Democrats Should Cut a Deal With Trump
· The Atlantic
On Election Night, Representative Robert Garcia, the incoming chair of the House Oversight Committee, described one agenda that congressional Democrats could pursue over the next two years: investigating the “Trump Crime Family,” as his office put it in a statement. His message was, “Lawyer up.”
Visit umafrika.club for more information.
This tack would be a mistake. The new Democratic majorities should instead take advantage of the fissures now emerging between President Trump and his party to pursue their own legislative goals. Following their electoral wipeout, Republicans are beginning to see Trump as a liability. Trump, for his part, has had little interest in GOP priorities beyond tax cuts, immigration, and Supreme Court appointments, and now is even less wedded to the party’s agenda. During the Republican primaries for president in 2016, Senator Ted Cruz’s pitch to become the party’s nominee was to claim that Trump had no loyalty to the GOP and would cut deals with Democrats whenever it suited him. The Democrats should put this premise to the test.
The core terms for such dealmaking are straightforward: Democrats should exploit the whims of the most transactional president in modern American history to secure durable policy gains in areas with broad public support, such as health-care reform (to expand Medicare, reverse cuts to Medicaid, and restore subsidies for the Affordable Care Act), and electoral reform to limit dark money in politics. Deals should also include measures that at least some populist Republicans say they support, such as policies to lower energy costs, cap credit-card interest, and break up monopolies in the health-care sector. Even immigration reform seems to be on the table. To exploit Trump’s awareness that his hard-line approach has hurt him politically, Democrats could offer a deal that appeals to his self-perception as a leader uniquely capable of solving intractable problems. Democrats should convince Trump that promoting these policy priorities will benefit his legacy and burnish his self-image as dealmaker in chief.
In exchange, Democrats will need to bank the righteous anger that’s been mounting among leftists for a decade and offer to curb investigations of Trump’s family and close associates. This will not be easy, particularly after the White House counsel’s provocative claim that such investigations would be “a clear abuse of power” and “an affront” to the rule of law. But the opportunities afforded by this moment demand some restraint. The party should also allow the president to build his monuments to himself—the ballroom, the arch, the renovations for that golf course. Trump’s ostentatious, gold-plated aesthetic—classified by some as “dictator chic”—offends many of the taxpayers footing the bill for all this glitz, but his architectural flourishes are largely harmless, and anything he builds can be changed down the road anyway. Democrats would be wiser to focus their efforts on persuading Trump to sign legislation that will outlast him.
Chief executives and world leaders have learned how to leverage Trump’s need for adulation to their advantage. Remember those Swiss executives who showed up at the Oval Office last year with a gold Rolex watch and an engraved gold bar and saw their tariff rates plummet a week later? Democrats should do the same: pander to Trump’s ego and avarice, and get something big in return. This has worked before, as evidenced by Trump’s willingness in his first term to work with the Democratic congressional leaders, “Chuck and Nancy,” on a budget deal, and his surprising openness to being charmed into partnering with New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani on building more affordable housing—and it can work again.
[Nick Clegg: Getting too close to Trump was a mistake]
Ironically, working with Trump may even be a way to restore the political norms he has eroded and reverse the Trumpification of the American government. The incoming Congress could pass new disclosure rules, new limits on self-dealing, and whatever guardrails on executive pardons and emergency powers might survive the Supreme Court’s conservative majority. Democrats might entice Trump to sign these reforms by making them take effect in 2029, after he leaves office. One can even imagine Trump relishing the thought that his successors will be bound by norms and rules he openly defied.
The most distasteful part of the bargain is the one Trump may value most: that in exchange for these statutes, Democrats won’t seek justice against the president and his family. For lawmakers horrified by the Trump family’s crypto deals and the president’s acceptance of huge gifts from business executives and foreign leaders, such as the luxury jet from the Qatari royal family, this would be a considerable sacrifice. But the trade-off should be clear: On one side is the emotional satisfaction of seeing Trump’s family squirm under questioning from Congress. On the other are transformative and lasting policy reforms.
Moreover, congressional Democrats should be realistic about what might even be achieved from the aggressive strategy that Garcia has promised. The Supreme Court has made it difficult to hold Trump accountable personally, and Trump’s Justice Department is unlikely to initiate prosecutions. Trump is almost certain to make liberal use of his pardon powers, and hearings will not claw back the money that Trump and his children have made off the presidency. Voters have already repudiated Trump and his politics. Democrats should translate this anger into the reforms these voters say they want. If Americans come to believe that Democrats accomplished little beyond scoring points for inside-the-Beltway grudges, they may well swing away just in time for the next election.
A deal need not mean that Democrats give up on holding anyone accountable for the misdeeds of this administration. Trump is loyal to his family, but he is happy to discard underlings once they stop being useful. The law firms, tech companies, crypto exchanges, and other corporations that participated in or capitulated to Trump’s lawless impulses are all fair game, as are various bit players within the administration. Democrats should stifle their instinct to seek retribution from the top and freely proceed against the rest—as long as this doesn’t detract from the party’s legislative priorities.
[Rachel Maddow: The collapse of America’s most consequential institution]
Getting significant legislation through Congress will be difficult. Even if the Democrats end up with 56 Senate seats, as appears likely, a handful of Republicans will still be needed to overcome a filibuster on substantive legislation. But the electoral thrashing should make some GOP senators more amenable to compromise, especially on matters of affordability and public corruption, both of which had broad support in exit polls. If Republicans prove obstructionist, Democrats can focus on the kinds of legislation that can pass with a simple majority in the Senate, such as trade agreements, measures that can be attached to budget bills, and judicial nominations. Democrats should propose their own slate of nominees, particularly for posts other than the D.C. Circuit, where they may trigger less opposition because they are not regularly involved in cases touching on executive power.
If Democrats want to prioritize legislation over investigation, they need to settle on that strategy soon. The tension between Trump and his party will likely crest over the next few months, and then everyone’s attention will turn to the 2028 campaign. Democrats can spend the next two years seeking justice for past wrongs, or they can set their eyes on the future. If Trump believes that everything is a deal, Democrats should take him at his word.