The Pen, Phone, and Stray Voltage

After pay-gap flap, Obama turns to worker training.

Lightning strike over Buenos Aires' city during a thunderstorm on April 8, 2014.
National Journal
Major Garrett
Add to Briefcase
Major Garrett
April 16, 2014, 1:10 a.m.

PITT­S­BURGH — The lengthy de­bate last week over Pres­id­ent Obama’s se­lect­ive stat­ist­ic­al em­phas­is when dis­cuss­ing the pay gap between work­ing men and wo­men drew many re­ac­tions. They are likely to be far dif­fer­ent than the re­ac­tion Obama will re­ceive here Wed­nes­day upon rolling out the first en­deavor of Vice Pres­id­ent Joe Biden’s task force on re­vamp­ing work­er train­ing (more on that later).

Of the pay-gap rap, Ruth Mar­cus of The Wash­ing­ton Post found parts “re­volt­ing.” Mar­cus was closer than she knew. Not with the ad­ject­ive but the root noun.

The White House saw the con­ten­tious wrangling over the di­men­sions of the gender pay gap na­tion­ally—even the gnaw­ing over male/fe­male pay dis­par­it­ies at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave — as a gift. A gift the White House wrapped for it­self.

Al­low me to ex­plain. The ques­tion­ing of Obama’s use of a Census Bur­eau stat­ist­ic that the me­di­an wages of work­ing wo­men in Amer­ica are 77 per­cent of me­di­an wages earned by men las­ted al­most all week. The story revved in­to mini-over­drive when the White House de­fens­ively swat­ted away cri­ti­cism that salar­ies on Obama’s watch — for which the Amer­ic­an En­ter­prise In­sti­tute  used the same me­di­an wages met­ric ap­plied by the Census Bur­eau — showed that wo­men in the pres­id­ent’s em­ploy earned 88 cents for every dol­lar earned by men.

All to the de­light of a White House des­per­ate to in­ject the is­sue in­to the polit­ic­al blood­stream and amp­li­fy oth­er­wise doomed Sen­ate Demo­crat­ic ef­forts to make it easi­er for wo­men to sue and win dam­ages for work­place pay dif­fer­ences. The con­tro­versy that played out on front pages, so­cial me­dia, TV, and ra­dio did just that.

This is the White House the­ory of “Stray Voltage.” It is the brainchild of former White House Seni­or Ad­viser Dav­id Plouffe, whose meth­ods loom large long after his de­par­ture. The the­ory goes like this: Con­tro­versy sparks at­ten­tion, at­ten­tion pro­vokes con­ver­sa­tion, and con­ver­sa­tion em­beds pre­vi­ously un­known or mar­gin­al­ized ideas in the pub­lic con­scious­ness. This hap­pens, Plouffe the­or­izes, even when — and some­times es­pe­cially when — the White House ap­pears de­fens­ive, be­sieged, or off-guard. I first dis­covered and wrote about this in Ju­ly of 2012.

A top White House ad­viser told me last week’s pay gap dust up was a “per­fect” ex­ample of stray voltage. This time it was pre­med­it­ated.

Soon after this year’s State of the Uni­on ad­dress, where Obama high­lighted the pay-gap is­sue, Les­ley Clark, a re­port­er with Mc­Clatchy News Ser­vice, first zer­oed in on the White House’s own pay gap. Clark used pub­lic data on White House salar­ies to de­term­ine that wo­men earned 91 cents for every dol­lar men earned, us­ing the same for­mula in the Census Bur­eau me­di­an wage es­tim­ate cited by Obama. That dif­fer­ence, Clark re­por­ted, amoun­ted to an av­er­age pay of $76,516 for White House wo­men com­pared with $84,082 for men.

The story, sadly, gained little trac­tion. But the White House saw it com­ing and dis­cussed ways to cope with the pay gap and de­bated al­ter­ing Obama’s stat­ist­ics when rais­ing the pay-gap is­sue in the fu­ture — as it knew he would. The de­cision was made to stick with the same 77 cents-on-the-dol­lar pay-gap fig­ure, even though it was im­pre­cise and in­vited un­fa­vor­able com­par­is­ons with the White House wage scale.

Obama’s team ex­pec­ted, in­vited, and, to a cer­tain de­gree, rel­ished last week’s hub­bub. That’s stray voltage in ac­tion.

Or in­ac­tion.

As a the­ory, “stray voltage” ex­ists in a kind of stra­tegic void. It can’t be dis­missed or em­braced as work­able be­cause cre­at­ing con­tro­versy for the sake of con­tro­versy is, well, achiev­able. Like get­ting soup from the White House mess. It’s also self-re­in­for­cing and in­tern­ally di­dact­ic. Every­one looks around and says, “See. There’s con­tro­versy. It’s work­ing.”

But it’s also re­veal­ing when the em­phas­is has shif­ted to a “pen and phone” strategy that el­ev­ates ex­ec­ut­ive ac­tion over messy le­gis­lat­ive hag­gling. The pen-and-phone ap­proach has be­come a low-level White House fet­ish, with ef­forts to sidestep Con­gress and place Obama at the cen­ter of the ac­tion all-con­sum­ing.

That will be on dis­play today in sub­urb­an Pitt­s­burgh as Obama and Biden ad­dress the slum­ber­ing is­sue of work­er re­train­ing. The White House will an­nounce $600 mil­lion in grants and com­pet­i­tion for fed­er­al dol­lars to in­crease job-spe­cif­ic work­er train­ing after tour­ing Com­munity Col­lege of Al­legheny County in nearby Oak­dale.

New Cen­tury Ca­reers, a loc­al non­profit, links work­er train­ing to iden­ti­fied job needs and em­ploy­ers. The concept is to make the job-train­ing pro­cess more lin­ear — dir­ectly train­ing people for avail­able job open­ings in man­u­fac­tur­ing and re­lated fields. The Labor De­part­ment will of­fer $500 mil­lion in grants to com­munity col­leges that have put to­geth­er these types of pro­grams, avail­able in all 50 states. Ap­pren­tice­ships serve this pur­pose, and Obama will an­nounce big com­mit­ments from the Big Three auto­makers, John Deere, and oth­er firms to boost ap­pren­tice­ships and will aug­ment the pro­cess with $100 mil­lion in fed­er­al funds. All of this be­cause Obama and Biden see little hope for re­form­ing ex­ist­ing fed­er­al job-train­ing pro­grams — many of them re­dund­ant — on Cap­it­ol Hill. Too com­plic­ated and ar­du­ous.

There is one com­mon thread between the pay gap and job train­ing. Con­gress is a sideshow, and ex­ec­ut­ive ac­tion is more com­pel­ling. At least as far as Obama is con­cerned.

The dif­fer­ence is this. The job train­ing an­nounce­ments today have no chance of spark­ing con­tro­versy nearly as lively as the pay gap. But they might ac­tu­ally do more for the eco­nomy, jobs, and wages. In oth­er words, make a dif­fer­ence. Without the stray voltage.

The au­thor is Na­tion­al Journ­al cor­res­pond­ent-at-large and chief White House cor­res­pond­ent for CBS News. He is also a dis­tin­guished fel­low at the George Wash­ing­ton Uni­versity School of Me­dia and Pub­lic Af­fairs.

What We're Following See More »
Colin Powell to Vote for Clinton
2 hours ago
Cook Report: Dems to Pick up 5-7 Seats, Retake Senate
3 hours ago

Since the release of the Access Hollywood tape, on which Donald Trump boasted of sexually assaulting women, "Senate Republicans have seen their fortunes dip, particularly in states like Florida, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Nevada and Pennsylvania," where Hillary Clinton now leads. Jennifer Duffy writes that she now expects Democrats to gain five to seven seats—enough to regain control of the chamber.

"Of the Senate seats in the Toss Up column, Trump only leads in Indiana and Missouri where both Republicans are running a few points behind him. ... History shows that races in the Toss Up column never split down the middle; one party tends to win the lion’s share of them."

Tying Republicans to Trump Now an Actionable Offense
5 hours ago

"Some Republicans are running so far away from their party’s nominee that they are threatening to sue TV stations for running ads that suggest they support Donald Trump. Just two weeks before Election Day, five Republicans―Reps. Bob Dold (R-Ill.), Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), David Jolly (R-Fla.), John Katko (R-N.Y.) and Brian Fitzpatrick, a Pennsylvania Republican running for an open seat that’s currently occupied by his brother―contend that certain commercials paid for by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee provide false or misleading information by connecting them to the GOP nominee. Trump is so terrible, these Republicans are essentially arguing, that tying them to him amounts to defamation."

Former Congressman Schock Fined $10,000
5 hours ago

Former Illinois GOP Congressman Aaron Schock "recently agreed to pay a $10,000 fine for making an excessive solicitation for a super PAC that was active in his home state of Illinois four years ago." Schock resigned from Congress after a story about his Downton Abbey-themed congressional office raised questions about how he was using taxpayer dollars.

Clinton Reaching Out to GOP Senators
7 hours ago

If you need a marker for how confident Hillary Clinton is at this point of the race, here's one: CNN's Jeff Zeleny reports "she's been talking to Republican senators, old allies and new, saying that she is willing to work with them and govern."


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.