Trump tilts toward pragmatism

Speculation regarding the White House’s supposed “leftward shift” is becoming a lot more credible.

It all began Sept. 6, when President Trump had North Dakota’s Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp join him during a swing through her state to push for his new tax reform plan.

He praised the U.S. senator for her willingness to engage on — what the administration hopes will be — a bipartisan overhaul of the most complex tax code in the world.

Some conservatives balked at the optics. Others argued that our ideologically elastic commanderin-chief was merely sending a message to Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan that the White House has other legislative options.

Then came that dinner with Democratic leaders Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. The fallout this time was much more severe. “Amnesty Don” trended as the No. 1 hashtag on Twitter in D.C.

As if all of the above weren’t enough for conservatives, now there appears to be a kerfuffle over the Paris climate accord.

On Saturday, at a ministerial conference in Montreal, the European Commissioner for Climate Action and Energy Miguel Arias Cañete stated that the U.S. has softened its position on withdrawal. If true, it could further erode the president’s base. But the White House insisted the U.S. will indeed withdraw unless we could “re-enter on terms more favorable to our country.” Speculation, nevertheless, abounded.

After all, senior administration officials have been divided on the matter from the beginning. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency administrator Scott Pruitt and

former White House chief strategist Steve

Bannon lobbied for the withdrawal amidst opposition from Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Director of the National Economic Council and chief economic strategist Gary Cohn. Reportedly Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner were also in the “stay” faction.

So despite being overruled back in June, the pro-Paris cohort might have the upper hand going forward.

As a conservative, I am virtually alone in my support for upholding the Paris Agreement. I understand that it’s largely a paper tiger, that its supposed effects on the climate will be minimal, and that China will game the system.

But, as someone who supports much of the president’s agenda, I am deeply frustrated with the legislative inertia we have been witnessing. In order for the White House to chalk up “wins,” the president needs political capital. He needs Democratic votes in the Senate to prevent filibusters on infrastructure and health care. And, most of all, he needs to give himself a chance to exhibit the dealmaking skills he’s boasted about for decades.

And if there is any issue on which he can pivot with little consequence, it is a nonbinding, multilateral agreement. The president is not an ideologue; that is why millions of Americans voted for him — myself included. If my fellow Trump voters wanted one, we could have nominated Ted Cruz. And so, it’s not a “leftward shift”; it’s called pragmatism.

In order for the White House to chalk up ‘wins,’ the president needs political capital. He needs Democratic votes in the Senate to prevent filibusters.