Here's a pledge even staunch progressives can use to win the hearts of Never Trumpers
Debate is heating up in the punditocracy on the following question: Should Democrats appeal to the center to win over disaffected Republicans and moderate independents (as many moderate Democratic congressional candidates did successfully in 2018), or should they go bold and go left to pump up their base?
To that, my answer is "yes."
It need not be an either/or proposition. Agreement can be found on the left and among anti-Trump non-leftists on issues such as ethics reform, the undesirability of fawning over dictators, the defense of an independent press here and abroad, and the need to curtail the use of acting secretaries and directors in Cabinet and sub-Cabinet positions. The Democrats have a fantastic opportunity to forge common ground from the center-non-Trump right to the left on a host of issues.
None should be more attractive than the right-sizing of executive power, which has ballooned under both parties. President Donald Trump's tenure has prompted the founders' greatest fear, namely the rise of an authoritarian executive. Until Trump came along, Republicans were horrified by sweeping executive orders, rule by administrative directive (e.g. modifying the Affordable Care Act without Congress), international executive agreements instead of treaties (e.g. the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) and executive-branch hubris in the face of congressional oversight (e.g. Operation Fast and Furious).
In that vein, Democratic contenders should consider a pledge to restore constitutional balance and remove temptations that all presidents before Trump were able to resist. The pledge would include promises to:
- Retract and reconsider the Office of Legal Counsel memo barring indictment of a sitting president;
- Repudiate the "absolute immunity" hokum that the Trump administration uses as an all-purpose excuse for ignoring congressional subpoenas;
- Assure that unless executive privilege is formally invoked by the president or national security is at risk, administration officials will respond in a timely matter to and comply with subpoenas and Freedom of Information Act requests;
- Pledge that for any significant use of military force for any prolonged period of time, the administration will, except in emergencies, seek congressional authorization for use of force.
- Require the president, vice president and all Cabinet members to release tax returns, liquidate their ownership in active businesses (employing a legitimate blind trust) and refrain from hiring relatives;
- Reaffirm the legislative branch's power of the purse and cooperate with Congress in repealing and/or revising "emergency" legislation that gives the president wide discretion to declare an "emergency" and act unilaterally;
- Report to the House and Senate intelligence committees deviations from the normal security-clearance process on behalf of senior officials;
- Repudiate use of executive orders designed to sidestep or avoid court rulings;
- Develop guidelines to prohibit White House politicization of Justice Department investigations and enforcement matters;
- Agree to fill in a timely manner and keep staffed all inspectors general positions;
- Insist the president reimburse taxpayers for travel costs for any adult children and other presidential relatives except the first spouse; and
- Disqualify judicial candidates who do not receive a "qualified" or "well qualified" rating from the American Bar Association.
Such steps, taken in defense of democratic norms and the constitutional separation of powers, could be pursued without damaging any Democrat's progressive credentials. In the long run, these things will be much more critical than progressive taxes or spending and other policy proposals that will be shaped (in some instances, pared back or eliminated altogether) by negotiations between Congress and the White House.
Jennifer Rubin writes reported opinion for The Washington Post.
Stories that may interest you
Environment -- humans are part of it and it is part of us. Why wouldn't we protect that, in our own interests?
The administration devised a way to balance surging operating costs while, at the same time, the mandatory spending cap is imposing a tight limit on allowable spending increases.
The Trump administration wants a 37 miles per gallon standard. This is Stone Age thinking in a world of tightening emissions rules where civilized societies face the crisis of global warming.