Author: sgstofka

Make America Fair Again

Leave a comment

April 13, 2025

By Stephen Stofka

This is part of a series on centralized power. The debates are voiced by Abel, a Wilsonian with a faith that government can ameliorate social and economic injustices to improve society’s welfare, and Cain, who believes that individual autonomy, the free market and the price system promote the greatest good.

Abel tucked a table napkin into his belt. “Another uneventful week.”

Cain smirked as he cut a bite from his stack of pancakes. “Will the country last four years?”

Abel sighed. “Sometimes I dream that the voting public turns the House and Senate over to the Democrats so they can impeach him.”

Cain laughed. “There would be another January 6th when the new members took their oath of office.”

Abel frowned. “That’s what I worry about. Trump has too many of the same characteristics as other autocrats. Maduro in Venezuela, Erdogan in Türkiye come to mind. They freeze out the opposition party. Laura Gamboa had a piece in Foreign Affairs this month about past incidents (Source).  In 2003, Erdogan and his party began a campaign that either crippled or took over parts of the bureaucracy in Türkiye. Although the opposition stopped some legislation, in the first four years, Erdogan was able to totally seize power in 2007.

Cain gave a soft whistle. “Yeah, in any kind of governing, it’s ‘process over substance.’ I remember some Congressman saying something like, ‘I’ll let you write the substance … you let me write the procedure, and I’ll screw you every time.’” (Source)

Abel smiled. “Yeah, that was John Dingell. Served in Congress for fifty years! Anyway, a good example of that. Trump has extended his powers by declaring an emergency. What’s the emergency? Not a pandemic, or a war, an attack from China. No, it’s the trade deficit. Under the National Emergencies Act, Congress can pass a joint resolution declaring an end to the emergency (Source).”

Cain interrupted, “Yeah, but Trump could still veto the resolution.”

Abel nodded. “True. A higher hurdle to formally end an emergency. The House has a Rules Committee that decides on how legislation is brought to the floor. So, Congress can initiate a declaration ending an emergency declared by the President. It would send a word of caution to the White House.”

Cain raised his eyebrows. “You know, there’s no definition of emergency under the IEEPA, the law that Trump is using [Source].”

Abel nodded. “The IEEPA is another of those laws passed in the 1970s with no definitions. Another example is ‘waters of the United States.’ What does that mean? Courts, including the Supreme Court, have been arguing about it for 50 years (Source). Today, all serious legislation contains definitions.”

Cain replied, “So I didn’t know Congress could undo that. Go ahead.”

Abel continued, “So the Rules Committee just wrote a rule a few weeks ago that prevents any member from raising an objection that lead to a vote to declare an end to the emergency (Source). That tweak of the rules gets little attention but curtails any effective opposition in the House to Trump’s expansion of powers. Republicans in the House don’t want to go on the record opposing Trump. It was that kind of stuff that Gamboa was writing about.”

Cain said, “The slim Republican majority in the House weakens any checks and balances. Like I said last week, Trump has gone rogue.”

Abel argued, “He’s put together a team of rogues. Yes men and yes women. Sycophants who suck up to power and those who cower in the corner, hoping not to attract anger from Trump or Musk. The nominee to head the Bureau of Land Management just withdrew her nomination after it was revealed that she had written a memo criticizing Trump after the 2020 election (Source).”

Cain put down his fork. “I think there are some independent voices, but they are reluctant to come forward. Rumor is that Trump paused the reciprocal tariffs, the really high ones, because some people warned him that the bond market was starting to crack. At first, investors started moving into Treasuries as expected but then the rate on 10-year Treasuries started to rise, indicating that the nosebleed tariffs were causing investors to lose confidence in Treasuries (Source). US debt is like the Titanic was thought to be. Unsinkable.”

Abel frowned. “That’s why mortgage rates shot up half a percent, back up to 6.90% (Source). The mortgage market tends to move with the long-term Treasuries.”

Cain asked, “Just yesterday, mortgage rates broke the 7% threshold. Can the President of the United States cause a financial crisis? Maybe.”

Abel put set his coffee cup down. “Trump’s had several bankruptcies. His dad helped to bail him out of his brash bets on the casino industry in Atlantic City (Source). He was having trouble getting financing, so he ran for President to boost his name recognition.”

Cain sighed. “I think a lot of us voted for someone who could get things done, even he was a little bit crazy and impulsive.”

Abel said, “This last election, Trump attracted people outside of his core MAGA supporters. What does ‘great’ mean? Different things to different people. Some thought Trump would bring down prices. He promised to do that on ‘day one’ of his presidency. Some thought he would end the war in Ukraine because he promised to do that. Some thought he would be pro-business and curb the regulatory state.”

Cain replied, “Yeah, Trump’s a promoter. That’s what politicians do. Different people have different levels of gullibility. Even a skeptic can be convinced if the promises confirm their beliefs and desires. I think a lot of pro-business types bought into Trump’s promise to cut back on regulations. These tariffs are just a different type of big government imposing its will on the market. This is as heavy-handed as the Democrats get, only in a different way. It makes for a lot of uncertainty.”

Abel nodded. “Exactly. You know, AOC and Bernie Sanders have been going around the country to build opposition to Trump. They actually got over 30,000 people in Denver a week or so ago. I was thinking that there is a constituency in the Democratic Party that is like MAFA, Make America Fair Again.”

Cain interrupted, “I like that, but what do you mean ‘again.’ Has America ever been fair?”

Abel replied, “Well, some Democrats look back to the post-war period as an example of more fairness. Sure, there was a lot of prejudice. Jim Crow laws in the south, for example. But union membership was strong, wages grew faster than inflation and taxes were like 70% on the top 1%. Kind of a ‘Father Knows Best’ or ‘Leave It To Beaver’ moment. What’s weird about that is that the MAGA crowd on the right also looks back to that time as an ideal as well. The U.S. was the leading manufacturing country in the world and the supply chain helped support businesses in small and medium sized towns. There were good paying jobs and people could afford to buy a home. So, the MAGA crowd on the right and the MAFA crowd on the left are looking to the same post-war period as their ‘Golden Age.’”

Cain replied, “I like that idea. What’s ‘great?’ What’s ‘fair?’ It can be anything. They are promotional, not substantive words. What’s fair to me might not be fair to you. Let’s say you and I pick apples for a living. We both have the same size ladder, but I get assigned a section of trees where the apples are easier to reach than the trees in your section. I think it’s fair because we both have the same tool, the same length ladder. You don’t think it’s fair because picking apples is more of a challenge for you than it is for me. When we are done, I think I am more productive than you and I deserve the extra money I made. You feel cheated. I think you are just lazy. If you don’t know that my apples were easier to pick, you might become convinced that there is something wrong with you. Some character flaw. You might start believing that you are lazy or dumb or something.”

Abel said, “I remember seeing a cartoon about that once. It was trying to show the difference between equality and equity. Two people might have equal means, but not equal opportunity because one person’s environment is more advantageous. They are more likely to succeed.”

Cain frowned. “Fixing that problem only makes the problem worse. That’s what’s wrong with liberal politicians. They focus on outcomes and reason backwards. If outcomes are not equal, then the environment must be different, so they change some aspect of the environment. Outcomes are still unequal. Why? Because people anticipate policy changes. People are not machines or rats in a lab. There is a field of economics where researchers introduce policy changes into a community and test the effect. Some women in a rural farming community in India are given ducks. It’s random so the researchers can publish their study. The women will be able to raise the ducks so they can feed their families (Banerjee & Duflo, 2011). A neighbor, jealous because they didn’t get ducks, poisons the ducks. Social scientists can’t conduct experiments on people the way that researchers in the hard sciences can. We are sentient beings, not dumb guinea pigs.”

Abel nodded. “At least researchers are trying to develop some empirical data. It’s better than the approach that Aristotle and other philosophers used. Make up shit based on my perspective and declare it so.”

Cain laughed. “Hey, I’ll grant you it’s not easy. The beauty of the price system is that prices are the result of thousands of experiments testing the value of something. The magic of the price system is that it involves trade-offs, some opportunity cost. I need to give up ‘x’ dollars to get ‘y’ good or service. I could spend my dollars on something else or nothing else and save it. A gigantic set of experiments in opportunity costs. That needs to be a fundamental characteristic of policy design. Often, it isn’t.”

Abel argued, “Yeah, but that bottom-up approach doesn’t work for collective action problems. Spend more money on national defense or health care? Public education or more police? People can’t agree on the value of each and the opportunity costs.”

Cain interrupted, “Agreed, but a top-down approach doesn’t work either.”

 Abel stood up. “So, we are left with irresolvable problems, it seems. Maybe that is something we can talk about next week. Please, God, something other than the latest Trump fiasco.”

Cain waved. “That would be nice. See you next week.”

//////////////////////

Image by ChatGPT in response to the prompt, “draw a blue baseball cap with the words ‘Make America Fair Again’ stenciled in white letters.”

Banerjee, A. V., & Duflo, E. (2011). Poor economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty. New York, NY: Public Affairs.

A Carousel of Surprises

2 Comments

April 6, 2025

by Stephen Stofka

This is part of a series on centralized power. The debates are voiced by Abel, a Wilsonian with a faith that government can ameliorate social and economic injustices to improve society’s welfare, and Cain, who believes that individual autonomy, the free market and the price system promote the greatest good.

Abel set his water glass on the table. “I’ve been looking forward to our breakfast this week. I want to hear how  you are going to normalize the tariffs that Trump enacted this week.”

Cain shook his head. “Sorry to disappoint you. It’s hard to make sense of the layers of tariffs. 10% base tariff in addition to some previous tariffs except where excluded blah-blah-blah. A company that does international compliance had a table and explanation that helped (Source).”

Abel frowned. “We are on a carousel of weekly announcements and executive orders from the White House. A lot of uncertainty. J.P. Morgan estimates the probability of a global recession at 60% (Source). A few days ago, before the tariff rates were announced, the bank was putting the probability at 40% (Source). That’s quite a jump. Shows how surprised even the analysts at the bank were when the actual tariffs were announced.”

Cain stirred his coffee thoughtfully. “Did you see Trump’s press conference Wednesday? The one where he announced the tariffs? He had a chart, I’ll call it the tariff chart, showing the tariffs that other countries impose on U.S. goods, and I realized that someone in his administration had pulled those numbers out of their ass.”

Abel laughed. “Well, the U.S. Trade Representative has an explainer of how they calculated the rates (Source). Basically, they think that the U.S. should have a net trade balance of zero for each of its trading partners. Anything other than that means that country has enacted trade barriers and/or is engaged in some kind of currency manipulation. It’s nuts.”

Cain nodded. “Good point. International trade is not a zero-sum game. Anyway, the U.S. has the third-lowest tariffs in the world, just behind Japan and Switzerland. As of 2023, it was 2.2% (Source). The EU has an average of less than 3%. Trump’s chart showed that the EU has a 39% tariff rate. Trump exaggerates a lot, but this was excessive even for him.”

Abel wiped syrup off his finger with a napkin. “Well, there probably is some currency manipulation, don’t you think?”

Cain swallowed hurriedly before replying, “Some, but not to the extent shown on that chart. The Congressional Research Service just did a report, a one-pager, answering some of the concerns of House members about currency manipulation (Source). Only Switzerland, Taiwan and Vietnam met the 2015 criteria for currency manipulation.”

Abel asked, “What’s the criteria?”

Cain replied, “First is that the country has a trade surplus greater than $20 billion.”

Abel interrupted, “They sold us $20 billion more than we sold them.”

Cain replied, “Right. The second was that their current account surplus…”

Abel interrupted again, “That’s mostly the trade surplus.”

Cain replied, “Yeah. That’s shouldn’t be more than 2% of that country’s GDP. The third and last criteria is if that country buys dollars in the FX, or foreign exchange, market that is more than 2% of their GDP (Source). That shows their intention to drive up the price of dollars relative to their own currency.”

Abel made a soft clapping sound. “You’ve done your homework.”

Cain laughed. “I’ll bet there are a lot of people trying to understand or refresh their limited understanding of international trade. It’s a WTF moment like when the Twin Towers collapsed on 9-11.”

Abel interrupted, “Except there is even more misinformation now than there was 25 years ago.”

Cain continued, “So, look past the hocus-pocus on the tariff chart and look at the movement in exchange rates between countries. China’s yuan is trading at 86 cents today, the same as it was in 2011 (Source). Is China actively suppressing the value of the yuan? Probably. How much? 20%? 40%?”

Abel asked, “Yeah, but that’s not a tariff.”

Cain nodded. “But it’s an advantage for China’s exporters and a disadvantage for U.S. exporters.”

Abel replied, “So Trump equates ‘advantage’ with ‘tariff.’”

Cain sighed. “I think so.”

Abel argued, “But the advantage for China’s exporters is also an advantage for American consumers who get lower prices. I mean, I bought a cordless pruner, like for cutting tree limbs. It was made in China, well built and cost me less than $100. It’s a good deal.”

Cain frowned. “Yeah, a good deal for you but a bad deal for any American company that might want to make a cordless pruner. At least that’s the way Trump thinks. An American made tool employs an American worker who pays income taxes, Social Security taxes and local taxes. The more that American workers are employed, the less dependent they are on government.”

Abel replied, “So, let’s say that an American-made pruner had cost me $150. That’s a 50% tax on my income.”

Cain interrupted, “And now that pruner will cost you $150 because Trump is charging a 54% tariff on Chinese goods (Source).”

Abel frowned. “So, I would be paying more for an American-made pruner, but another American is less dependent on government welfare because they have a job. Is that what Trump is thinking?”

Cain nodded. “I can’t look inside his head but I’m guessing that is the reasoning underlying the direction of these policies. The problem is that it will take years to build a factory that makes a cordless pruner at a competitive price and the supply chain that supplies the parts for that pruner. A piston in an American-made car starts off in Tennessee as raw aluminum powder, goes to Pennsylvania, then to Canada, then to Mexico and finally to Detroit (Source). The 21st century supply chain is no longer confined to one region or one country. Trump will be out of office by the time a new supply chain is built.”

Abel had a faraway look in his eyes. “When I was a kid, I heard on a talk show that telephone customers who lived in urban areas had a fee tacked onto their monthly bill to support the customers in rural areas. I told mother that I didn’t think that was fair. She explained that it cost more to provide telephone service in a rural area where she grew up. She had lived in both worlds, rural and urban. Because costs were shared, telephone service was more affordable in rural areas, and she could talk to her family. She had that sense of a broad community. Maybe we have lost that. We live in our siloed worlds, absorbed in a perspective that we agree on and share with others.”

Cain replied, “It’s like what happened to music when FM radio started in the 60s and 70s. Large AM radio stations like WABC used to play a variety of music to appeal to a broad consumer base so they could sell advertising. As FM stations proliferated, each station’s choice of music narrowed to a particular taste. In fact, I think it was called ‘narrowcasting,’ not ‘broadcasting’ (Source). A hard rock fan could listen to only hard rock, not soft or pop rock. A country music fan who preferred traditional Nashville style music over Bluegrass could listen to a station that catered to their tastes.”

Abel laughed. “Specialization, the secret to progress, according to Adam Smith. Now we have specialized perspectives and opinions.”

Cain interrupted, “And tailor-made facts, carefully selected to support our opinions. That’s how those tariff rates wound up on Trump’s chart.”

Abel replied, “There’s no consensus.”

Cain nodded. “Divide and conquer. It’s a winning strategy in politics.”

Abel asked, “You’ve studied this recently. Why do you think they chose 10% as a base tariff rate?”

Cain replied, “Exchange rates, I think. Like we discussed before, a strong dollar helps the American consumer buy foreign-made goods at a discount.”

Abel interrupted, “And buy more local services with the money they saved.”

Cain replied, “Right. That’s what Trump’s team doesn’t get. It’s goods and services, not just goods. I can’t buy a haircut from China. Last year, a Federal Reserve study estimated that private services added 72% of economic value in the U.S. (Source). That $50 you saved on the cordless pruner might have been spent at a restaurant or some other service business. That business hires workers who pay federal and local taxes. The business itself supports the local economy with sales, use and property taxes.”

Abel sighed. “Now the $50 will be a tariff charge that goes to the federal government directly. That will hurt service businesses, service workers and local governments.”

Cain shook his head. “More likely is that you decide not to buy the cordless pruner for $150. There is less economic activity. You trim your trees and bushes by hand and save the money. Now someone on Trump’s team might say that the money you saved will be invested in the American economy, but investors are less willing to invest those savings because there is less economic activity. Interest rates go down because there is less demand for loans. The money you saved earns less interest. Consumer or saver, you’re getting screwed.”

Abel nodded. “It’s an endless carousel of cause and effect. Trump wants to return to some imagined idyllic age maybe in the 1950s when he was growing up. That world is out of reach and Trump will destroy this world in his effort to get back to that world.”

Cain shrugged. “Destroy might be an exaggeration. But he will definitely hurt this economy in his pursuit of that dream, I think.”

Abel asked, “Back to the 10% base tariff. Where do you think they came up with that?”

Cain nodded. “Oh yeah. So, if I am going to take a vacation in Europe, I can look up the euro-to-dollar exchange rate to see how many euros my money will buy. Then there’s several indexes that construct a type of average of several currencies against the dollar. There’s a traditional dollar index called DXY that’s often cited in financial markets, but it’s heavily weighted toward the Euro and doesn’t include the Chinese yuan. China is our third largest trading partner (Source) so the Federal Reserve maintains a broad trade-weighted index that includes the Chinese yuan. It is up 20% in the past decade (Source).”

Abel asked, “So that could be used to justify even a 20% base tariff rate?”

Cain sighed. “Like Trump said, the U.S. was being wonderful not charging more.”

Abel asked, “So, we’ve been talking about broad movements of money and goods but most of us stay focused on the prices we pay each week for gas, groceries and other necessities. Next week, we are going to encounter these tariff rates when we go to the grocery store. We get a lot of produce from Mexico and other Central American countries.”

Cain argued, “There are no additional tariffs on those imports from Mexico that were included under the USMCA that Trump negotiated in 2017 (Source).”

Abel replied, “Yeah, but that doesn’t include bananas from Guatemala, for example. During the winter, we get fruits and veggies from Australia and South America. Kennedy wants us to eat healthier, but the tariffs will make healthy foods more expensive.”

Cain nodded. “In the next few weeks, I’m guessing that consumers are going to get very angry. People who were thinking of buying a new car with their tax refund will be heartbroken when they see the increase in prices at the dealership.”

Abel replied, “I heard that some people were trying to lock in deals before the tariffs took hold.”

Cain nodded. “There’s that rush to buy phenomenon but we really notice persistently higher prices in the goods we buy regularly. Members of Congress are going to see their phones blow up with complaints.”

Abel argued, “The Congress has been pretty passive. You think public sentiment will have much effect?”

Cain sighed. “Who knows? Trump has gone rogue.”

Abel asked, “Not what his supporters expected? His poll numbers have declined, and his approval rating is below the average of U.S. Presidents (Source).

Cain replied, “He’s a lame duck president. I don’t know if he cares. Like I said, I think he’s gone rogue.”

Abel stood up. “A rogue president. Unsettling. Look, I’ll see you next week when prices are up on everything. I wonder how much the restaurant will charge for our meal next week? I think I’ll keep a copy of our tab to compare.”

Cain waved. “See you later.”

////////////////////

Image by ChatGPT in response to the prompt “draw an image of a carousel with people sitting on the animals”

Notes: 1) In the U.S. Trade Representative’s explainer of the tariff calculations there is an in-text citation to Cavallo et al. without a corresponding reference. The reference is:
Cavallo, Alberto, Gita Gopinath, Brent Neiman, and Jenny Tang. “Tariff Passthrough at the Border and at the Store: Evidence from U.S. Trade Policy.” (pdf) American Economic Review: Insights 3, no. 1 (March 2021). See the lead author’s page.
2) The title of the first reference is incorrect. The title should read: The long and short (run) of trade elasticities.
3) Because of the values assigned to epsilon and phi in the denominator of the formula, the calculation of the tariff change is essentially (exports – imports) / -imports. A more appropriate measure would be a difference-sum ratio, as in (exports – imports) / (exports + imports).

Capacity Without Legitimacy

Leave a comment

March 30, 2025

by Stephen Stofka

This is part of a series on centralized power. The debates are voiced by Abel, a Wilsonian with a faith that government can ameliorate social and economic injustices to improve society’s welfare, and Cain, who believes that individual autonomy, the free market and the price system promote the greatest good.

Cain looked around the restaurant. There was only one empty table. “Busy here this morning.”

Abel nodded. “Even when they are busy, they bring out water, coffee and a menu. To me, that’s a mark of good organization. Good service.”

Cain added half a packet of sugar to his coffee. “Yeah, that initiates the process. Like saying, ‘We see you. We are going to take care of your needs.’ I think that’s what the Trump administration has done these first two months. Tried to fulfill some campaign promises from the start.”

Abel rolled his eyes. “Like a waiter who brings a pitcher of water to the table and forgets the glasses, then blames the mistake on the dishwasher.”

Cain laughed. “Oh sure, just like that. Look, they’re trying to fix stuff that’s been broken for decades. Stuff like illegal immigration. Both parties promise to fix it but it’s a hard problem. Unlike past presidents, Trump is making an effort to fulfill his campaign promises.”

Abel interrupted, “Yeah, forget about human rights and due process. That’s a heck of a way to fix problems.”

Cain asked, “When does due process become excess process? We are a nation of laws, the saying goes, but we’ve become a country of lawyers who profit from creating red tape. We’re tangled in it. We’ve got plenty of process but few outcomes. We’re like a sailing ship stuck in the horse latitudes. Trump is trying to steer this ship toward land.”

Abel laughed. “That is a poetic description of this administration’s efforts.”

Cain asked, “This country has the capacity to fix problems but the processes that have evolved cripple the legitimacy of government. Trump is reasserting executive capacity.”

Abel objected, “But the way he is doing it weakens the legitimacy of his actions.”

Cain argued, “In the eyes of some. Anyway, you think some of these Venezuela gang members have any respect for human rights?”

Abel frowned. “How did they determine they were gang members? Because they had a tattoo. Is there a tattoo that distinguishes the gang? No. Any tattoo will do. That kind of arbitrariness is typical of the way this administration acts.”

Cain sat back in his seat as the waitress set his order in front of him. After serving Abel, Cain replied, “There’s what, a few hundred gang members? Could there have been a rush to judgment on one or two individuals? Maybe. So, should the government let two hundred criminals loose to save one person who maybe doesn’t belong to the gang? Reminds me of the old argument that it’s better that a lot of guilty people should go free rather than one innocent person should suffer.”

Abel nodded as he set his coffee cup down. “Yeah, you’re talking about Blackstone’s ratio. The need for firm proof before convicting an innocent person. It’s taught to law students as a foundational principle and Ben Franklin cited the ratio (Source). It alarms me that this administration would throw out a traditional principle of fairness just to look like they are accomplishing something.”

Cain replied, “There are so many issues in the 24-hour news cycle. How long will people be concerned about this? In the ‘80s and ‘90s, people worried about two American gangs, the Bloods and the Crips (Source). The drug epidemic was crack cocaine, not fentanyl. The two gangs killed each other to claim territorial rights to sell crack. There were innocent kids killed in drive-by shootings. The public wanted politicians to get tough on crime and they passed laws to get tough on crack dealers and users. One of the leaders in that effort was none other than Joe Biden. So now when Trump gets tough on criminal gangs, it’s bad? Come on.”

Abel said, “You’re talking about the 1994 crime bill that Biden sponsored. He was criticized later by people in his own party for sponsoring that bill. They said it unfairly targeted black people. But, there were a lot of leaders in the black community who supported that bill because the gangs and the drugs were tearing apart black families and communities (Source).”

Cain nodded. “So, this time the scourge is fentanyl, not crack. Strung out homeless people camped out on downtown sidewalks. It’s turned the downtown areas of many cities into graveyards of drug zombies. There’s a video that Peter Santenello shot in the Kensington neighborhood of Philadelphia and the druggies are walking around slumped over like the zombies on that TV show ‘The Walking Dead’ (Source). And where is the fentanyl coming from? Gangs from Latin America and suppliers in China. The drug problem is worse now than it was when Biden introduced the 1994 crime bill. Voters wanted action and Trump is delivering.”

Abel shook his head. “In the ‘90s, Biden went through the legislative process of building a coalition and forging compromises with other members of Congress. That’s the democratic way of creating policy. Trump is disregarding any procedural safeguards. Immigration officials are targeting people who have green cards (Source). They are in the country legally. This isn’t just about drugs. They’re targeting ideas that the administration doesn’t like. This is an arbitrary purge, an attack on free speech.”  

Cain nodded. “Yeah, I don’t agree with that. But some of those protestors did more than just talk.”

Abel argued, “Is there any evidence of violence? They arrested Khalil Mahmoud for leading protests in support of Palestinians. He’s a grad student at Columbia and he wanted the university to divest from Israel (Source). In the 1980s, there was a similar campaign to get U.S. universities to divest from South Africa to protest their apartheid policies (Source).”

Cain interrupted, “Yeah, that campaign was successful. There is not a powerful South African lobby in this country to pull political strings. On the other hand, the Israeli lobby might be more powerful than the gun lobby, if that’s possible. They don’t like any protests against Israel’s policies or actions and the Trump administration bows to any pressure from that lobby.”

Abel nodded. “Good point. So, Khalil was born in a Palestinian refugee camp (Source). Naturally, he is going to be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. He’s got a green card, for God’s sake, not just a student visa. The folks at ICE didn’t know that. It’s all power and no preparedness. Totally arbitrary. So, the Trump administration interprets Khalil’s humanitarian concern for the suffering of innocent civilians as support for Hamas, a terrorist organization (Source). They’s making it up as they go along.”

Cain shook his head. “Ok, so there are excesses and mistakes. It’s the same with any administration. Does an injustice done to one foreign student…”

Abel interrupted. “There are others, as well.”

Cain nodded. “Ok, several foreign students. Does it get voters riled up enough? I don’t think so. We can argue whether it should or not, but the plight of a few people is far away from most people’s lives.”

Abel argued, “What about the plight of students marching in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963? Public sentiment shifted when they saw water cannons turned on kids protesting Jim Crow policies in the south (Source).”

Cain nodded. “Sure, but there wasn’t enough momentum to pass any legislation on that issue until after Kennedy was shot later that year. The Civil Right Act in 1964 is almost a memorial tribute to Kennedy, an appeasement for the death of a president in a southern state. It takes several events to arouse public sympathy to the point of action.”

Abel agreed. “Usually there’s some event that gets the public’s attention. People became more sympathetic to campus protest against the Vietnam War after the Kent State Massacre. The national guard troops killed four student protestors. Killed them! That’s when a lot of people said, ‘Hey, this is a step too far.’”

Cain interrupted, “Yeah, I don’t think the arrest of a few student protestors has pushed public sentiment to that point yet.”

Abel asked, “Every week, there’s more examples of bullying by this administration. Republicans in Congress are afraid to speak up publicly. Musk has threatened to primary any Republican opposition to Trump’s policies (Source). Congressional Republicans are approaching the administration privately, hoping to carve out exemptions for those policies that are hurting their constituents (Source). Trump has already cowed the legislative branch of his own party. Now his supporters are going after federal judges who rule against Trump’s policies (Source). A showdown is coming with the Supreme Court. They are rewriting the Constitution, eliminating the other two branches of government. That’s the world they want. No accountability for their actions.”

Cain sat back in his chair. “Whoa! A few excesses and you’re ready to declare the end of democracy. As Adam Smith once said, ‘there is a great deal of ruin in a nation’ (Source). You’re alarmed at the excesses of one party but less sensitive to excesses committed by a party that you voted for.”

Abel shook his head. “No, what I am concerned about is the pursuit of a dream that Donald Trump has had for many years. To be accountable to no one. To do whatever strikes his fancy at the moment and have no one to check him.”

Cain smiled as he pushed his plate to the side. “That’s probably a secret dream of many people.”

Abel frowned. “Yeah, but most of us develop some impulse control. Social, political and economic circumstances may put limits on our impulses, or we learn to develop that control as part of our character. Trump has not developed it. He goes around fondling women’s privates in public and says, ‘they let you do it’ (Source). No, they are frightened and don’t know how to respond. Why? Because most normal people do not do that unless they are drunk or high on drugs. Now Trump has put together a team of people to carry out his impulses.”

Cain shrugged. “You’re talking about the Hollywood Access tape before the 2016 election. Voters knew about it. They voted for him anyway. In 2024, they voted for him a second time.”

Abel sighed. “That’s what I don’t understand. Are people so loyal to their party that they are willing to disregard a candidate’s character? That’s what worries me.”

Cain stood. “That’s a discussion for another day. Which do you worry about more? Trump or the majority of American voters who voted for him?”

Abel lifted his eyebrows. “Good question. I’ll see you next week.”

Cain said, “I’ll pick up the tab. Next week, then.”

/////////////////

Image by ChatGPT in response to the prompt “draw an image of an angry elephant.”

The Chopping Block

Leave a comment

March 23, 2025

by Stephen Stofka

This is part of a series on centralized power. The debates are voiced by Abel, a Wilsonian with a faith that government can ameliorate social and economic injustices to improve society’s welfare, and Cain, who believes that individual autonomy, the free market and the price system promote the greatest good.

Abel put his coffee cup down on the table. “I don’t know where to start. Shortly after Trump was inaugurated, I said that the EPA would get cut (Source). Now Trump has announced that his recently confirmed head of the EPA will be cutting agency staff by 65%. This week Trump is signing an executive order to end the Department of Education (Source). He’s cutting staff by 50%. He fired the two Democrats on the Federal Trade Commission, an independent agency (Source). That violates a Supreme Court decision. He shut down three watchdog agencies in the Department of Homeland Security who monitor his immigration crackdown (Source). The Federal Reserve will be next. This reminds me of the guillotine during the French Revolution. That didn’t end well.”

Cain swallowed a bite of pancake. “He’s not going to fire governors on the Fed. He can’t, I don’t think.”

Abel scoffed. “Trump shoots first and leaves the details to others. The governors are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate just like the commissioners at the FTC that he just fired.”

Cain frowned. “The market would implode.”

Abel replied, “In his first term, Trump sought the market’s approval of his policies. In this second term, Trump has shown that he no longer cares what the market thinks.”

Cain shrugged. “On the campaign trail, he said he would clean up the swamp in Washington. He’s keeping a campaign promise. The majority of voters wanted this.”

Abel laughed. “Cutting staff by 50%? You think half of any government agency is ‘waste, fraud and abuse?’ Nah, this is the same radical disorder that marked the French Revolution.”

Cain shook his head. “Well, only Congress can end the Department of Education. Trump’s executive order simply outlines steps toward the end of the department.”

Abel raised his eyebrows. “You’re trying to normalize this? Nothing about this is normal or gradual.”

Cain sighed. “Look, the federal government is like a ship locked in ice. Nothing gets done in Washington any longer. There needed to be some drastic action to break free. You know, the department’s functions should never have been carved out of HEW, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. In his run for President in 1976, Jimmy Carter promised the teacher’s union that he would make education a cabinet level agency in return for their endorsement. Even after he was elected, Carter slow walked the process for three years (Source). So, Carter signed the bill in October 1979. Ronald Reagan was running for President and promised to end the department if he became President (Source). Reagan and others thought it was unconstitutional, but he was never successful in ending it because the Democrats controlled the House during his two terms in office.”

Abel put his fork down. “So, you’re saying that Republicans have always challenged the legitimacy of the department.”

Cain nodded. “Yeah. There are three departments that have long been on the Republican hit list because they are outside the constitutional scope of the federal government. Education, Energy, and the EPA, the three ‘E’s. In 1977, Carter signed into law the creation of the Department of Energy to combine and coordinate several dozen programs in various agencies (Source). These are departments, as in cabinet level positions. Unlike Education and Energy, the EPA was not created by law, but by executive order. Not Johnson. Not Carter, or some big government-loving Democratic President. Nixon created the EPA shortly after signing an update to the Clean Air Act in 1970 (Source). Like Carter, Nixon wanted to combine a lot of programs into a single agency reporting to the President.”

Abel replied, “I often think of the 1930s as the era of big government. FDR created what was called an alphabet soup of agencies. You’re saying that Trump’s first target, though, is the second wave of federal government expansion in the 1960s and 1970s.”

Cain nodded. “That’s why I don’t think he will go after the Federal Reserve, which was created before FDR and the first expansion of government.”

Abel shook his head. “He’s trying to gut the IRS and that was created before FDR as well. I think you underestimate the anarchical instinct that motivates Trump and his cohorts.”

Cain shrugged. “Anarchy? Nah. Principled objection and longstanding grievance is not anarchy. Anyway, that second expansion was made possible by some key decisions by the Supreme Court during the first wave of federal expansion. The Tenth Amendment restricts the scope of the federal government and promotes federalism, the idea that a lot of power should be decentralized and under state control.”

Abel interrupted, “State governments are more responsive to the people. That kind of idea.”

Cain nodded. “Yeah, and the founders were suspicious of concentrated power. So, the FDR administration didn’t like the variety of worker protections in the states. No consistency. In 1938, FDR signed into law the Fair Labor Standards Act to make labor policy uniform throughout the nation. The law established a standard work week, a minimum wage, and overtime pay (Source).”

Abel interjected, “It’s good to have the same rules. Otherwise, it’s a race to the bottom as states try to get a competitive advantage by lowering standards.”

Cain smiled. “That’s some teleological reasoning you’re doing there. The ends justify the means.”

Abel argued, “The Constitution gives the federal government power to fix standards of money, weights and measures. A unit of labor is affected by the rules governing labor contracts. Setting uniform rules of commerce is like setting uniform measures used in commerce. Achieving uniformity in commerce is an implicit federal power granted by the Constitution.”

Cain rolled his eyes. “That’s stretching the definition of weights and measures, if you ask me. Anyway, some states complained that the act was an unconstitutional federal intrusion on state power. The government claimed that all labor policy had some effect on interstate commerce. The Constitution grants the federal government authority to control interstate commerce. That same year, a federal district court ruled that the act was unconstitutional in a case involving Darby Lumber Company. The case made it up to the Supreme Court which overturned the lower court’s  decision. Since Darby Lumber shipped some of their lumber out of state, that meant the company was involved in interstate commerce (Source).”

Abel replied, “Seems hard to argue with that. One state could lower their standards and give their manufacturers a competitive advantage offering lower prices.”

Cain nodded. “Yeah, sounds reasonable. But, consider a situation where a company exports less than 1% of its products out of state. The federal government was claiming authority over labor policy for a company’s entire operation because of any amount of interstate commerce, no matter how small.”

Abel frowned. “Ok, I see how that could be an intrusion on the state’s domain of legal authority.”

Cain replied, “And it got worse. In a 1942 decision Wickard v. Filburn, the Supreme Court decided that a farmer growing wheat for his own use was also involved in interstate commerce (Source). Yeah, you look puzzled. The court reasoned that the farmer’s consumption of his own wheat affected the interstate market for wheat.”

Abel laughed. “So, growing tomatoes in my backyard affects interstate commerce?”

Cain scoffed. “Apparently. That was the opinion of the Supreme Court.”

Abel nodded. “Ok, so the federal government expanded its scope under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.”

Cain replied, “Way beyond the intentions of the framers. The whole idea of the Commerce Clause was to settle disputes over issues like water and road transportation, and anti-trade policies between the states. Instead, FDR wanted to undercut the legitimacy of state governments. He wanted to control everything.”

Abel asked, “Ok, so what is the beef against the Department of Energy? Natural gas lines cross state lines. Oil gets shipped from one state to a refinery in another state, then distributed out to states within a region. Plainly, it is interstate commerce.”

Cain shook his head. “The department was created in 1977 when the whole country was concerned about the price and supply of oil. Back then, a lot of policymakers and scientists believed in peak oil theory, first proposed in 1956 by geologist M. King Hubbert (Source). This was the idea that oil production would peak in the late 1960s and begin to decline thereafter. The crises of the 1970s seemed to confirm that prediction.”

Abel interrupted with a question. “What about fracking?”

Cain replied, “It had not been invented yet. At least, not an economical way. When the price of oil was high in the 1970s, the industry experimented with extracting oil from oil sands. When the price of oil started declining in the early 1980s, these developments were no longer profitable.”

Abel nodded. “Ok, back to what’s the beef with the Department of Energy?”

Cain sighed. “The purpose of the department was to develop nuclear energy to solve the problem of declining oil supplies (Source). Instead, the oil industry developed new drilling and exploration techniques, and America is now the leading producer of oil (Source). Anyway, a few years after the creation of the DOE came the nuclear accident at Three Mile Island (Source). Public sentiment turned against nuclear.”

Abel interrupted, “France gets over 70% of their electricity from nuclear (Source).”

Cain replied, “Yeah, but they have only a small amount of oil reserves compared to the U.S. That affects public sentiment. Anyway, the DOE has completely changed its mission in the past decades. Now they focus on developing green energy sources like wind and solar (Source). If there is no longer a shortage of oil reserves, there is no justification for the Department of Energy.”

Abel said, “Look, an energy crisis might have prompted the creation of the department, but it’s mission was always to develop a coordinated national energy policy. Initially, its focus was on nuclear energy. The department’s mission is broad. The oil industry just wants to get rid of a federal agency that supports the development of competing energy sources like solar and wind. Despite all its abundances, the federal government still gives over $20 billion a year in subsidies to the oil industry (Source). No matter how much they get, the industry wants more for them and less for their competition.”

Cain replied, “The federal government needs to get out of the energy business, including subsidies for the oil and gas industry.”

Abel frowned. “Fat chance. What about pollution, oil clean ups and nuclear waste disposal? If there is no longer an EPA, who takes care of oil spills like the 2010 Horizon accident?”

Cain replied, “FEMA would be the natural choice for emergencies of that sort. There are a lot of redundancies in the federal government.”

Abel shook his head. “Shifting responsibilities to another department may gain some slight efficiencies in the long run. In the short run, there is going to be a lot of knowledge lost, leaving us vulnerable to the next disaster. Each week, we learn of another stupid mistake that DOGE has made in their efforts to remake government. They are causing more harm and saving little money.”

Cain protested, “The federal government has become so bloated that it is crippling our ability to get anything done. The federal response to Hurricane Katrina was an embarrassment. Same with the Horizon oil spill, the delays and ineffectiveness of Obama’s Build America plan, the botched rollout of the Obamacare exchanges. Let’s not forget the high-speed rail line in California. Billions spent and no rail. Biden’s infrastructure bill that spent billions to get just a few electric charging stations built. This country used to be able to get stuff done. Now, everything gets snarled in red tape. Compared to China, we look like a declining empire. Turning that around will not be easy.”

Abel set his coffee cup on his plate. “Well, firing a bunch of government employees with vital expertise, and closing a few departments is not going to solve the problem. This administration will flail around when the next crisis comes. In the 2026 midterms, a small number of voters on the fence will cast their vote with the ‘other guys,’ the Democratic Party, and power will shift again. We have become a country of short-term thinkers. That’s why China will eventually gain the upper hand.”

Cain laid his napkin on the table and stood up. “This will take time, I grant you.”

Abel interrupted, “Yeah, Rome wasn’t built in a day, and I need to have faith and blah, blah, blah.”

Cain laughed. “No, I won’t give you that lecture again.”

Abel sighed. “I’ll see you next week. Maybe there will be another department on the chopping block.”

/////////////////

Image by ChatGPT in response to the prompt “draw an image of a butcher block with a carving knife beside it”

A group of people show alarm as they slide down a slope

A Slippery Slope?

Leave a comment

March 16, 2025

by Stephen Stofka

This is part of a series on centralized power. The debates are voiced by Abel, a Wilsonian with a faith that government can ameliorate social and economic injustices to improve society’s welfare, and Cain, who believes that individual autonomy, the free market and the price system promote the greatest good.

In the park, Abel paused beneath an elm tree to study the new leaf buds emerging on the branches. He turned at the sound of Cain’s voice from the picnic table. Cain raised a seat cushion and motioned Abel over. Abel set the tray of two coffees on the concrete table inlaid with a chessboard. Abel said, “I didn’t know they had chess here.”

Cain frowned. “They used to provide sets, but the park office is closed. What do you have?”

Abel unslung his backpack, set it down and withdrew a white paper bag. “Burritos. This is a good idea, meeting outside on a nice spring day.”

Cain lifted a coffee from the cardboard tray. “Sugar?”

Abel nodded as he sat down. “In the bag. You know, we were talking about executive orders last week. You were comparing Trump and FDR. I was reading an article in Foreign Affairs this week called “The Path to American Authoritarianism” (Source – Levitsky and Way). They compare Trump’s strategies to autocrats around the world and they are similar.”

Cain pointed to his burrito. “Mild chili?” Abel nodded. Cain said, “I’m skeptical but go on.”

Abel continued, “Autocrats want to silence their critics, so they bring the media under control by hitting them with lawsuits. Trump has done that. Bezos and Zuckerberg have both settled lawsuits or the threat of lawsuits against the Washington Post and Facebook.”

Cain swallowed. “Trump sued both the Washington Post and the New York Times for defamation in March 2020 when he was running for re-election (Source – NPR). He sued ABC News in March 2024 when he was running for President again (Source – BBC). In office or out of office, the guy sues. It’s an election tactic.”

Abel replied, “Yeah, Trump has always kept lawyers busy, whether for him or against him. It’s just that between Election Day and Inauguration Day, when Trump took power, prominent media figures gave in.”

Cain shook his head. “I don’t think the White House has any more control of the media than it did when JFK was President. Here’s one example. To protect their access to the White House, the press kept JFK’s physical condition secret. Today, that would be a scandal. In that time, it was business as usual.”

Abel set his coffee cup down. “The authors of that article also talked about weaponizing the justice system to go after the political opposition.”

Cain shook his head. “FDR, JFK and Johnson weaponized the FBI. Is it OK when Democrats do it but not when Republicans do it?”

Abel shrugged. “You keep comparing the present to a time like sixty years or more in the past. The 60s and 70s introduced a lot of reforms to curb those abuses of earlier decades. Trump is undoing those reforms.”

Cain put his cup down on the concrete table. “Look, there are plenty of checks and balances in the system.”

Abel nodded. “Yeah, Levitsky and Way listed several. Let me think. There’s a small number of political appointees in the civil service. That’s one I can remember. The Senate has to confirm the heads of agencies. That’s another.”

Cain offered, “Lifetime tenure for judges?”

Abel replied, “Yeah, and staggered terms for independent agencies. Also, the military. Lots of laws to isolate the military chain of command from the political chain of command.”

Cain traced the rim of his cup with his forefinger. “So, a variety of boundaries that restrain a president.”

Abel shook his head. “But an autocrat systematically tries to break free of those restraints. He uses the tax system against his enemies. He rewards friendly businessmen and punishes unfriendly businesses.”

Cain interrupted, “You mean like Obama did favoring Solyndra? That was the solar panel company that got a lot of federal loans before it went bankrupt. Meanwhile, the Obama administration was imposing new regulatory burdens on the oil and gas industry (Source).

Abel frowned. “Solyndra’s business model did not account for the falling cost of making solar panels or the state support that panel manufacturers were being given in China. The Obama administration paid more attention to its own ideology rather than the economic and political facts. But that’s a common mistake. The financial crisis developed because policymakers like former Fed Chair Alan Greenspan was ‘blinded’ by his faith in the free market” (Source – video). People act based on their convictions.”

Cain shrugged. “Hmmm, good point. In fact, that’s a great argument for a minimum of regulation. Policymakers pay more attention to their ideologies when they make decisions. Or they favor their political friends. The Sackler family, the owners of Purdue Pharma, the makers of Oxycontin – they escaped responsibility for their actions for years (Source). They were generous contributors to both civic and political organizations. Policymakers on both sides of the aisle overlooked their role in the growing opioid crisis. Is that evidence of an authoritarian state or just plain old ‘machine’ politics?”

Abel replied, “I think the authors would say it’s a matter of degree. One or two examples of favoritism, or judicial prosecution does not indicate a slide into authoritarianism. It’s an accumulation of evidence. I guess its like in civil court cases. It’s a preponderance of the evidence.”

Cain argued, “But by then, when the evidence has accumulated, it’s too late. The autocrat has taken over the systems of government. Right? So many things in life are a matter of degree. ”

Abel nodded. “I guess you’re right. That’s why I often hear some version of the ‘slippery slope’ argument. Is the banning of the sale of bump stocks an abrogation of second amendment rights and a step on the road to tyranny or is it a reasonable response to the invention of digital printers?”

Cain crumpled his napkin. “It depends on my political bias or passion for a particular issue. People on the opposite side of an issue or the political aisle are more likely to see a single incident like bump stocks as a threat to individual freedom.”

Abel gave a short laugh. “It sounds like we are agreeing on something.”

Cain smiled. “I think I speak for a group that is naturally skeptical of the power of group thinking. A person might have what sounds like a good idea. Then it gets distorted. Take Darwin’s idea of evolution by natural selection. Policymakers here in America used that idea to justify eugenics. An earlier theory was Lamarckism, the idea that use or disuse of a part of the body was passed on to succeeding generations (Source). Policymakers justified taking American Indian children from their families and training them to be ‘civilized.’ They would then pass those traits on to their offspring.”

Abel looked up as a crow flew into the tree near them. “Yeah, Levitsky and Way stress how powerful a government is. There has to be checks on that power to protect people and businesses. The richest nations are capitalist because it’s an economic system that minimizes the role of government.”

Cain nodded. “I like that. Government needs to be smaller than it is.”

Abel replied, “That’s easy to say, but imagine you are trying to apply for Social Security or resolve some problem related to that. Some things have to be handled in person. Musk and DOGE are planning to close fifty Social Security offices (Source). So, you’ve worked a lifetime. You’ve paid taxes into the system, and you just want someone to handle the problem. How fair is that?”

Cain shrugged. “The way you put it, no, it’s not fair. Most people use computers or smartphones. A person with a problem could just start a chat with a Social Security representative. We need to design apps that make such interactions easy. Facial recognition, maybe some other biometric identification tools for security. Private institutions like banks have been closing branches as many people migrate to online banking. Government needs to do the same.”

Abel set his coffee cup down. “Last week you said that Americans accept the reality that politicians lie. As we said goodbye, you said I didn’t have enough faith in the American people. Those two sentiments contradict each other, if you ask me.”

Cain shook his head. “I didn’t mean that Americans are cynical. We guard our freedom. We’re more suspicious of power than European democracies, I think. We’re more feisty and non-conformist compared to European sensibilities. I think the Democratic Party has become more conformist in the past decade or so.”

Abel frowned. “Trump has taken over the Republican Party because they fall in line. They champion the ‘party over person’ idea. Even if you don’t like a politician personally, vote along party lines because a unified party is how policy gets enacted in this country. Trump could never take over the Democratic Party because it’s like herding cats. Like Trump, Obama was a charismatic leader, and he struggled to corral the diverse sentiments in the party.”

Cain nodded. “OK, good point. But no one is requiring people to vote Republican. The woke movement is all about conformity to certain language like the use of pronouns. Then they make policies that require students and employees to take the DEI classes. It’s indoctrination. That’s what Huxley warned about in Brave New World (Source).”

Abel scoffed. “In 1945, Sinatra made a short film denouncing racism that was called The House I Live In (Source – video). Was that DEI training or some mind control? No. It was in response to the prejudices when soldiers from different faiths and backgrounds came together to fight World War 2. This country is big. A lot of different people, races, religions. It’s about not putting up with bigotry and sexism when we encounter it on college campuses or some corporate headquarters in Manhattan.”

Cain argued, “As to diversity, there are a lot of factions in the Republican Party. Trump averaged about 40% approval ratings in his first term (Source). Why? Because the party is not conformist. There’s MAGA and traditional conservatives like Mitt Romney and the libertarian Rand Paul faction and the Freedom Caucus. Under Trump’s leadership, the party is now attracting more voters from the Democratic side. Republicans are against DEI because it’s forced indoctrination.”

Abel sighed as he closed the paper bag that had held their breakfast. “I look forward to these weekly talks because they challenge my viewpoint. I just don’t think we are going to get anywhere on this. DEI is about acting with some civility and responsibility, not some futuristic mind control.”

Cain smiled as he stood up. “It’s the slippery slope, isn’t it? Some see DEI as a step to an authoritarian government. Others see it as benign.”

Abel slid to the side on his bench seat. “Some see Trump’s actions as a path to autocracy. Some see it as a remedy for a bloated bureaucracy. Hey, at least we found some agreement this week. That’s a step forward.”

Cain laughed. “Is that one step on the road to total agreement? Hey, I’m glad we got together here in the park. I’ll see you next week.”

Abel waved. “Take care.”

///////////////////

Image by Chat GPT in response to the prompt “draw an image of a group of people sliding down a slippery slope with alarm on their faces.”

Arbitrary Power

Leave a comment

March 9, 2025

by Stephen Stofka

This is part of a series of debates on centralized power. The debates are voiced by Abel, a Wilsonian with a faith that government can ameliorate social and economic injustices to improve society’s welfare, and Cain, who believes that individual autonomy, the free market and the price system promote the greatest good.

As Abel paused next to the restaurant booth, Cain bumped into him from behind. Cain asked, “What’s up?”

Abel said, “They still haven’t fixed the lump in the seat that was there last week.”

Cain shrugged. “I can sit there, if you like.”

Abel pointed to a booth in the corner. “Let’s try that one.”

As they slid into their seats, Cain joked, “I thought you didn’t like change.”

Abel smiled. “Many of us like consistency in our daily lives. I don’t understand how you and others want that in daily life, yet root for drastic change in government policy. Elon Musk with his chainsaw approach to downsizing government. Trump with his on again, off again tariffs.”

Cain nodded when the waitress stopped by with two glasses of water and a pot coffee. “Look, a President has to negotiate with his own government, with Congress, with foreign powers. Trump is using the tools available to him as the head of the executive branch.”

Abel raised his eyebrows as he sipped from his coffee cup. “Many of those ‘tools,’ as you call them, are probably illegal.”

Cain replied, “What’s legal and illegal is up the courts to decide. An executive has to act on a shorter time scale than the deliberate pace of the courts. Trump is a decisive executive.”

Abel interrupted, “Who changes his mind from day-to-day. Tariffs on, tariffs off. Erratic foreign policy with the European countries who are part of the NATO alliance. Building a luxury resort on the Gaza strip. It’s sheer lunacy.”

Cain looked up as the waitress stopped by, pen and ticket book in hand. “Number two for me, over medium, pancakes. Number five for him, scrambled…” He paused to look at Abel. “Pancakes, right?”

Abel nodded and said to the waitress. “My friend here is trying to be decisive today.”

Cain continued after the waitress moved on to serve another table. “Trump is trying to resolve tough issues that have gone unresolved for decades. NATO now has 32 countries (Source – U.N.), far more expansive in scope than after World War II when it was a defensive alliance of western European powers and the U.S. At that time, the U.S. had a deep interest in curbing military conflict that might lead to a nuclear third world war. Those days are gone. Same with the Gaza strip. Israel has occupied that since the Six Day War against Israel in 1967 (Source). How many solutions have been tried? As Shakespeare said, ‘Let me count the ways.””

Abel laughed. “Quoting Shakespeare like a scholar and ordering my breakfast like an executive all in one morning. Look, America is the oldest democracy because it has checks and balances that promote incremental policymaking. Change happens slowly. That frustrates people on both sides of the political aisle, but it provides a stability that the rest of the world admires and relies on. Trump is a bully, flexing his muscles to show how powerful he is. He is going to provoke a crisis then spend all his time blaming other people for the crisis.”

Cain shook his head. “I appreciate your point about stability, but our country is like a ship locked in Arctic ice. Too many policies and positions have been frozen for decades. Trump is trying to break free of these. Sure, there is going to be some breakage but its better than the status quo.”

Abel put down his fork. “The cure will be worse than the disease. Musk with his chainsaw approach to downsizing government. The defense department deleted 26,000 images with descriptive text that had the word ‘gay’ in it. In the process, they deleted images of the Enola Gay, the bomber that released the atomic bomb on Hiroshima.”

Cain equivocated. “Look I agree that a broad rule like that can have some embarrassing exceptions, but it’s several photos out of 26,000.”

Abel argued, “Computer algorithms are powerful tools but need to be deployed by people who understand the consequences of those algorithms. There is no adult supervision in the room. Musk is busy doing photo ops. Trump is busy signing pieces of paper his staff put in front of him. No one is supervising the whiz kids feeding algorithms into the government computers that pay seniors and veterans Social Security.”

Cain mopped up syrup on his plate with a finger. “There was plenty of human supervision on the rollout of the health exchanges under Obamacare. What was that? 2014? Jennifer Pahlka wrote about that disaster in her book ‘Recoding America’ (Source). A lot of the people working on that project didn’t have the skills or experience. What were they doing there? They knew the art of applying for a government job, if you ask me.”

Abel sighed. “You know Richard Dawkins, the evolutionary biologist? On his Substack The Poetry of Reality he objected to claims that sex is not binary (Source). He distinguished between sex, a biological reality determined by our gametes at conception, and gender, a language convention. Like which adjectives and pronouns to use with different nouns.”

Cain interjected, “I like that idea.”

Abel nodded. “Some groups blur the distinction between sexual identity, an innate characteristic, with gender identity, a socially constructed belief like religion. Government can’t impose religious rules on Americans. It shouldn’t impose rules regarding gender identity either.”

Cain replied, “Yeah, rules need to be based on objective facts.”

Abel replied, “So now we have a President who spouts imaginary facts that he wants to impose on the rest of us. It’s his subjective reality, just like a man who thinks he’s a woman. The objective reality is that the U.S. has spent $100 billion helping Ukraine (Source). Trump says it is $350 billion (Source). He wants everyone else to acknowledge his subjective sense of reality as a test of loyalty. Trans advocates want others to acknowledge a sexual identity that is fluid, not fixed at birth. That’s also a loyalty test, but to the ‘woke’ movement. Trump bad-mouths the woke movement but uses the same loyalty strategy as the woke movement. Because Trump is President, it’s a display of arbitrary power.”

Cain shook his head. “I don’t think Trump actually believes half of the facts that he says. It’s just rhetoric he uses in the political poker game.”

Abel replied, “So you admit he lies.”

Cain shrugged. “All politicians lie. The public is used to it.”

Abel objected, “But how does a person know if Trump believes his lie or is using it as a bargaining chip? It’s all subjective. No one can know what Trump believes. That’s what he wants. Reality is arbitrary. That’s what autocratic leaders like Putin, Xi, Hungary’s Orban and Venezuela’s Maduro do. They cut the connection with objective reality. Anyone who disagrees with them is just being political or disloyal.”

Cain tapped his plate once. “I keep hearing that Trump is an autocrat, destroying democracy. FDR issued over 3700 executive orders during three terms (Source). Trump issued 220 during his first term.”

Abel interrupted, “He’s issued 75 in just the first six weeks of his Presidency. At that pace, he would have about 600 orders in a year, 2400 in a four-year term.”

Cain argued, “FDR had 99 in his first 100 days.” (Source)

Abel disagreed, “Look, the country was in the middle of the Great Depression. Unemployment was 25% or so. People were desperate. A lot of those orders were FDR’s attempt to bring relief to a suffering public. There is no comparison with today.”

Cain said, “Trump’s trying to undo almost 100 years of the gigantic government movement that FDR started. It may take as many executive orders to undo that legacy as FDR signed.”

Abel shook his head. “After Trump has finished his coup and there are only the tattered shreds of our democracy left, his supporters will complain that they just wanted Trump to shake things up, not blow up the system. By then, it will be too late.” Abel slid out of his seat. “I’ll pick up the check. The public is going to get poorer as Trump and his cronies get richer.”

Cain looked up as Abel stood. “I have more faith in Americans than you do, I think.”

Abel raised his eyebrows as he looked to the street. “I hope you’re right, my friend. I’ll see you next week.”

//////////////////

Image by ChatGPT in response to the prompt draw an image of a roulette wheel with the label “Reality” inscribed on it

The Battle of the Big Robots

Leave a comment

March 2, 2025

by Stephen Stofka

In this week’s conversation Abel and Cain discuss current events and two theories of international relations – realism and liberalism.

Abel looked out the window of the restaurant onto the busy street. He fidgeted on the bench seat in the booth opposite Cain.

Cain sensed his discomfort. “Is it too bright for you?”

Abel shook his head and shifted closer to the window. “No, there’s a bit of a lump in the bench seat cushion.” He gave a quick laugh. “A Trump lump. Trump’s transactional style is forcing European countries to shift their diplomatic positions.”

Cain took a sip from his coffee cup. “It’s about time that they shouldered some of the burden for their own defense. After World War II, America wanted a larger security role to avoid a large-scale military build up that led to the first two world wars. But that was 75 to 80 years ago. Trump is renegotiating those post-war agreements.”

Abel slipped a cube of ice into his coffee. “I never thought I would see the day when the US voted with Russia and North Korea and against most other countries in the U.N. Trump is building an autocracy the same way that Putin did in the early years of his reign.”

Cain shrugged. “The U.S. often stands alone in support of Israel in the U.N. This vote is not a slippery slope to autocracy. It’s a pragmatic vote. Trump does not want to aggravate Russia ahead of negotiations over a peace in Ukraine.”

Abel said. “There are too many principles being sacrificed to pragmatism if you ask me. The U.S. stands with Israel to recognize its democracy, its sovereignty and its right to exist. Russia and North Korea represent what George Bush once called an “axis of evil.” You say that Trump is placating the devil to better his bargaining position.”

Cain motioned for more coffee. “International relations is a system built on anarchy. Each country claims to be the final authority. It’s a high stakes poker game and sometimes countries have to bargain with their enemies.”

Abel thought for a moment. “It’s a dog-eat-dog world, you’re saying. That’s the realist approach to international relations. That analysis sees national states as big robots on the world stage. They are the primary actors, motivated by concerns about their own security, sovereignty, and interests. John Mearsheimer is the most widely read proponent of that type of analysis.”

Cain interrupted, “Yeah, that’s his name. In the early 1990s after the collapse of the Soviet Union, there were worries that terrorist groups might get a hold of Ukraine’s nuclear weapons. Ukraine transferred more than 2000 nuclear weapons to Russia and the U.S. helped dismantle Ukraine’s nuclear facilities (Source). It was Mearsheimer who said that Ukraine, being next door to Russia, should not give up its nuclear weapons. He got a lot of guff for that. Ukraine would be in a more advantageous bargaining position if they had kept their nuclear weapons.”

Abel nodded. “Maybe Mearsheimer’s perspective is the better analysis, but that perspective assumes that we are little more than lions and hyenas fighting over a kill on the African plains. Two world wars and a 45-year cold war have taught us that our ability to fight has become too destructive. We won’t survive as a species unless we cooperate. The nations of the world must build common ground based on social relationships, shared values and democratic institutions. Trump is upending that entire project.”

Cain shook his head. “You’re talking about liberalism, the theory that states are defined by geographical borders but operate within the constraints of their civilian institutions, you know, like shared norms, the right of the people to choose their own government.”

Abel nodded. “Yeah, and human rights. The importance of NGOs, non-governmental organizations like CARE, Feed the Children and Doctors Without Borders (Source).”

Cain interrupted, “It’s an aspirational theory but we are left with ugly truths about human nature, state actors and power. As Russia and China have gained in economic and political strength, they have reasserted their desire to increase their sphere of influence. Putin wants to rebuild the former Soviet Union. China wants control of Taiwan. They are building bases in the South China sea, creating conflict with the Philippines and Vietnam.”

Abel smiled. “So, this lump in my seat cushion is not Trump, it’s a cancer of the human spirit, huh? Geez, I hope we’re better than that or we’re doomed. Should we not try to build a world based on cooperation and compassion?”

Cain shrugged as he took a sip of coffee. “We can try but the ugly reality is that resources are not distributed evenly around the world. Russia has little access to open water during the winter. To Putin, the Crimea Peninsula in the Black Sea is vital to Russia’s security (Source). Russia, China, and Iran have deep memories of European aggression. The western powers can’t just say “oh, we’re going to be good now” and expect other countries to trust that rhetoric.”

Abel asked, “You’re saying that we can’t overcome the national memories of past conflicts? That we’re doomed to endless feuding like the Hatfields and McCoys? There is an underlying cynicism in that analysis that is just too pessimistic for me. Besides, consensus is so much more efficient than conflict.”

Cain frowned. “Talk about consensus. At the Munich Security Conference this month, J. D. Vance scolded those European nations that have been willing to sacrifice individual freedom for the sake of consensus (Source – video). A forced consensus is more of a characteristic of totalitarian governments.”

Abel shook his head in disgust. “Imagine if Macron or some other European leader came over here and started lecturing Americans on their policies regarding freedom of speech. J. D. Vance is the personification of American hubris. A pompous preacher. The satirist Stephen Fry remarked that freedom of speech is a step to justice and fairness, not an end in itself (Source, 2:40). Unlike Americans, the European protection of speech emphasizes freedom and responsibility (Source). Individuals have a responsibility to the group. It’s not a one-way street. But don’t look for the word ‘responsibility’ in the American Constitution. It’s not  there (Source). Maybe Americans could learn something about responsibility from Europeans on this topic.”

Cain scoffed. “Yeah, right, responsibility. How about Europeans being responsible for their own defense? Vance reminded them of that responsibility. The U.S. is $36 trillion in debt. American taxpayers can’t keep footing the bill for Europe’s defense so they can give European citizens generous social service programs. The French retire at 62! When the EU was forming thirty years ago, the defense target was 3% of each country’s GDP. Many of them haven’t even been spending 2% of GDP. The U.S. is spending almost 4% of GDP on defense. The European nations have not been doing their part. Free riders. They needed a good old swift kick in the can.”

Abel asked, “Do you think Trump wants to end NATO?”

Cain shrugged. “Who knows. He’s not in love with the organization. That’s for sure. The U.S. has other concerns, particularly in Asia. Ukraine was never in America’s security interest. Mearsheimer made that point after Russia took Crimea in 2014 (Source). Expanding NATO to include countries like Ukraine and Georgia just make Russia uncomfortable. The old saying is ‘don’t poke the bear.’”

Abel shook his head. “So, you agree with Trump that Ukraine started the war?”

Cain replied, “No, Trump’s brain is jumbled up with the last thing he heard on TV. But Ukraine could have stayed neutral instead of seeking a security alliance with NATO. Wake up, Ukraine! You’re next door to Russia and you have no nuclear weapons anymore. Stay neutral. Like I said, ‘don’t poke the bear.’”

Abel signaled for the check. “You’re depressing me.”

Cain laughed. “Hey, it’s not me. International relations is a study in power. Nation states are like big robots with national leaders pulling switches and levers inside the big machines.”

Abel smiled. “Reminds me of The Big O animation series (Source). Grim.”

Cain stood up. “I’ll catch the check and see you next week.”

Abel scootched to the outside of his seat. “Another eventful week, I’m sure. See you next week.”

 ////////////

Image by ChatGPT in response to the prompt “draw an image of two big robots facing off against each other.”

The Magical Beast

Leave a comment

February 23, 2025

by Stephen Stofka

This is second in a series on centralized power. I decided to use a more conventional narrative rather than the debate format of previous posts. Research on this topic upset my “apple cart” of preconceptions regarding spending, taxes, and Republican support for some social programs. I survived.

Proponents of smaller government aim to restrain the growth of government spending by reducing tax revenue. In a 1981 Address to the Nation shortly after taking office, President Ronald Reagan first proposed the idea. If Congress would not cut back spending, then reducing tax revenues would force them to cut spending. As many political leaders did, Reagan assumed that the public would not tolerate the nation running large fiscal deficits. For most of the eight years he was in office, government spending stayed fairly constant at about 22% of GDP and the federal deficit remained at the same percent of GDP as during Jimmy Carter’s term. After 9-11, the public’s tolerance for deficits grew. The feckless Bush administration promised that Iraqi oil production would pay for the costs of invading the country. In 2003, the Republican Congress passed tax cuts and Bush won reelection despite the many failures of the Iraqi invasion. This time, he did so without the help of the conservative justices on the Supreme Court. It was the last time a Republican would win the popular vote until the election of Donald Trump in 2024.

A 2006 analysis by Christina and David Romer found little support for the Starve the Beast hypothesis and suggested that lowering taxes may, in fact, increase spending. In a 2006 paper, William Niskanen, former head of the Cato Institute, found that spending and tax revenues moved in opposite directions. One of the pathways for this phenomenon may be that taxpayers come to disconnect the two forces, taxes and spending, and don’t hold politicians responsible. For a politician, cutting taxes is a popular brand but they keep their seats by “bringing home the bacon” for their constituents. A farming community does not want to see decreases in crop subsidies or favorable tax breaks. Voters magnify the burden of spending cuts, feeling as though they are shouldering more of the burden than other voter groups.

In his second term, Donald Trump has adopted a different approach – kill the beast. Readers of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies will remember the scene where a mob mentality overtakes a group of shipwrecked boys and they start a feverish chant after a hunt, “Kill the pig, spill its blood.” The cuts that Musk and his DOGE team are making on the federal work force resemble less the precision of a surgeon and more the frantic swinging of a knife in the dark. They have targeted recent hires with few job protections and paid little attention to what those workers do. In their zeal to kill or wound the bloated government – the beast – they have laid off nuclear safety and food safety workers,  infectious disease specialists and IRS workers near the height of tax filing season. Both Musk and Trump are among the wealthy elite. Neither is dependent on a tax refund.

In his recently published book Why Nothing Works: Who Killed Progress—and How to Bring It Back, Marc J. Dunkelman recounts the expansion of the federal government, starting with the Progressive movement that began under Theodore Roosevelt’s administration over a hundred years ago. The movement embodies two instincts that are in constant tension, a “progressive schism” whose roots began when the nation was founded (pg. 22). Alexander Hamilton favored a strong central government whose institutions could facilitate the commerce and defense of the new American republic. Thomas Jefferson believed that the integrity and character of the new nation depended on the yeoman farmer, who must be protected from the power of government. Jefferson was horrified by the abuses of a strong British government headed by a monarch.

Progressives want to expand the reach of government – the Hamiltonian instinct – but are fearful of the power of government – the Jeffersonian instinct. The struggle between these two sentiments frustrates the aims of the Progressive movement. Progressives’ “cultural aversion to power renders government incompetent, and incompetent government undermines progressivism’s political appeal” (pg. 15).

For more than a century conservatives in both political parties have tried to check the ambitions of the progressives and the expansion of the federal government. For almost a century following the civil war, southern Democrats fought to preserve their political dominance and cultural institutions from the imposition of reformist norms by “northern elites.” There is still a strong antipathy to federal power but most of us have adapted to and enjoy federal institutions created by progressive legislation. Millions of Americans enjoy our national parks and monuments but over a century ago, local groups protested federal interference in the management of lands within state boundaries like Yellowstone Park, Glacier National Park and Grand Canyon National Park.

We no longer argue over child labor laws introduced by progressives in the early 20th century. Though popular today, conservative groups fought against the Social Security program when it was first introduced in the 1930s. Congressional Republicans, however, were largely unopposed, according to this 1966 interview with George Bigge. Opposition to “socialized medicine” stymied proponents of a Medicare type system first proposed in 1942. In the 1950s, President Eisenhower initially supported a health plan financed through the Social Security system but dropped his endorsement over objections that the program was a slippery slope to socialized medicine (Source). Wilbur Mills, the powerful Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, overcame Republican opposition to the Medicare program by introducing a Part B system for physician payments that would be voluntary. Many of us make an uneasy truce with federal power when those policies produce a net gain for our well-being, or there are limits to federal mandates.

This week, Donald Trump completed the first month of his second presidential term with a whirlwind of federal job cuts and controversial remarks. The first ninety days of a presidential term are said to be the honeymoon period when public opinion is still forming but recent polls by Quinnipiac University and CNN indicate that initial favorable sentiment has soured. More respondents disapprove of Trump’s policies than approve. Trump has promised to downsize both spending and taxes but preserve the Social Security and Medicare programs. Both programs are popular, as many voters feel that people have earned the benefits after a lifetime of paying taxes. The taxes, or dues, come first; the benefits come later.

There are no dues for the Medicaid program which provides health care insurance for low-income households. The federal government and states share the costs of this program in varying degrees, with the federal government picking up the majority of the costs. The Republican majority in the House has proposed $880 billion in cuts to the Medicaid program and Trump has expressed support for the cuts, surprising some Republican lawmakers and Trump’s own staff.

Trump acts with the impulsiveness of a 14-year-old boy. In an earlier age, the public wanted a stable hand in control of a vast nuclear arsenal. Thirty years after the end of the Cold War, voters seemed less concerned with Trump’s erratic behavior. Some excuse it as a negotiating ploy; others see it as a tactical maneuver. In Washington, where everyone has a “loaded weapon,” so to speak, Trump presents a moving target. Others see the policy moves as sheer incompetence. Over a thousand employees at the National Park Service were laid off and seasonal hiring was frozen (Source). Oops. Seasonal employees fight forest fires and clean bathrooms at National Parks. The Trump administration did an about face and promised to hire even more seasonal employees than the Biden administration did (Source). The daily two-step is a boon for news organizations and pundits. Lots of copy. Not a dull moment in the 24-hour news cycle.

Advocates may clamor for the death of the beast – the government – but many of the functions that the beast provides are popular. In 1963, the folk group Peter, Paul and Mary released the song Puff, the Magic Dragon. Although Puff was an eternal creature, his friend Jackie Paper eventually lost interest in Puff as he grew up. After his friend abandoned him, Puff lost all his vigor and retreated into his cave by the sea. Some wish that the federal government would do the same. Lobbyist Grover Norquist wished that government would become so small that “we can drown it in a bathtub” (Source). Unlike Jackie Paper, the majority of the public has not outgrown its affection for government programs or its belief in the magic of government power.

//////////////////

Image by ChatGPT at the suggestion “draw a picture of a multi-colored dragon on the shore of the ocean with a cliff behind him.”

A Debate on Presidential Power

Leave a comment

February 16, 2025

by Stephen Stofka

This is part of a series on centralized power. This week’s debate is about the power of the President relative to the other branches of the federal government. The debates are voiced by Abel, a Wilsonian with a faith that government can ameliorate social and economic injustices to improve society’s welfare, and Cain, who believes that individual autonomy, the free market and the price system promote the greatest good.

Abel began the conversation. “Our country is founded on the principle of federalism, a sharing of power between the states and a centralized government in Washington. In that central authority are three branches that balance and check each other’s ambitions for power. It looks like Trump is challenging those restraints.”

Cain shrugged. “The Speaker of the House doesn’t seem worried. The Congress hasn’t been able to get anything done. It’s been almost thirty years since Congress completed a full budget (Source – pdf). The executive branch is stuck with the burden of implementing years of legislative compromises. It is entirely appropriate that the President clean up the mess.”

Abel shook his head in disbelief. “Trump is taking control of the purse, a power given to Congress by the Constitution. Doesn’t it worry you that a Democratic president could simply undo any laws passed by a Republican legislature?”

Cain looked puzzled. “If the President gets out of line, the Constitution gives Congress the power to impeach the President.”

Abel laughed. “Trump has already been impeached twice. Never in the history of this country has the Senate convicted a President. Impeachment is an empty threat. After the Supreme Court’s decision to grant the President immunity from criminal prosecution, the President can act like a king.”

Cain frowned. “FDR expanded the scope of the executive when he took office in 1933. Did your group sound the alarm then? Did you cry ‘Constitutional crisis’ when Roosevelt threatened to pack the Supreme Court to get his way? No, your group stood by silently as Roosevelt upended 150 years of tradition. This President is trying to undo that shameful legacy, to return this country to its founding roots.”

Abel showed his disdain. “He is undoing a century of building government institutions that help people, that protect people from the power of large corporations. This is not the America of the 18th century.”

Cain argued, “They are inefficient government institutions that swear allegiance not to the people they serve but Washington lobbyists and their own internal processes. We have a spending crisis. The Constitution gives the President the executive power. Alexander Hamilton argued for a strong executive and President Trump embodies Hamilton’s vision.”

Abel sighed. “You’re talking about the unitary executive theory. Advocates for that theory take Hamilton out of context. He wanted to convince those in the state legislatures that the strong executive in the proposed Constitution was preferred to the weak plural executive that had been defined in the Articles of Confederation. Hamilton was not advocating for a President with all the powers of a king. The country had fought seven bloody years to rid themselves of a king.”

Cain shook his head. “Look, Washington and Jefferson set the example. They were strong Presidents who sat at the top of the executive hierarchy. They didn’t ask Congress for permission. They defined their role as the chief executive of the laws.”

Abel interrupted. “Ok, but the executive branch was small in the early 19th century. Employees worked at the whim of the President. As the country grew, there needed to be more stability in the executive work force. Congress wanted more control or supervision of the various departments. After all, it is Congress who writes the laws. Congress represents the people. The President is the people’s agent, executing the laws that the representatives of the people have passed.”

Cain held up his hand. “Look, you’re describing a clerk, not the leader of a country. Hamilton was arguing for a leader with enough power to meet threats from other countries led by monarchs with absolute power.”

Abel argued, “That was another century when even the mightiest rulers had relatively little firepower at their command. We have invented weapons that are too destructive to put at any person’s command. There have to be checks and balances within the executive just as there are within the legislative and judicial branches.”

Cain shook his head. “The more destructive the weapons, the more we need a strong leader with the authority and power to act decisively to answer any threats from other countries.”

Abel frowned. “There has to be checks and balances within each branch. That’s especially true for the executive. All previous empires have fallen because one person gained too much power. Rome, Persia, Egypt, and Byzantium come to mind. There are too many temptations. A President with control of the Bureau of Labor Statistics would be able to adjust the monthly unemployment numbers or inflation report to make his administration look good. Argentina did this for seven years (Source). China, Venezuela and Hungary do it. He could disallow the counting of some of the population by the Census Bureau to reduce some grant funding for states who did not vote for him.

Cain scoffed. “There are checks and balances between Congress and the Executive. If a President were to ‘cook the books,’ that information would be leaked. The Congress could impeach the President.”

Abel’s expression was stern. “When the founders wrote the impeachment rules, they envisioned a system without political parties. In a party system, the President is the leader of the party. Impeachment is not a check. If the House is the same party as the President, they dare not bring their leader up on impeachment charges. A Democratic-led House would not impeach Andrew Jackson in 1833. All the anti-Jacksonian majority in the Senate could do was censure Jackson.”

 Cain argued, “In 1868, the Republican-led House impeached Andrew Johnson.”

Abel shook his head. “Johnson was a Democrat who ran with Lincoln on a third-party ticket called the Union Party (Source).”

Cain’s tone of voice was conceding. “Ok, maybe impeachment is not the ideal check on a President. But they pay attention to popular opinion. If the public is outraged, they will complain to their representatives. Presidents care about public opinion.”

Abel showed a wry smile. “George Bush’s poll numbers fell as low as 25% (Source). What did that accomplish? There is an entire phalanx of advisors who shield the President from disheartening news. A President lives in an information bubble designed to protect his self-confidence.”

Cain argued, “Well, there are no checks on the Supreme Court. They have lifetime tenure and the last one to be impeached was in 1805 (Source). They control their own agenda. The House and Senate make up their own rules (Source) and have no internal Constitutional checks. In the Senate, the Majority Leader controls all the floor time. If he doesn’t want some legislation brought to the floor, it isn’t considered. The President should have the same authority over officials in the executive branch. He should be able to direct them on how he wants the law executed. His decisions should not be subject to review by a court.”

Abel frowned. “You’re describing the unitary executive theory again. It grants the President most of the powers of a king. We know that Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison and the other founders did not want a king. This country rejected rule by the whim of one person, the king. We are a nation of laws, not whims. Trump and Musk are two rich crackpots who dance to the music of their own whims. The wolves in Russia and China are licking their chops. By the time Trump is done, this country will be weaker.”

Cain scoffed. “This country was already weak. That’s what the President is trying to fix. The country has $36 trillion dollars in debt. We’re spending more on interest than we do on defense. We play mister nice guy, letting other countries take advantage of our charity, then vote against our interests in the U.N. DOGE is going to trim the discretionary items in the budget then look to implement fraud controls in mandatory spending programs like Medicare and Medicaid. Trump has shown he’s a tough negotiator.”

Abel laughed. “Trump changes his mind from day to day, from week to week. It’s a sign of weakness that Putin and Xi will take advantage of.”

Cain shook his head. “The President dances like Muhammed Ali in the ring. That’s what we need. A fighter who keeps other countries hesitant to make any aggressive moves. That’s the road to a cautious peace.”

Abel sighed. “It’s only a few weeks since Trump took office. He will leave a trail of chaos and carnage and half of the people in this country won’t hold him responsible.”

Cain laughed. “And the other half of the country thinks he’s the devil. That says more about all of us than it does President Trump. We’ll talk next week.”

//////////////////

Image by ChatGPT

The scene is set in a grand hall with tall columns, chandeliers, and intricate tapestries. A majestic king is seated on a grand throne, dressed in luxurious royal robes adorned with gold and jewels. Several people kneel before him in deep reverence, wearing medieval-style clothing.

The Carousel of Political Appointees

Leave a comment

February 9, 2025

by Stephen Stofka

This Super Bowl weekend, I’ll take a short break from the debate series and take a brief look at the Federal workforce. Next week I hope to have a debate on the Central Power of the Federal Government.

Since Donald Trump took the oath of office on January 20th, he has enlisted Elon Musk to head an effort to trim the civilian federal workforce (CFW). These employees do not include the men and women serving in the Armed Forces. Musk leads an unofficial department called the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) designated by President Trump to root out “waste, fraud and abuse.” Several lawsuits have challenged the authority and methods of DOGE to make personnel decisions. Several DOGE employees have access to personal credit and medical information but have not passed a background check (Source). This is a fluid situation sparking controversies each day. I wanted to understand the structure of the CFW as a context for this evolving story.

CFW employees fall into one of two categories: competitive service workers who must pass examinations to be hired and advance within the organization, and political appointees who are excepted from such requirements. The former are permanent or career employees and serve under several Presidential administrations regardless of the party of the President. This system promotes stability within a shifting political environment and was a response to the former system of patronage. The latter are temporary employees and leave the CFW when a new President takes office. Within each classification, there are several subcategories. For interested readers, I will list the various classes of employees in the notes.

Last summer the Partnership for Public Service published an analysis of 2023 data from the Office of Personnel and Management (OPM), the HR agency of the of the federal government (Source). There were over two million permanent full-time employees in the CFW, an increase of 140,000, or 7% from 2019 levels. OPM lists the current level of the CFW at 2.2 million (Source). The majority of the increase was in response to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed in 2021, the first year of the Biden administration, when the Democrats held a “trifecta,” all three branches of government. The law benefited both red and blue states but has been criticized for the embarrassing flaws in its implementation.

The bill contained $42 billion to expand internet access, particularly to rural areas. Nothing has been connected yet. Over $7 billion was earmarked for electric vehicle charging stations but fewer than fifty have been built. To provide some comparison, consider the case of a Denver suburb that hired HDR, a private company, to complete a full renovation of a county library, expand the building and construct four charging stations (Source). HDR completed the project in three years, roughly the same time period since the passage of the 2021 law. Federal projects are plagued with a cumbersome process that makes delays inevitable and diminishes public confidence in the competence of the federal government. When President Trump and Elon Musk claim that they can fix the problem, their supporters believe them.

President Trump would like to undo much of what his predecessor, President Biden, accomplished. Trump could argue that he is simply resizing the CFW to pre-pandemic levels. According to the Partnership for Public Service, 71% of the CFW is defense or national security related. Twenty-one percent of federal employees are in the Department of Veterans Affairs (Source). Cuts to those programs will be unpopular with MAGA supporters and Republican lawmakers. Fifteen percent are medical personnel, some hired during the Covid crisis, and might become a target for dismissal. Many of those provide medical service to active military and veterans. USAID and the EPA have long been targets of Republican condemnation. Trump says he wants to close USAID. The EPA could be next. In response to several lawsuits, the courts will have to decide whether the executive branch has any authority to eliminate a department or agency created by Congress.

Excluding Postal Service workers, there are 2.2 million employees in the CFW (Source). Only 9000 are political appointees and listed in the OPM’s Plum Book (Source). President Trump wants to follow through on an executive order he signed just before the 2020 election that was rescinded by Biden (Source). That order envisioned a plan to convert 50,000 federal employees into a new type of political appointee called Schedule F that would be loyal to Trump’s policies (Source).  

In his first term, Trump became convinced that career civil service employees were sabotaging the policies of his administration. Political appointees carrying out the policies of then President Trump were frustrated by the delaying tactics of career employees who may not have agreed with those policies (Source). Many career employees have done their jobs for both Democratic and Republican administrations. They would claim that they are loyal to the law, not to any one President. Although Trump took an oath to uphold and faithfully execute the laws, his loyalty is to his opinion and vision, not the law. He follows the tradition of President Nixon, who believed that the three branches of government are not co-equal. Nixon regarded his interpretation of the law as the law.

The appointment system is bit complicated but is designed to balance power and interests. President Trump is used to running a family business and does not like checks and balances because they diminish his power. On the other hand, voters elected the President, and he should be able to have some confidence in the personnel who execute public policy. Career civil service employees are a welcome alternative to the patronage system that existed in the 19th and early part of the 20th century. However, a large class of employees with virtual tenure can become insulated from the public will. Those employees can develop a culture that is resistant to policy changes. Within the context of a CFW of more than two million employees, shifting the status of 50,000 employees can seem modest to some. Does the executive have the authority? Will the courts and Congress stand by while the executive alters a workforce structure constructed by Congress?

///////////////////

Image by ChatGPT

The first type of position are presidential appointees with Senate confirmation (PAS). These positions promote a balance of power between Senators and the President.

The second type of position are Presidential appointees that do not need Senate confirmation. This gives the President the autonomy to build an executive team that will implement the policies he wants. These make up 5% of appointees.

The Senior Executive SES-NA and SES-GEN appointees make up half of the SES class and almost half of all 9000 appointees. The other half of SES employees are filled by career appointees on a competitive basis to ensure some impartiality.

The Schedule C (SC or SL) positions allow agency heads to place key policymakers with some expertise in an agency but only after approval by the Office of Personnel Management, a check on political discretion (Source).

The Schedule C (XS) statutory positions legislated by Congress strike a balance of Presidential discretion and Congressional policymaking. Most of these positions are in agencies with financial functions or international jurisdictions like USAID. They are GS-15 or lower and Congress has exempted them from competitive hiring (Source).