The real fight ahead
Politics in Washington happens on many levels at once. Democrats are certainly right to protest the Republican rush to hold hearings on some of President-elect Trump’s cabinet picks before their ethics forms and investigations have been completed.
As Sen. Charles Schumer, the new Democratic leader, put it, “The transition team’s collusion with Senate Republicans to jam through these cabinet nominees before they’ve been thoroughly vetted is unprecedented.”
As a candidate, Trump defied many conventions and took many “unprecedented” actions and seldom paid much of a price. We’re still waiting for his tax returns, after all. But as the ethics spat indicates, a president is held to much higher standards than a candidate, and Trump is still adjusting to his new, elevated status.
Congressional Democrats also have a large adjustment to make. For the first time in 10 years, they control none of the capital’s main power bases: the House, Senate or White House. And Schumer is still learning the ropes as the party’s most prominent strategist and spokesman.
So this is not just a tussle over ethics. It’s the opening skirmish in a long war, as both sides feel each other out, probing for strengths and weaknesses, scoping out the new battlefield and preparing for the conflicts ahead.
The pressures are much greater on the Democrats because they have so much less firepower. Guerilla warfare is their only option. And for guerillas, fear is a potent weapon. Schumer’s goal is to send a message to Republicans: Pay attention. Take us seriously. If you don’t, we can make life really uncomfortable for you.
Ethics is favorable terrain for the Democrats’ hit-and-run tactics. Trump promised repeatedly during the campaign to “drain the swamp” of Washington insiders, so he’s sensitive to charges that he’s not keeping his promises. He’s already pressured House Republicans to back away from an effort to gut the ethics process that governs their members.
Even so, Trump and his children remain vulnerable to charges of ethical misconduct, since they’ve been slow to untangle their vast financial holdings around the world. Many of his cabinet picks are very wealthy individuals whose complex business connections present myriad opportunities for conflicts of interest. And the independent Office of Government Ethics has provided the Democrats with plenty of ammunition.
Walter Shaub, the office’s director, said the Republican plan to hold hearings on nominees before their ethics reviews are completed “is of great concern to me.” Trevor Potter, a longtime Republican adviser, told the Washington Post: “This suggests that there has been a real breakdown between the transition and the Office of Government Ethics.”
Beyond ethics, Senate Democrats can use the hearings on Trump’s nominees to sharpen their skills and re-learn how to operate without a president to lean on. They now run their own show. They have to draft their own plans, ask their own questions, make their own arguments. They don’t have Obama’s microphone or magic to back them up. But they don’t have to answer for his failings, either.
Barring some unanticipated event, all of Trump’s cabinet nominees are likely to win Senate approval. Even in today’s polarized capital, the precept is widely shared that presidents get to pick their own advisers. And in a fit of frustration, which they now probably regret, the Democrats foolishly changed the rules a few years ago to bar filibusters on cabinet appointments.
But as we say, these are only skirmishes. The real war starts when Trump picks someone to fill the Supreme Court vacancy caused by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia almost a year ago.
Cabinet officers come and go, but justices serve for life, and their influence can last a generation. Scalia was appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1986 and stayed for 30 years -- 28 of them after Reagan left office.
Moreover, the current court is often split 4-4, so the new justice could play a huge role immediately. Democrats deeply resent the Republicans’ risky but successful gamble to keep Scalia’s seat open by blocking President Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland. And the filibuster is still in order on Supreme Court nominees. So the stakes could not be higher.
The best time to influence a nomination is before it’s made. If Schumer and his troops can prove to be effective guerilla warriors in the weeks ahead, Trump might be moved to pick a justice who is slightly more pragmatic and acceptable than some of his other options. If not, Democrats will be battle-tested when the nomination fight begins.
Steve and Cokie Roberts can be contacted by email at stevecokie@gmail.com.