Trump’s goal makes Congress irrelevant
Arc de Trump, yes; serious legislating, no
Gordon L. Weil
Grumbling about the failure of Congress to perform its
designated role, including by me, may be wrong.
The conventional wisdom is that members of Republican
majority in the House and Senate retreat before Trump’s assertion of power and
his threats to their reelection. While he
has seized control of the nation’s political agenda, taking it way from the
branch of government that is supposed to make policy, that’s far from the
underlying reason.
Trump apparently believes he can bypass or overrule Congress
at will, but a good case can be made that he simply doesn’t care. It may not matter to him whatever Congress
does or does not do. His goal is not to leave
a legislative legacy or to contribute to the betterment of the lives of Americans.
He has little need for Congress, and it has responded by
slowing down. Both the House and Senate
have met in working sessions and enacted legislation far less than is normal
for Congress.
The One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB), the highest expression of
Trump’s agenda, is a notable example. The
pro-Trump House would almost reflexively pass his requested spending requests.
Importantly, OBBB allowed the president go around the normal and cumbersome appropriation
process, especially in the Senate, a less reliable part of his team.
In the Senate, spending bills are considered by the Appropriations
Committee, now under GOP control and chaired by Maine Sen. Susan Collins. Traditionally, departmental bills would be
considered individually but gradually they were adopted in packages. If passed late, bridging funding would be
adopted.
The Republicans had promised separate consideration of each
bill, but Trump wanted quick success rather than a legislative process with extended
negotiating. That lightened the Senate work
load, and senators got their earmarks, money for home state projects. Collins, having lost much budget authority,
could still bring home the bacon.
While the Senate appears to remain in session more than the
House, it’s an illusion. To prevent gaps
allowing the president to make recess appointments to top positions, the Senate
holds daily pro forma sessions with a single senator present. Still, the Senate passes more bills than the
House, thanks to a few senators breaking party ranks, but the House lets the
bills die.
The House has reduced its work load by taking the longest
recess in modern House history. After it
enacted Trump’s budget, Speaker Mike Johnson took any possibility of negotiating
with the Senate off the table by sending the House members back home. He sought to strongarm the Senate, though it
was led by his own party.
Johnson also called snap recesses when he could not gain
agreement among Republican members to support or oppose a bill, risking action by
Democrats and a few Republicans. He
fights to keep bills, like one on Epstein documents, from coming to a vote.
Both bodies have fewer bills to consider. Members’ bills become scarcer as party
discipline stifles individual initiative.
Even more important is the relative lack of presidential proposals,
which would involve the president in prolonged negotiations with Congress. He does not seek a legacy earned through conventional
politics, beyond the passage of a few key bills.
In their new book “Regime Change,” Maggie Haberman and Jonathan
Swan explain the president. “Trump saw himself
as a transformational figure in history, one who was already remaking the world
in his image, something few leaders ever had the chance to do so definitively.”
Trump seeks an unforgettable place in history alongside
names that have long been revered and remembered. He does not pursue the acclaim that they had
received after the adoption of their legislative programs. As much as he has tried to show himself as a
leader in great crises, like Lincoln or Roosevelt, he has had to create a mythology
of comparable achievement.
And he wanted to cement his historic standing quickly,
realizing that his influence would be limited to his second term. That left him no time for Congress and he has
ruled by executive orders, even if they are subject to protracted judicial challenges
whose outcomes would be delayed for years. There would no lasting legislative monuments
to his leadership.
Instead, his monuments would be tangible, permanent and personal. His name might be attached to an “Arc de
Trump,” the White House East Wing, a Mount Rushmore bust, U.S. currency and
passports, a reflecting pool, a D.C. football stadium, and a New York railroad
station, plus a Nobel Peace Prize medal.
And personal glory could create the opportunity for personal profit.
In the end, Congress has been bypassed because it cannot contribute
to his effort to gain permanent and exalted historical recognition. While Republican majorities in both houses have
bent to his will, Congress is irrelevant to his quest for lasting fame. That helps explain its failure.
