These ideas one can find already in Quintilian's rhetoric, and in Adam Smith's explanations of the importance of wealth. For what makes wealth a grand and worthwhile thing, according to Smith, is its reflection of a morally good state of affairs, a well-organized state. Political economy and rhetoric have always been intertwined. Technicians of politics better take that into account. But, as I said in an earlier communication, it is not all that easy to theorize rhetorical address, because that requires coming to terms with the reciprocal dimension of political exchange.
Address points to the mutual formativeness of speakers, addressee, speech, medium, contexts.
This kind of reciprocal formativity is not easily swallowed because it challenges the positionality of the speaker. I've been highly underwhelmed so far by your grasp of policy, or political economy in general. This is a new line on me. I thought the old days were when class and economic issues predominated, before all those evil cult studs and posties assimiliated everything to discourse. Since you're such a detail guy, I'm sure you could provide us all with some details.