RSN Fundraising Banner
Congress Has the Power to Stop the 'Imperial Presidency.' Now It's Time to Act.
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=17019"><span class="small">Adam Peck, ThinkProgress </span></a>   
Saturday, 27 April 2019 12:29

Peck writes: "It was reasonable to think that when Democrats swept the majority in the House of Representatives earlier this year, the American people would finally get what they were owed: accountability for President Donald Trump's aggressive administration."

Sunset at the U.S. Capitol. (photo: Alex Brandon/AP)
Sunset at the U.S. Capitol. (photo: Alex Brandon/AP)

Congress Has the Power to Stop the 'Imperial Presidency.' Now It's Time to Act.

By Adam Peck, ThinkProgress

27 April 19

The mistake in assuming Democrats would finally have the power to impose oversight was thinking their authority would be recognized by the White House.

t was reasonable to think that when Democrats swept the majority in the House of Representatives earlier this year, the American people would finally get what they were owed: accountability for President Donald Trump’s aggressive administration.

For the first two years of the Trump presidency, with Republicans in control of two branches of government, any hope of congressional oversight rested in the disinterested hands of then-House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Democrats in the minority lacked any authority to hold hearings or issue subpoenas, or enough votes pass legislation to place checks on the White House.

When Democrats picked up 40 seats in the House last November, many victorious candidates promised they would put a swift end to what author and historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. famously dubbed the imperial presidency — that is, an administration that willfully detaches itself from any system of checks and balances.

Kevin Kruse, a history professor at Princeton University and outspoken critic of the current administration, was equally optimistic. “With Democrats now in control of the House of Representatives and the Mueller investigation seemingly coming to a conclusion as well, Mr. Trump will likely be held to account, in one form or another,” he and a colleague, historian Julian Zelizer, wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times. “But it’s important to remember that the ‘imperial presidency’ will outlive any one president unless more is done to institute real checks and balances on the office itself.”

Three months later, with the special counsel Robert Mueller’s report finally public and Democrats sitting atop powerful congressional committees, one thing is clear: the imperial presidency might be even harder to dismantle than many feared.

As it turns out, the mistake in assuming that Democratic lawmakers would finally have the power they needed to do their jobs was thinking their authority would be recognized by the White House.

Earlier this month, House Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal (D-MA) formally requested the IRS turn over the past five years of Trump’s tax returns, long sought-after documents Trump has repeatedly refused to disclose himself. Federal law is unambiguous: Congress has the absolute right to request the tax returns of a sitting president.

Under normal circumstances, that would be the end of the story: the IRS complies, Democrats and the American people have an opportunity to finally see the extent to which Trump and his family are financially linked — or perhaps even indebted — to foreign investors, and oversight is finally achieved.

Instead, the White House has refused to comply. Chief of staff Mick Mulvaney told reporters the public would “never” see Trump’s tax returns, and this week Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told Congress his department needed more time to assess the “lawfulness” of their request. It’s the second time he’s missed a deadline imposed by Congress.

The White House has similarly refused to comply with requests by Congress to allow administration officials to testify, and are now in open defiance of at least one subpoena, issued to former personnel security director Carl Kline to provide answers regarding senior presidential adviser Jared Kushner’s questionably obtained security clearance. The White House instructed Kline, who now works at the Defense Department, not to comply.

The White House has also telegraphed its intention to defy another subpoena, this one issued to former White House counsel Donald McGahn, whose name appears frequently in the Mueller report.

In an administration defined by scandal and lawlessness, Kruse has watched the last few weeks unfold with particular alarm.

“The refusal to turn over documents that have been subpoenaed, the refusal to appear before Congress, lawful congressional orders they’re just going to balk at — this is a real crisis moment for our constitutional system,” Kruse told ThinkProgress this week.

It is an unprecedented one, as well. Even at the height of administrative corruption during the darkest days of Watergate, the Nixon White House felt compelled to obey congressional oversight thanks in part to Republican lawmakers who put their constitutional duty above party loyalty. When officials in the Nixon White House were reportedly considering ignoring subpoenas, Congress threatened to hold them in contempt and have them arrested.

Similar threats have begun to surface out of this Congress as well, at least among Democrats. House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings (D-MD), who issued the subpoena to Kline, said this week that he plans to schedule a vote to hold Kline in contempt, further escalating tension between Congress and the White House.

So alarming is the White House’s cavalier approach to congressional authority that even some of its staunchest Republican allies on Capitol Hill are beginning to apply pressure on behalf of the legislative branch.

On Friday, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), the ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Reform Committee, sent a letter to the White House urging officials to allow Kline to appear before the committee, in accordance with the subpoena issued by Congress. Even so, Republicans — Jordan included — have opposed any effort to hold hearings into the findings of the Mueller report, which detailed no fewer than 10 instances of possible obstruction of justice involving Trump.

Whether or not other Republicans recognize the serious jeopardy in which they are placing the nation’s foundational system of checks and balances by capitulating to the whims of the White House is the central question.

“If Congress and the courts refuse to apply any oversight, all that is going to do is encourage [the White House] to continue this behavior,” Kruse said.

“Much of our system has worked on the assumption that people don’t want to violate the norm,” he added.

In this White House, where nothing is normal, there is no way to assume.

Email This Page your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+16 # DongiC 2019-04-27 17:35
The American Ship of State has developed a serious list; it is entering a dangerous zone. Perhaps, the stock market will take notice, plunge terribly and catch the attention of the Republican Party who will join with the Democrats in bringing this errant president to order. Or does the GOP prefer that our ship of state capsize and wipe out stock gains in a massive depression. After all, we have seen the president already close down the government for a spell when he didn't get his way. Will he smash the economy as well?
0 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2019-04-28 05:21
The Demos made a fatal mistake in hitching their program to the Mueller Probe. They were not able to see from the start that Mueller was off on a goose chase or witch hunt. Had they distanced themselves from Mueller, they'd be in a lot better position now.

The US has almost always had an imperial presidency. Congress rarely imposes its power of checks and balances. The president is almost always given the money he asks for - and often more -- to run the American empire. The bloated Pentagon is now being stuffed with more cash by the very democrats who could be cutting it off.

This article paint a picture that is doo dire. Congress is controlling Trump somewhat. It refused to fund his wall. It tried to cut off US participation in the war against Yemen. The courts are checking some of his orders. In fact, Trump is a near Lame Duck. His foreign policy is out of control but democrats generally support that.

My recommendation is to stop whining about how bad Trump is and get to work building up the progressive agenda of the demo party. That's where the future is. Trump has had his 15 minutes of fame and the Pelosi congress is pretty much status quo of the last 30 years. We are well into the 2020 campaign season. That's where some real changes can happen.
+2 # hectormaria 2019-04-28 08:44
I'll say it again: "When you do things in a half-ass manner, all you can expect is to get a kick (deservedly) in the butt." To Dems: ignore impeachment looking for a misconstrued and/or misguided political principle and you deserve that kick in the butt- unfortunately it is a kick that will hurt the country for a long time. We trusted voters to do the right thing in 2016 and they kicked us in the keister. IT IS BETTER TO TRY TO DO THE RIGHT THING EVEN IF YOU LOSE THAN TO BURY YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND and then being sorry.
+1 # economagic 2019-04-28 21:50
The more times I read that comment the more convinced I am that you are convinced that we would have been better off with Corporate Hillary, at least in the long run. I'm not.

Clintonism in the guise of the "Center for American Progress" of which "Think Progress" is a project--ISN'T. It COULD have been a bit progressive when the Democratic (mis-)Leadershi p Council was founded in the mid-90s (Reagan era), but it blew it even then by adopting right wing policies on the premise that doing so would help the party win elections. It did exactly that, giving us dishonest center-right "Democratic" presidents for exactly 16 of the next 33 years, giving cover for the extreme right-wing Republicans to take full control of that party.

The difference between Republican and Republican Lite in this context is that Republican is openly fascist NOW while Republican Lite drags the process out for a couple more decades. It'e the difference between being shot in the head and being shot in the stomach, a slow, agonizing death. Or, would you prefer your fascism now or later?

The problem is that we don't have time for later. Ten more years of business as usual and we're cooked--literal ly. Four years of seeing where it leads just might scare people into DOING THE RIGHT THING BY MONKEY-WRENCHIN G THE PARTY TO ALLOW NON-CORPORATIST CANDIDATES TO PARTICIPATE.
+5 # Steve B 2019-04-28 09:00
The Republicans have been the standard bearer for "the end justifies the means" politics and as long as they're happy with Trump's agenda, they won't balk particularly as they face being bullied by the "President". What an opportunity for the entire Republican Party to go down the toilet with Trump. Only the Democrats' legendary cowardice can keep this from happening as once more they hedge their bets ahead of the election. Trump on the other hand acts boldly. Is there a lesson here?
+1 # economagic 2019-04-28 21:22
"Whether or not other Republicans recognize the serious jeopardy in which they are placing the nation’s foundational system of checks and balances by capitulating to the whims of the White House is the central question."

Mr. Peck, your English teacher would have run a red Highlighter (TM) over that entire "sentence," and your government teacher would point out that the Republican party has long wished to destroy checks and balances in favor of a "Unitary Executive" even before it was hijacked by the Federalist Society.