What IS the Plan?
February 15this the next deadline. If the Congress and the President cannot agree on a funding plan, including Border Security, then the government may be closed once again, and 800000 employees will face financial crisis. Wednesday, a committee of House and Senate members from both parties got together to begin the process of negotiations.
It would seem obvious that all sides want to avoid another disastrous closing. But, in the current era where “normal” rules no longer matter, nothing is obvious anymore. As the committee gathered, with both leadership teams choosing members who aren’t “bomb-throwers,” the President issued his first salvo in a tweet:
If the committee of Republicans and Democrats now meeting on Border Security is not discussing or contemplating a Wall or Physical Barrier, they are Wasting their time!
The “bomb thrower” was sitting in the White House. While Republicans and Democrats in Congress will likely reach a negotiated agreement, there is no guarantee that any deal will pass Presidential muster without “Wall.” Both sides recognize this, but the problem is: what is “wall?”
“Wall” started as a “great” concrete barrier stretching from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Coast. But that concept, created as a memory device for the then-candidate to remember to talk about immigration, has faded away. While the President wants the legacy, a monument to the strength of his will, perhaps the Trump Wall like the Hoover Dam; to the opposition it has become a symbol of racism, of complete disregard for the environment, and of the folly of using simplistic solutions to complex issues. A concrete barrier is totally unacceptable.
What will “wall” be? The discussions have grown into a complicated mix of fence, barriers, actual walls, electronic monitoring, and more border personnel on the ground. This modern border security has been given a name to use as a fig leaf for the President: “Smart Wall.” In addition, funding to alleviate the Trump created humanitarian crisis would be included. Left out are the larger immigration issues that seem intractable: a solution for the Dreamers, for those temporarily admitted to the US, and an overall immigration strategy.
This solution seems inevitable, with both sides moving towards agreement. But that may not be the Trump strategy. The President has consistently shown his desire to govern alone, without suggestions or assistance from Congress, or even those who work in his administration. His recent treatment of his own National Intelligence leaders is just another example of this trend.
There is a way that the President can avoid a shutdown, and have a better chance of building the “Great Wall of Trump.” Rather than use the legislative process, the normal means of determining policy and law in the United States, the President could simply declare a National Emergency, and try to subvert Congressional powers to determine funding. The advantages for him are clear: he can declare a public “victory” (whether an Emergency declaration would hold up in court is an open question) then declare that there is no need to shutdown the government. He would attempt to gain powers that have never been claimed by a US President outside of wartime.
He would also “flip the script” from the ongoing Mueller investigation, at a time that the Special Counsel is likely to bring the most damning indictments to those closest to the President, and Congressional investigations into his actions are gearing up.
Oddly enough, the President declaring an emergency is as much a problem for the Republicans in Congress as Democrats. To the Democrats it would be seen as a probably unconstitutional move to be contested in court, and another rallying cry to the Democratic base. To Republicans, the declaration would establish a dangerous precedent. Should the next President be a Democrat, what would stop her or him from taking similar action for REAL national emergencies: global warming (not the neutered “climate change”) or mass shootings, or health care.
While I was writing this essay, the President has put out six tweets, four dealing with the need for his “wall” to stop “murderers and drugs.” He continues to undermine the Congressional negotiations almost before they begin. It may seem like he is floundering; trying to negotiate from weakness. But it is just as likely that this IS the plan: a plan to gain control of the message, and of authoritarian power.
