The
government seems to be operating without a president. Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican like President Trump,
questions if his presidency can be saved.
The
2016 campaign continues. Trump attacks Republicans, Democrats, and
the media. He implies that he has no “moral” concern about Nazi
and white supremacist demonstrators. If Democrats won’t support
Americans paying for the border wall, not Mexico, he will shut down
the government.
As
president, he offers rhetoric, not substantive proposals. He attacks
Congress, creating opponents whose support he needs. He has a freer
hand in international affairs than on domestic policy, but often
confuses and bewilders allies and adversaries. The generals running
the government must correct his statements.
After
his deeply divisive remarks on Charlottesville and his collapsing
poll numbers, his scripted speech on Afghanistan, where he promised,
“we will win,” may have been an attempt to appear more
presidential. But he reverted to form with the Phoenix rally.
He
appears to believe tax reform is his silver bullet. “This is our
moment,” he says. He hopes to unite Republicans and Democrats,
bring back the disaffected business community and send the stock
market to new heights.
Called
tax reform, it is mainly a tax cut for everybody, which should be
widely popular. The prospect of tax reductions originally attracted
business leaders and was the basis of the Trump bump in the stock
market.
A
couple of aspects of tax “reform” are certain. First, everybody,
from the lowest income fifth to the wealthiest tenth, will have their
income taxes reduced.
The
wall-to-wall tax reduction is what Trump expects should produce
sufficient congressional majorities. In theory, the GOP will get
behind the cut, and Democrats could have a hard time opposing it.
Just
who gets most of the tax cut may prove to be the problem with this
theory. The Democrats favor a tax increase on those with incomes in
the top one percent, but the Trump proposal is slated to give them
the biggest reduction.
This
is where the idea of tax reform departs from tax reduction. While
there may be cuts for all, reform is meant to benefit the rich.
Some
loopholes may be closed, but lower rates and eliminating the
inheritance tax on people who leave more than about $10 million will
be a boon to the most wealthy. The tax breaks for the wealthiest may
be what limits Democratic support.
The
second key aspect of the tax proposal is that the federal government
will receive less revenue. That’s the GOP’s intention, and it
means deep cuts in government services.
The
federal budget has three parts. The largest is required support for
programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. The remainder,
about one-third of outlays, has been evenly split between defense and
all non-defense spending. Trump wants to end equal treatment,
boosting defense and slashing the rest.
While
that may be conservative policy, it fails to take into account the
people whose services will be cut. That was the lesson of “repeal
and replace Obamacare.” So many people would have lost coverage
that some legislators could not support outright repeal.
Much
the same would be true with cuts on programs from agriculture to the
arts, many created by members of Congress responding to their
constituents. It may be difficult for them to sell tax cuts for the
rich financed by reductions in services to voters.
As
for the conduct of his presidency, it’s not clear that Trump grasps
all of this. He has shown little interest in the substance of
policies, and looks for political wins that he can claim for himself.
He relishes the cheers of his dwindling core supporters more than
the details of governing.
He
congratulates himself for creating one million jobs in the first half
of the year. That’s exactly the job growth under President Obama
in the same period last year. Trump counts the gain for himself but
not for the president whose legacy he would destroy.
Without
tax reform success and governing as if the presidency is really a
continuing political campaign, Trump could find it difficult to
achieve success with any domestic policy proposals. A solution must
be found elsewhere or government will remain stalled.
If
a reluctant McConnell and House Speaker Ryan would compromise with
Democrats, moderate, veto-proof bills could be passed. Trump could
take the credit for them. As with the nearly unanimously passed bill
keeping sanctions on Russia, a bipartisan approach could reduce the
risks of a Trump foreign policy.
In
short, Congress might be able to save the Trump presidency.
No comments:
Post a Comment