Unapproved Earmark and a Stinging Promotion
Plot Beats
The narrative micro-steps within this event
Maddi Tatem informs Josh about an unexpected earmark of $30 million from the immunization fund to immunization education.
Josh realizes the budget changes were made without his knowledge and suspects Max might be responsible.
Who Was There
Characters present in this moment
Startled and angered by a professional lapse that exposes him; defensive and searching for a scapegoat while privately shaken by Donna's unexpected hiring.
Josh reads the HHS final, reacts with mounting confusion and anger, questions staff for who moved the money, and retreats slowly into his office after hearing Donna's promotion — physically and emotionally unmoored.
- • Determine who authorized or made the re-earmark to contain political exposure
- • Reassert control over budget language and staff processes
- • Process the personal blow of Donna's exit while not showing weakness publicly
- • Procedural oversights are politically dangerous and must be owned or punished
- • He is the one who is expected to catch and control these details
- • Staff loyalty matters and betrayal is intolerable
Neutral and professional as the sender of campaign information; her role is connective rather than emotional in this moment.
Amy is not physically present but is the source of the fax that carries campaign updates and the announcement of Donna's hiring; her communication catalyzes the revelation.
- • Deliver campaign updates to White House staff
- • Communicate political endorsements and personnel changes promptly
- • Timely information flow is essential to campaign and White House coordination
- • Faxes are an acceptable channel for fast operational updates
Not present physically; implied to be defensive or blindsided if informed — cast as suspected but unproven.
Max is referenced by Maddi as the likely person who could have moved the money; he is not present but immediately becomes a suspected scapegoat in the bullpen's speculative chain.
- • (Inferred) Protect his standing with the First Lady and White House staff
- • (Inferred) Avoid being blamed for procedural failures
- • Others view him as inexperienced and therefore a likely culprit
- • He may be judged before being heard
Calmly proud and lightly amused at the new opportunity; pragmatic about delivering news even as it complicates Josh emotionally.
Donna delivers the fax, reads campaign highlights aloud, and then reads the line that the First Lady has hired her — balancing matter-of-fact delivery with a trace of amusement and pride; she is both informer and inadvertent emotional catalyst.
- • Communicate the campaign updates accurately
- • Acknowledge and accept the First Lady's hiring decision
- • Maintain professionalism in the face of awkwardness with Josh
- • This promotion is a deserved professional step
- • Delivering facts plainly is the right approach, even when they sting
- • She can separate personal and professional roles
Anxious and insistent — worried about the technical change and confused about the chain of custody for the edit.
Maddi rushes in breathless, waving the HHS pages, directly challenges Josh about a re-earmark she found in the HHS final, and insists the change was made in the galleys, pressing for accountability.
- • Surface and correct an unauthorized budget change
- • Identify the person responsible so the error can be fixed
- • Protect the integrity of the HHS submission
- • Budget galleys should be proofed and locked to prevent errors
- • Someone on staff must be accountable for unauthorized edits
- • Procedural lapses will create political and policy problems
Institutional — purposeful and decisive in personnel choices, unconcerned with the immediate fallout in the bullpen.
Referenced as having taken Josh's advice and hired Donna as chief of staff and as a prior negotiating partner over the earmark; its decision directly alters personnel dynamics and contributes to the budget dispute.
- • Advance the First Lady's policy and administrative priorities
- • Install competent staff to manage her office
- • A professional chief of staff will better serve the First Lady's agenda
- • Personnel decisions are tools to secure policy outcomes
Objects Involved
Significant items in this scene
Donna's stack of faxed campaign papers serves as the physical medium from which the hiring announcement and endorsements are delivered; it anchors the scene's information flow and visually signals administrative business at hand.
The immunization fund item is the contested budget line that has been re-earmarked to 'immunization education.' As an abstract object it embodies the policy money at stake and functions narratively as the bone of contention that wakes procedural failures.
The fax from Amy is the narrative trigger: its lines report campaign endorsements and, crucially, the First Lady's decision to hire Donna. It functions as both information delivery and emotional detonator, exposing staffing changes to Josh mid-crisis.
The HHS final budget paper is inspected by Josh and Maddi; it is the documentary evidence of the unauthorized re-earmark. Its language (and the change made in the galleys) converts a procedural slip into a political problem and spawns suspicion.
Location Details
Places and their significance in this event
Josh's bullpen is the confined, fluorescent-lit workspace where late-night staff triage bureaucratic and political problems; it serves as the stage where procedural oversight becomes interpersonal crisis and where career moves are announced bluntly.
Organizations Involved
Institutional presence and influence
The Sierra Club appears in the fax as one of three new national endorsements; rhetorically it bolsters campaign positioning and provides political context to the bulletin Donna reads aloud.
The Department of Health and Human Services is the institutional owner of the HHS budget documents at issue; its final galleys contain the disputed re-earmark and thus are the institutional artifact that precipitates White House scrutiny.
The Office of the First Lady is the organization whose decision (to hire Donna) and prior negotiation (over the earmark) are central to the scene: it is both the negotiation partner on policy language and the recipient of staff changes that ripple back to the West Wing.
NARAL is named in the fax as another endorsement contingent on a policy promise; its presence highlights the political tradeoffs in play and the electoral weight of policy positions mentioned during the bullpen exchange.
Narrative Connections
How this event relates to others in the story
"Josh's advice to Abbey about hiring a professional Chief of Staff leads to Donna's promotion."
"Josh's removal of the immunization earmark leads to the later budget change he discovers."
Key Dialogue
"MADDI TATEM: Hey Josh? Did you sign of on 30 million from the immunization fund to be ear marked for immunization education?"
"JOSH: This isn't what we had this morning."
"DONNA (reading): "First Lady took your advice; she just hired me.""