The drama of the transition is over. Now for the drama of government
HOLED up in
Trump Tower, the New York citadel he seems reluctant to leave, Donald Trump
detected a tsunami of excitement in the national capital before his
inauguration on January 20th. “People are pouring into Washington in record
numbers,” he tweeted. In fact the mood in Washington, DC, where Mr Trump won 4%
of the vote on November 8th, was more obviously one of apathy and disdain for
his upcoming jamboree.
Even the scalpers were unhappy, having reportedly
overestimated people’s willingness to shell out to see Mr Trump sworn in as the
45th president. Some 200,000 protesters are expected to attend an anti-Trump
march the day after the inauguration (see article).
Mr Trump’s
post-election behaviour has been every bit as belligerent as it was during the
campaign. In his victory speech he said it was time to “bind the wounds of
division”; he has ever since been insulting and threatening people on Twitter, at
a rate of roughly one attack every two days. His targets have included Meryl
Streep, Boeing, a union boss in Indiana, “so-called A-list celebrities” who
refused to perform at his inauguration, Toyota and the “distorted and
inaccurate” media, whose job it will be to hold his administration to account.
He enters the White House as by
far the most unpopular new president of recent times. It does not help that
America’s intelligence agencies believe Russian hackers sought to bring about
his victory over Hillary Clinton (though she won the popular vote by almost 3m
ballots).
Yet amid the protests, the launch
of a Senate investigation into Russia’s hacking and nerves jangling in the
United States and elsewhere at the prospect of President Trump, the transition
has been chugging along fairly smoothly. The markets have responded with a
“Trump bump”, exploring record highs in expectation of tax cuts and
deregulation.
Mr Trump has named most of his
senior team, including cabinet secretaries and top White House aides, and their
Senate confirmation hearings are well under way. These are even more of a
formality than usual, thanks to a recent change to the Senate’s rules,
instigated by a former Democratic senator, Harry Reid, which allows cabinet
appointments to be approved by a simple majority. As the Republicans control
both congressional houses, even Mr Trump’s most divisive nominees—such as
Senator Jeff Sessions from Alabama, his choice for attorney-general, an
immigration hawk dogged by historical allegations of racism—appear to be
breezing through.
Tom Price, a doctor and
congressman from Georgia who is Mr Trump’s pick for health secretary, is touted
by Democrats as the likeliest faller; he is in trouble over legislation he
proposed that would have benefited a medical-kit firm in which he owned shares.
But as the Democrats mainly dislike Dr Price because he is the putative
assassin of Barack Obama’s health-care reform, and Republicans like him for the
same reason, he will probably get a pass. “There are two people responsible for
the direction we are heading in,” says Senator John Barrasso, a Republican from
Wyoming, approvingly. “Donald Trump, who won the election, and Harry Reid, for
changing the Senate rule. This has allowed the president-elect to nominate
patriots, not parrots.”
Indeed, Mr Trump’s cabinet picks
have been solidly conservative, with a strong strain of small-governmentism. At
least three of his nominees appear to have mixed feelings about whether their
future departments should even exist.
Rick Perry, Mr Trump’s choice to
lead the Department of Energy, pledged to abolish that agency when campaigning
for the presidency in 2011. Ben Carson, a right-winger with little management
experience, whom Mr Trump has chosen to head his Department of Housing and Urban
Development, once wrote that “entrusting the government” to look after housing
policy was “downright dangerous”. As attorney-general of Oklahoma Scott Pruitt,
picked to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, has sued the EPA 14 times,
partly in an attempt to foil the Clean Power Plan, Mr Obama’s main effort to
cut America’s greenhouse-gas emissions.
No comments:
Post a Comment