In his Fox & Friends phone call Wednesday morning, Donald Trump all but confirmed that he planned to shatter norms and bend (and possibly outright break) the law by giving his Republican National Convention speech on the South Lawn of the White House. Trump tried to make it out to be a decision about cost-effectiveness and logistical simplicity, saying: “It would be the easiest from the standpoint of security” and “by far the least expensive from the country’s standpoint.” Except that the Trump campaign is supposed to reimburse the federal government for expenses incurred while campaigning.
Donald Trump had spent at least 248 days at golf courses as of Memorial Day weekend. Before the beginning of the pandemic, he had visited his own properties on nearly a third of the days of his time in office, not just incurring the usual expenses of presidential travel but billing the Secret Service up to $650 per night for stays in his own hotels. He went to Mount Rushmore for the Fourth of July. This is not a man concerned with the taxpayer expense of his travel and security.
Later in the interview, Trump claimed: “I spend a lot of time here [at the White House], a lot of people didn’t spend as much time.” Again, it cannot be emphasized enough, he has been at a Trump property nearly one in three days since his inauguration. And that’s just his relaxation time. He’s also had plenty of days on the road stroking his own ego with big campaign rallies.
So, no, Trump is not considering accepting the Republican nomination from the South Lawn of the White House because it would be easy and cheap. He wants to do it because it would make him seem very important, like Mount Rushmore did, and if he can’t have a screaming crowd, he at least wants an ego-inflating backdrop. It would also be dubiously legal. While the president and vice president are not covered by the Hatch Act, which is a law prohibiting federal workers from campaign activity on the job, and the residential areas of the White House are similarly exempt from the law, there are still big problems here.
As Kedric Payne, senior director of ethics at the Campaign Legal Center, pointed out to The Washington Post: “The RNC would have a difficult time arguing that they can reimburse for the expenses, because how do you calculate such things as the fair market value of the White House lawn?”
Right. The symbolism of the White House lawn can’t be calculated in dollars, but it’s what Trump is seeking here.
And, while Trump himself is not subject to the Hatch Act, “he is ordering other people to,” former George W. Bush White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter said. “At a certain point you are using White House resources, and that is a violation of the Hatch Act.” But White House violations of the Hatch Act are referred back to the White House, as has happened previously with the Trump administration, and the Trump White House does nothing about it, for the obvious reason that this is how Trump operates.
The Post does report one tantalizing nugget, though: “[T]wo Democratic lawyers, who requested anonymity to discuss private deliberations, said that while Hatch Act violations do not result in criminal prosecutions, the misuse of congressionally appropriated funds for a political purpose could be criminally enforceable, and the statute of limitations would not have run out in 2021, when the winner of this year’s election takes office.” It will never happen, of course. Democrats are always too worried about seeming fair and forgiving. But it’s nice to dream.