Get Jonathan Bernstein's newsletter every morning in your inbox. Click here to subscribe. An interesting discussion Thursday focused on whether former Vice President Joe Biden should disclose various facts that aren't legally required but have been standard for presidential candidates to air publicly. The consensus seemed to be that Biden is a sucker if he's transparent while President Donald Trump has refused to go along with similar disclosures, such as his tax returns, who visits the White House and numerous other things that Congress has asked for. Give stuff to the media, the theory goes, and they'll give no credit for openness but have plenty of material to create scandals out of.There are a couple counterarguments. One is that Trump isn't as damaged by media complaints about lack of openness because his supporters only pay attention to Republican-aligned media; Biden's supporters might be more like to follow the "neutral" media who do give credit for transparency. Failing to disclose also risks larger scandals if damaging information does eventually get out. Some have argued that the main thing Trump did wrong in the Ukraine case was to keep things secret originally, whereas he openly asked Russia to interfere in the 2016 election. One good test will be the $500 billion bailout fund that Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin is administering. By keeping the list of corporate recipients under wraps, Mnuchin may make it more likely that anything unfortunate that surfaces will be blamed on the administration. And I'm always wary of claims that any norm violation by Trump is good for public opinion, given that he's been such an unpopular president. At any rate, there's one more reason that openness is useful to presidents: It can generate information. Take White House visitor lists. It's true that publishing them can generate negative publicity. But media criticism of the president is often harmless. After all, most people ignore such stories, and those who do pay attention tend to be solid partisans. On the plus side, those stories offer useful information for the president. Which visitors does the media consider scandalous? Do out-party politicians think it's a dangerous story for the president, or no big deal? Do controversial visitors have friends in the president's party who rally to their defense, or not? The same goes for all sorts of stories. Getting them out there long before election season is a good way for presidents to learn things. Not just about which topics are scandalous, but where networks of support might be, what the best arguments for and against policies are, and who feels intensely about what. If some industry's lobbyist is so toxic that she has to be hidden from the media, perhaps it's best to, well, stop meeting with her. It's hard to know for sure unless it goes public. Presidents are well positioned to gather such information — but secrecy can waste the opportunity. I don't think there's any general law that presidents should follow across the board. But outside of the final stretch of a campaign, it's easy to overvalue the cost of losing a few news cycles. Smart presidents know the value of information. 1. Jamila Michener at the Monkey Cage on why the protests picked up so much steam. 2. Andrea Benjamin on the complexities of public opinion on policing and Black Lives Matter. 3. Dave Hopkins on women running in 2020. 4. The Economist has a brand new model projecting the results of the presidential election. Explanation here. Looks good. One note of caution: They quite properly add uncertainty to the model because of the unusual events this year, but the truth is we can't really know how voters will react. There's just no good precedent. 5. Greg Sargent on Trump and President Herbert Hoover. 6. And I love this Los Angeles Times look at the city's neighborhoods. Get Early Returns every morning in your inbox. Click here to subscribe. Also subscribe to Bloomberg All Access and get much, much more. You'll receive our unmatched global news coverage and two in-depth daily newsletters, the Bloomberg Open and the Bloomberg Close. | 
Post a Comment