The Trump administration is not just sclerotic or ineffective; it is broken. And it is hurting America.
RONALD REAGAN, in his first inaugural address, famously pronounced that “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” The wave of small-government conservatism over which Mr. Reagan presided hinged on one simple observation: that as a bureaucracy becomes more and more bloated, it also becomes less and less efficient.
But long before Mr. Reagan reshaped its political landscape, America has been locked in a perennial debate over what the role of the government ought to be. Should it raise spending or cut taxes to help the middle class? Should the screws of regulatory policy be tightened to correct market failures or loosened to promote business agility? Should the government provide a large support network for its citizens, or perhaps should it eschew social-welfare schemes in favor of greater economic liberty?
The debate will rage on. But in many ways, the Trump administration has stymied such discourse in a manner hitherto unseen in American politics. Its rhetorical incoherence, utter lack of policy, inadequate staffing, and perpetual state of scandal undercut attempts at serious governing, thereby rendering criticism on substantive matters almost entirely insignificant. The White House, devoid of any legislative accomplishments, has ground to a halt.
After the election, some starry-eyed observers made the case for a successful Trump administration: a number of moderate, qualified cabinet members; hints of bipartisan policy desires (e.g. infrastructure spending); movement away from the timorous foreign policy of Barack Obama. Even if these didn’t materialize, the administration would most probably fall into the mold of a typical Republican executive—or so the argument went. But this view has proven far too optimistic. The Trump administration’s approach is not one which sources its policy ideas from left, right, or center; indeed, it sees policy as altogether unimportant.
Policy aside, there was also a hope that Mr. Trump’s emphatic—if not hamfisted and racially tinged—appeal to a “silent majority” would engender a period of American introspection. Echoes of Mr. Reagan’s own appeal to that same group of muted voters were impossible to miss.
An encouraging level of introspection has begun to occur within the media ecosystem. The New York Times andWashington Post are engaged in an arms race of original reporting, highlighting the tales of anxious Americans living in Rust Belt states. ProPublica, an investigative journalism nonprofit, saw an inflow of donations following the election and has since ramped up its keen coverage of the administration. Even CNN, rightly considered a journalistic pariah under its president Jeff Zucker, has shown some hopeful signs of reform.
Yet though the media’s current revamp is welcome, “American introspection” increasingly seems no more than an exercise in self-flagellation. Figures in the bi-coastal “establishment” are no doubt having a meaningful conversation about the excesses of liberal identity politics and the plight of manufacturing workers—but with themselves alone.
The extent to which polarization has receded likewise appears minimal. Polling data suggest that Trump voters hold few reservations about their candidate, instead deflecting his difficulties onto a hostile, anti-Trump media environment or pinning them on the illusory “deep state.” Deeper into the fog of political division we delve.
Prudent policy is the best way to remedy our ailing body politic. Through mindful and thought-out reforms, we can bring the alienated back into the light—and back into our political discourse. But Mr. Trump’s interminable policy failings will only serve to further cleave America into warring factions. Although current Republican efforts at health-care and tax reform have so far disappointed, at least these two policy avenues represent an attempt to get something—anything—done. We desperately need to expand our capital stock, reform the Affordable Care Act, combat the opioid epidemic, pare back long-term entitlement spending, buff up anti-poverty measures—the list is never-ending. But how much of this, even superficially, is being discussed?
Mr. Trump himself is the root of the dysfunction. His tirades about the “fake media” and heavy-handed involvement with our intelligence agencies are undermining American institutions and distracting from the vital work of policy-making. By and large, Mr. Trump’s executive orders, his few tangible specks of policy, have been at best sloppy and at worst unconstitutional. His proclivity for grandiose hand-waving seems to far outweigh his desire to govern. The irony is that when Washington intrigue dominates the headlines, lost are the perils of Americans beset by an unforgiving world, the same “forgotten Americans” for whom Mr. Trump so fervently advocated.
It should be said that the most likely disaster scenario of this administration would not be—as some liberals fear—the collapse of American democracy; it is more prosaic than that. Mr. Trump is steering us towards a world where the pursuit of fact-based policy outcomes occupies an ever-dwindling space in the national conversation, until all U.S. domestic and foreign policy becomes as erratic as the president.
This would precipitate a crisis of confidence. As political uncertainty mounts, investors would seek out new markets for their capital. Weary allies would form alliances and trade pacts amongst themselves, wary of an unreliable America. Consequently, American primacy, already bruised from the foreign policies of Presidents Bush and Obama, would crumble.
Even the rosiest of projections are at best tepid. Mr. Trump has already wreaked permanent damage on our political norms and injected a noxious strand of anti-institutionalism into the government. His incompetent and broken administration is hurting America with no signs of stopping. But the nation’s fate now hinges on how its people respond—and history will judge harshly those who did not.
Discourse in a Discordant Society is a monthly column on society and politics.
