocates for robust democracy encourage the Trump team to engage fully with the established transition procedures to uphold governmental efficacy and integrity.
