Why did Trump threaten the Freedom Caucus?
We all know the superficial answer to the question of why Trump threatened the Republican members of Congress known as the Freedom Caucus: because they thwarted him in the passage of the Obamacare reform bill (Ryancare, Trumpcare, GOPcare, whatever you want to call it). But his action—that of a new president publicly threatening to oppose and topple an important wing of his own party during the next election—is unusual enough (at least, in this country) to draw attention and questions.
Was it a temper tantrum from a juvenile president angry at not getting his way?
Was it a well-thought-out strategy designed to intimidate and control some members of Congress who were getting too big (and too contrary) for their britches?
Was it payback to the conservatives who failed to back him sufficiently during his campaign?
And will it have any effect at all (other than bringing joy to the hearts of liberals everywhere)? Will it actually intimidate the members of the Freedom Caucus?
I’ll take that last question first: no. For example:
“It didn’t take long for the swamp to drain @realDonaldTrump,” tweeted Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich. “No shame, Mr. President. Almost everyone succumbs to the D.C. Establishment.”…
As for a possible challenge in 2018, [Rep. Trent] Franks said: “If somebody can get to the right of me in the primaries God bless them.”
That response from Franks prompts the question of what sort of candidates would Trump try to replace the Freedom Caucus members with—moderates? Trump lackeys?:
Recruiting primary opponents to run against sitting House Republicans is easier said than done, said Jennifer Duffy, senior editor of The Cook Political Report.
For one thing, it will be hard to find challengers more conservative than many Freedom Caucus members, Duffy said. There also may not be many establishment Republicans willing to be considered “Trump’s candidate” in a tough primary race.
“I think he might believe he can recruit candidates,” she said, “because he’s never actually had to do it.”
There are a lot of things Trump has never done before that he thinks he will be able to do. It’s part of the confidence that reassured and heartened a lot of people who voted for him—that, and his business record. I was not one of those reassured and heartened people, and I’m still not. I’m happy with some of Trump’s moves, particularly the nomination of Gorsuch. And I’m happy, very happy, that Hillary Clinton isn’t president. But there are a lot of “buts.”
Nor am I surprised at these anti-Freedom Caucus tweets of Trump’s (which I feel are empty threats so far). Trump has a long record of attacking and threatening anyone who crosses him, and it goes back way before he entered politics. I agree with this analysis:
Matt Mackowiak, a Republican political consultant based in Texas, said there is “a natural contrast” between Trump and many GOP conservatives, one that may be deeper any side realizes.
“Donald Trump is all about deals and the Freedom Caucus is all about principles,” Mackowiak said. “I’m not sure it can be fixed on health care, and the more frustrated Trump gets, the more likely he will be to try to cut deals with Democrats.”
It’s hard to say how a split would affect the 2018 elections, Mackowiak said, though he added: “A narrower (Republican) majority in the next Congress would make Trump and Ryan’s job even harder than it is now.”
It is my impression that Trump wanted a bill passed, and he wanted to pass it quickly and then to move on to other things. On what points did Trump and the Freedom Caucus disagree? I couldn’t find too many articles on that, but here’s one. It appears to me to be a valid disagreement between the two sides on how reconciliation would work and what the bill would be allowed to cover, but it also seems to me that this was a disagreement that could have been ironed out as the answers to those questions were clarified with more time.
But Trump was determined to rush it:
Mick Mulvaney told Republicans behind the doors behind me, he said that the president wants a vote tomorrow, and is moving on after this vote regardless of what happens.”
A source from within the room told Bash that if the bill doesn’t pass, Trump said “he is moving on, and they will be stuck with Obamacare.”
Another threat that didn’t work. Of perhaps it did work, depending on Trump’s goal. A lot of people (me included) have pointed out that Trump is somewhat to the left on health care reform, and that he probably only added that campaign rhetoric about repealing Obamacare because he figured it would help him win, rather than out of any sense of outrage at Obamacare itself. Therefore his idea of a good system to replace it is not going to resemble the ideas of a conservative, because on this issue he isn’t conservative at all. So perhaps his goal all the time was to get a green light to work with Democrats to tweak Obamacare a bit but essentially leave it in place, and ignore and condemn the conservative wing of the GOP in the process.
However, I have little doubt that, if that’s the case, most of Trump’s more avid supporters will shrug and excuse it—and blame Congress instead.
“… Trump is somewhat to the left on health care reform, and that he probably only added that campaign rhetoric about repealing Obamacare because he figured it would help him win … on this issue he isn’t conservative at all. So perhaps his goal all the time was to get a green light to work with Democrats to tweak Obamacare a bit but essentially leave it in place, and ignore and condemn the conservative wing of the GOP in the process.” – Neo
If true that would be a rather naive approach to governing.
Reagan built broader support in the public and was able to bring some dems onboard for some of his legislative initiatives.
trump has done none of that (though he uniquely has an opportunity to do so), and seems set on alienating even those who could be on his side.
At this point, with all the trump generated brackish / bloody water under the bridge, so to speak, I highly doubt he could bring the dems on side directly without some very high price paid in policy (i.e. calculated by the dems to disrupt trump’s remaining relationship with the GOP).
.
“I have little doubt that, if that’s the case, most of Trump’s more avid supporters will shrug and excuse it–and blame Congress instead.”
Sadly, seems to be the case.
It is no longer merely for shooting someone on 5th Ave., but he could be advocating full blown communism, and folks would still support him, it seems.
Think not? Look at how “RINO!” is being applied, and now the Freedom Caucus are now being labelled “the establishment”.
Up is down, and down is up!
.
But “trump fights!” donchano!
What he is “fighting” for is of no consequence.
Given some of the replacement’s details, it doesn’t seem his discontented dem supporters from the mid-west will be helped (more probably harmed) – the ones that helped trump eek out a win in those swing states.
But, gosh, those darn “RINOs!” are at it again, obstructing progress, obstructing trump, and they “gotta pay for it!” and trump will go after them for their brazen “disloyalty”.
.
Have to say, I thought that the GOP had so easily folded for trump during the campaign that they’d do more of the same when governing.
Maybe those who assured us here, during the campaign, that the GOP and Congress in general, would still be a check on trump’s unbridled power were right.
However, I doubt they thought it would look like this, or that they are happy to see the GOP stand up whatsoever.
Big Maq:
Did you read that WaPo link about the differences the Freedom Caucus had about whether reconciliation made it impossible to put certain things in this bill? Seems to me that the differences between the two sides on this were mainly differences about how reconciliation works and what limits it sets. This disagreement wasn’t so much a check on Trump’s power as an honest and understandable disagreement. Trump made it into a check on his power by his reaction to it.
Battle of the outsiders, or at least those who view themselves as the outsiders. The problem is that they aren’t both on the same wing of the Republican Party.
Trump won the nomination and the presidency by occupying the center that had been abandoned by, primarily, the Democrats. Those in the Freedom Caucus, however, occupy the right side compared to the House and Senate leadership. I think Trump and the FC can make common cause on a lot of issues, but Obamacare and its “replacement” is one where they can’t.
Yancey Ward:
I have the same question for you as I had for Big Maq. See this.
Is it too early to speculate that we might be looking at the beginning of a one term presidency?
KLSmith:
I can imagine that someone on the right could primary Trump in 2020, much like Reagan did Ford in 1976. That person might be no more successful than Reagan was that year, though. Or, I can imagine Trump declining to run in 2020, when he will be 74. It really depends in part on how much he enjoys being president, and whether his health holds up.
KLSmith:
Let me add that, if Trump continues to deeply annoy and insult the GOP right, the right actually could join with Democrats to impeach and convict him. I’m not sure whether there are enough conservatives in the Senate to convict, but if I were an advisor to Trump he would suggest he start counting, and hold off the insults.
Removal of Trump from office would be an embarrassment, but the result would be Pence (a conservative) as president. Not a bad deal as far as the Freedom Caucus is concerned.
I’m with neo in my view of the situation. It may work out but it could easily go very wrong.
I envision something more mundane. He won in a squeaker in 16. Losing by same in 20.
I support the HFC. Why should its members go along with obamacare lite with no guarantees of further legislation ( that Trump would not veto) in the near future to remove the odious elements of the ACA? I am not expecting everything that I want when it comes to health care, but I certainly do expect major reforms to the ACA.
The DC establishment, and that includes both major partys and the lobbyists that buy them, have not earned a scintilla of my trust. I might cautiously walk down that path if the politicians and bureaucrats inside the belt way live with me equally under the laws and regulations they lord over we peasants in flyover country. Until then I am in Defcon 3.
Trump is no conservative, but if he thinks he can be successful without us, he is a more of a BIGLY fool than I ever imagined.
“The Art of the Deal” ~ Donald Trump
“The Art of War” ~ Sun Tzu
Coincidence?
“However, I have little doubt that, if that’s the case, most of Trump’s more avid supporters will shrug and excuse it–and blame Congress instead.”
Well, gosh. As a Trump supporter I’ll say yes, I do blame Congress.
Who writes the bill? Trump? Or you know?
I’ve watched the GOP pass bill after bill repealing 0care while knowing they’d get vetoed. Now, when a bill won’t, somehow they can’t even get a bill through the House.
Would they be able to get a bill thorough if Scott Walker was president? Jeb!? Carly?
I know I’m supposed to assume yes, because conservative. But again the bill gets written in Congress.
The GOP runs Congress, or so I’ve read. Thus, they should have been able to put a proposed law, blessed by all the proper conservatives, on the President’s desk, all ready for an autograph, lickety split after Trump took office. If Trump chose to veto that- well, then point the finger at him.
Until that occurs, no. He isn’t the problem. It’s the people in Congress, who haven’t managed to get their feces in order, despite having almost a decade to do so.
Don’t blame Trump for that.
“This disagreement wasn’t so much a check on Trump’s power as an honest and understandable disagreement. Trump made it into a check on his power by his reaction to it.“ – Neo
Very much the point I was trying to make.
bunion was sent to give an ultimatum. However, those in the FC didn’t collapse.
Having been through this campaign, it wasn’t obvious that the GOP wouldn’t just continue to fold under pressure from trump.
However, this was one of the key arguments many made wrt how we needn’t worry too much about trump over-reaching on presidential power – that Congress would be a “check” on that.
They were right, but probably not in the way they thought.
In fact, so much so, they view the FC as part of “the establishment”, following, as any good acolyte would, trump’s own tweets as such.
“Don’t blame Trump for that.” – Xen
Bought the hook, line, and sinker.
.
trump , as POTUS, gets to drive the priorities and agenda.
trump, with his veto, gets to set the terms of what he will pass.
trump, uniquely, as the megaphone to reach the public.
In sum, trump is the leader of the party that has majority in all elective chambers.
.
No doubt, leadership in Congress, particularly Ryan, deserves their share in the failure, but trump very much owns some share for the failure.
Individually, given the power he has, mentioned above (and others not mentioned), trump probably deserves more than Ryan, if we want to allocate blame according to their ability to affect the outcome.
.
Bottom Line: trump is hardly a “victim”.
If he thinks so, he is far less a leader and much less competent than I thought.
Xennady:
I blame Trump for threatening various consequences to certain people if Congress didn’t vote on this flawed bill immediately, rather than trying to work it out. It was this bill or nothing. And then I blame him afterward for threatening those who hadn’t voted for it.
By pushing the issue too soon, Trump guaranteed the failure of his own bill—one he strongly advocated, that is. Congress writes it, but he doesn’t have to endorse it. He can tell them to take it back to the drawing board if he doesn’t like it. Trump not only liked this bill, he seemed to LOVE it. So if you don’t like the bill, Congress is certainly partly to blame for writing it, but Trump is certainly to blame for approving it and pushing it, and threatening those who didn’t vote for it.
All of that is obvious from my post. And yet you refuse to blame Trump for his own failures and errors.
It’s a fools errand to assign “blame”. Because this requires an assumption that something different could have been done to affect the outcome.
Don’t forget that the Democrats had 20 more members in 2010 when Obamacare passed. The Republicans have 237 members, only giving them a margin of 25– and there are about 36 members of the FC. The odds didn’t look good. The FC were well aware that the bill wasn’t going to get more conservative once it got to the Senate. I think their skepticism that their issues would be addressed was well taken and realized they would get one bite.
The bill also tried to address the guaranteed issue problem by creating a fund to help pay the costs of those with serious catastrophic health issues.
I don’t think anything else could have been done. It’s my understanding that language affecting the EHB was being added to the bill, and while the EHB is a sore point with conservatives, it’s not the major cost driver in insurance premiums.
It’s community rating and guaranteed issue. These two components caused between 30 and 50% (depends on age) of the total increase of about 45 to 69% from 2013 to 2016.
EHB is estimated to contribute about 8%.
The House attempted to address the community rating allowing a 5 times differential between age groups versus the 3 times in the ACA. This is probably more realistic, lowering premiums for the young and raising them for seniors. The House added back means tested subsidies to ameliorate the changes, but critics were pouncing on the fact that premiums would increase for some seniors.
As I said elsewhere, I wondered if Trumps threats would actually have any effect (which they didn’t) because I assume these people come from deeply red districts that are voting on principles. What Trump needs to do is tie their support of the AHCA to legislation that would get administration support– such as reducing the overreach by BLM or other federal agencies. They need to be able to point to something positively conservative that happened in exchange for voting for Obamacare lite.
Another problem with the AHCA is the amount it’s going to reduce premiums. It’s not going to be as significant as the increases have been. And the reductions to the federal budget aren’t going to be as substantial as needed.
It’s the regulations that need to be rolled back as this article points out. Dr. Price has said he’s going to do that regardless of what happens with this bill to the extent that they can be.
http://dailysignal.com/2017/03/23/to-lower-premiums-congress-must-roll-back-obamacare-regulations/
I do think the FC does need to be careful about over playing their position.
While Obamacare was very unpopular when initially passed, the democrats very smartly delayed some of the more onerous parts, kept subsidies higher than they should have been, so the impact to many Americans was negligible.
My health insurance comes from my company and I haven’t seen any change– other than more reticence from my dr. to order tests.
If you joined by using Medicaid, you haven’t seen much change– other than the reality how crappy it can be in some areas.
I think this is evident by the sudden lack of urgency based on polling for changes to the law.
Once again it’s the middle/upper middle class buying insurance on the open market that have gotten hammered.
Obamacare needs to be reigned in to control government subsidies, and to lower premiums to those paying full bore for their insurance.
To answer your question, I submit The Princess Bride.
Man in Black: All right. Where is the poison? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both drink, and find out who is right… and who is dead.
Vizzini: But it’s so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the poison into his own goblet or his enemy’s? Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in Black: You’ve made your decision then?
Vizzini: Not remotely….
I can’t believe Trump thought he could intimidate the FC into supporting the AHCA, so I assume he is setting them up as the fall guys when a more liberal version of replacement is passed next year with the help of democrats.
In the meantime, if they do achieve a compromise bill this year in the House, Trump gets the credit.
So it’s a win-win for Trump.
My reading has lead me to the conclusion the AHCA bill was a very, very poor product.
For that, Ryan is responsible. For the House’s handling of the bill, Ryan is also responsible.
Trump can bellow and mash on the accelerator, but it is up to the House under Ryan.
If anyone is to be impeached, it should be the Speaker of the House.
Neo,
I am not convinced the House leadership or even a majority of the Republicans in Congress want to repeal Obamacare- so, no, I don’t believe this was just a disagreement about how far they could go via reconciliation. I actually agree with the Freedom Caucus in a lot regard to this- it is the leadership in the House and Senate I don’t trust. And I half expect that distrust to reach full blown status is the Democrats do have enough votes to block Gorsuch with a filibuster- I am not convinced they will go nuclear.
I think it too early, though, to think something won’t pass even by the end of Spring. There are some big decisions that have to be made before Summer that will affect the exchanges- specifically whether or not to continue with the appeal to compensate the insurance companies after Congress refused to appropriate the money needed. I am assuming that the Trump Administration will not continue on this, and without that it is likely that most of the insurers left will eventually decide to withdraw from the exchanges.
Yeah yeah, yeah forever…
Is it so diffiicult to see what is wrong with the corruption of DC determining the cost of health care. If so please decide on how you will die. 1, jump off a high building or cliff. 2, drink a container of drano. 3, attack a cop or cops until you commit death by cop. 4. Fill in _________.
Bottom line, djt is perhaps smart and savy in one micro area, but ut in the big world he is an idiot. And those who defend him no matter when he dispalys his ignorance, you join him in being an igorant fool/tool.
Its late and i apologize for tyoo errors.
Isn’t it to be expected that President Trump would have “a rather naive approach to governing”??
He reminds me of every sales manager I ever worked for in the software business. They always think they could do a better job managing the firm than the CEO, but if they do get promoted to the top job they generally run the company into the ground. And often they have no idea what went wrong. It never seems to occur to them to actually study what an executive does. Crafting and closing deals is nothing like executive decision-making.
…in the big world he is an idiot.
Even in his business dealings that applies. How much personal and business debt does he have and to whom is it owed? His flip answer during one of the debates that he loves debt should have been a warning. No wonder he’s willing to target the fiscal conservatives in the FC who could get in his way to trillion dollar New Deal style works projects.
This isn’t about a failed health care bill as much as it’s about his broader populist agenda going forward.
According to the American Enterprise Institute, “The repeal and replace plan – dubbed the American Health Care Act (AHCA) – is structurally sound. It has the major components needed for effective reform of current health care arrangements. The problem is that the plan falls short on several crucial details, details that can and should be changed before the bill clears Congress and goes to the president to become law.”
http://www.aei.org/publication/republicans-should-take-the-time-necessary-to-improve-the-american-health-care-act/
It does need to get out of the House to allow those changes to be made. Remember, the ego of the Senate will not allow a bill to come to them of such scope without them tinkering with it.
I’ve found working with committees you often need to leave elements of a proposal undone so that people can “discover” solutions and add input. That’s just human nature.
The FC did have some input into the house bill. Not enough by their reckoning. But the FC wasn’t and isn’t going to be the main driver of healthcare reform legislation.
Medicaid may be a poor vehicle for allowing the poor to access health care, but it’s the structure that exists. Block granting funds to the states is a conservative principle and may result in continued improvements in how health care is delivered. But in the short term, we’re not going to scrap it.
Will a bill eventually pass? Sure. In the short term, it just delays which year premiums will stabilize and begin to come down.
As to whether or not Trump is an idiot, unless you have a net worth in excess of a billion dollars, I’d suggest you reserve judgment. This very much reminds me of the democrat attitude toward GW Bush. He was the previous idiot that was elected president.
Only, he got elected president, Trump got elected president. I think it’s safe to say that it requires an IQ above an idiot to achieve that.
But if it makes you feel better, Trump got elected by insulting his opponents, so I guess turn about is fair play.
“This isn’t about a failed health care bill as much as it’s about his broader populist agenda going forward.”- The Other Chuck
Yes, this is the first turn at the Belmont Park or the Calgary Stampede or the Mongol Derby.
What a great thing google is. The Mongol Derby is the longest horse race in the world– 1,000 kilometers.
“Isn’t it to be expected that President Trump would have “a rather naive approach to governing”??
…
It never seems to occur to them to actually study what an executive does. Crafting and closing deals is nothing like executive decision-making” – Sarah R
Very interesting point.
One of the biggest selling points was that trump was a CEO of a business empire, and was “successful” at it, and that DC was missing that business acumen and competency.
But I’ve never personally seen a C-level exec who was involved in deal-making that didn’t have a good handle on the issues (maybe not all the way to the minutiae, but certainly enough to understand impact of counter offers).
Doesn’t take much thinking to understand that if he doesn’t, as on what basis could he shake hands on a deal?
.
Seems very true that running a RE empire is nothing like running a “regular” large corporation.
Seems to, in some ways, explain trump’s affinity for debt (as Other Chuck mentions), high risk, “relationships” (e.g. political) and “loyalty” (vs FC), and his “salesmanship” (e.g. the best, greatest, fabulous – over-promising).
“Bottom Line: trump is hardly a “victim”.”
I’m not sure who called Trump a “victim” – not me here and not people at the pro-Trump websites I read.
But I am completely unsurprised to see someone who can’t bring themselves to capitalize his name will pin the blame on him for the failure of an entirely different branch of government to accomplish a basic task.
The repeal of Obamacare has been a key promise of the GOP since that disastrous law was put in force.
Yet the party acts stunned and confused when presented with the opportunity to do so.
Pitiful. That sort of failure is how you ended up with Trump in the place.
Or- if you prefer- trump.
“By pushing the issue too soon, Trump guaranteed the failure of his own bill–one he strongly advocated, that is.”
Too soon?
The GOP had years to prepare for this. It has had control of Congress since the 2014 elections. It has even had months since the latest election to hash out the various internal party disagreements and write a specific law and prepare it for a Presidential signature- months it apparently spent praying the impeachment fairy would make the bad man go away, saving them the trouble.
Not good enough, obviously. Trump will of course get his share of the blame, because the buck ultimately stops with him.
But that ultimate responsibility also gives him something else- an ability to point fingers at his own party to make them get in line. To borrow from someone else, he gets to set the agenda, gets to set the terms of what he will pass, and be the megaphone to reach the public.
That sort of thing rather obviously includes yelling at the freedom caucus, which I expect will survive his wrath rather handily. Perhaps not Speaker Ryan, famously not a Trump fan, who now looks like an incompetent.
The buck stops with Trump- but not yet. Count him a failure when his term ends, not two months into it.
Xennady:
Yes, too soon.
Have you ever been a member of a legislative body? Or even a committee?
And among other things, the personnel in Congress has not been exactly the same for “years.” In fact, the current Congress was only sworn in in January 2017. Only a couple of months ago.
I recently wrote a post on the issue of the speed with which this was done, and also a comment on the different GOP proposals on health care over the years and how it would be difficult to iron out what to actually do once the time came.
“Speed” is a relative term. No one (least of all me) is saying the GOP in Congress should have waited a year or two before taking this up. But forcing the issue on a bill that had NOT been ironed out in detail was—when there wasn’t enough support to successfully pass that bill—was just plain stupid, and both Trump and Ryan share blame. In fact, it seems to me that Trump was pushing it now as much or more than Ryan was. Would a couple more weeks of negotiation (which is what I’m advocating) have helped get to agreement? Maybe no, maybe yes. But it clearly was premature to do it now.
There are profound splits in political philosophy within the Republican Party (see this). See also this on Republican unity.
“Have you ever been a member of a legislative body? Or even a committee?”
No, but I’ve never been an architect either- yet I retain the ability to notice when a building is burning down, because I can see the flames.
The GOP has been on fire a good long time, and there really isn’t much left to burn. Hence, President Trump.
The endless excuse-mongering from the GOP has grown extremely tiresome. Everyone is fully aware that new Republicans enter Congress after every election-but presumably those folks also want to repeal Obamacare. Presumably if they were presented with a decent bill they’d also vote for it, like other Republicans, including the senior members who have been in Congress for decades.
But they weren’t. Again, that’s not on Trump. It’s on the people in Congress who couldn’t write a bill- or perhaps wouldn’t. As others have already noted here, one logical inference is that the GOP simply doesn’t want to repeal Obamacare, because presumably GOP donors will profit handsomely when they are able to dump their expensive employee health costs onto failing government exchanges.
In any case, the usual suspects of the GOP can’t complain that Trump wouldn’t support them, because he plainly worked hard to make this bill pass. Worse, if the GOP sought to fail to repeal Obamacare, what would they have done differently?
Maybe nothing. Regardless, I put the failure on the House GOP leadership, who were responsible to write the actual law.
They failed, not Trump. And that failure will hurt them more than it will hurt Trump.
Xennady: I can’t follow your logic. It seems mostly to emerge from the narrative which always blames the anti-GOPe, anti-NeverTrump forces.
It’s true Trump doesn’t write bills but then neither does Obama write networked software apps. Obama is still responsible for aguably the greatest software embarrassment in computer history.
Obama delegated to the people who put the team together to execute the project and provide timely accurate feedback on its progress. Epic fail.
I don’t see how that logic doesn’t apply to Trump as well — especially since he and his supporters were always going on about how competent Trump would be coming from the business world and the amazing people he would find to work for him.
Trump and Obama are birds of feather when it comes to bragging about the huge wins they will produce, then neglecting to make sure they happen.
I liked what Sarah Rolph wrote yesterday:
[Trump] reminds me of every sales manager I ever worked for in the software business. They always think they could do a better job managing the firm than the CEO, but if they do get promoted to the top job they generally run the company into the ground. And often they have no idea what went wrong. It never seems to occur to them to actually study what an executive does. Crafting and closing deals is nothing like executive decision-making.
Most of what happened with the AHCA went on behind closed doors, so it’s hard to say precisely who was to blame for what.
But we do know Trump approved the bill, fought for it, and pushed Ryan to move it to a vote quickly against Ryan’s judgment.
If it was a bad bill, then Trump was incompetent to realize it or incompetent to realize he needed an independent view to assess it. I can’t imagine Trump didn’t have a fair amount of input on the overall shape of the bill.
After the bill failed, Trump didn’t blame Paul Ryan or the GOPe or the bill itself. He blamed the Freedom Caucus.
But to some Trump supporters, the only people who could be responsible for the failure were Ryan and the GOPe.
” I can’t follow your logic. It seems mostly to emerge from the narrative which always blames the anti-GOPe, anti-NeverTrump forces.”
It’s a mirror image of the nevertrump logic, which blames Trump for every bad thing that happens anywhere. That so much of THAT comes from the GOP makes me suspect the party will not survive intact for much longer.
“It’s true Trump doesn’t write bills but then neither does Obama write networked software apps. Obama is still responsible for aguably the greatest software embarrassment in computer history.”
True, but the key point here is that Trump did not get to pick the people who run Congress. If he did, it certainly wouldn’t be the present folks.
“If it was a bad bill,”
It apparently wasn’t, from Trump’s perspective. To be blunt, I wasn’t especially impressed with it, nor was I particularly upset when it failed. I figure there will be another better bill later, because no rank-and-file Republican voter is pleased with this outcome.
But- again- I see no excuse for the GOP in Congress to fail to have had a bill ready to go when Trump started pushing for it. They have been promising to repeal Obamacare since the day it passed, and they should have been ready to do so.
They weren’t. That’s on them, not Trump.
It’s on both of them. There was plenty of stupid to go around here.
For the person up thread claiming that this is a “win-win” for Trump, I don’t know about you but, as Trump himself predicted, I’m already tired of all the “winning”.
My prediction was that Trump would be a disaster for the country and for conservatism. I hope I’m wrong and there’s still a lot of time left, but this fumbling of health care reform that the GOP has had seven years to prepare is a horrendous unforced error.
Trump’s promise to let the current law “explode” so he can blame the Democrats is both cruel – take your eyes of the political horse race for a moment folks – there are real lives at stake – and incredibly naive. If it explodes it’s on him, now. That’s what you sign up for when you:re the freaking president.
Character is destiny. Get ready for a lot more disappointment.
“My prediction was that Trump would be a disaster for the country and for conservatism. I hope I’m wrong and there’s still a lot of time left, but this fumbling of health care reform that the GOP has had seven years to prepare is a horrendous unforced error.”- Bill
Bill, Hillary would have been a disaster for the country. Thank God we didn’t go full Socialist– in spite of her protestations, you might call Hillary Socialist lite.
As to the “fumbling” of this health care bill, the blame squarely rests on the GOPe/RINO’s. They’re the hypocrites that voted repeatedly to repeal the ACA when they really meant they, as Trump is, are fine with amending/fixing it.
That’s not on Trump. Should the bill have been pushed so early in the session? Since Congress doesn’t do much during an election year (next year), his entire agenda needs to be pushed through this year. That blame is also not on Trump.
They wanted the AHCA bill to go first, so the budget savings could be applied to the 2018 budget reconciliation bill, allowing for larger tax cuts.
I don’t blame conservatives for sticking to their principles (remember, they’re the only ones left in Washington that have any :), but they do hold a losing hand, and I hope in the next attempt they’ll get what they can and compromise on the rest.
Don’t forget that Trump is trying to govern against the most obstructionist leftist/Democrats ever. It’s going to be messy. But for you to think that if Trump were to play nice, they’d reciprocate– you’re delusional.
Trump has already effectively done more to advance a conservative agenda than the last three Republican presidents at this point in their terms.
The health care bill is just not going to be on the conservative’s agenda.
As to the criticism that should fall on Trump’s side, I thought trying to intimidate the FC was very amateurish. They needed to peel off approximately 12 of that group.
That needed to be one on one, by offering legislation that the representative could take back to their district, justifying their support.
Here’s a little factoid. Congress was in session 111 days in 2016 and 157 days in 2015.
Yes, they are having hearings during some of the other days, and are back in their districts holding hearings, but seriously they might step it up a bit, even in an election year.
So what is Trump? Chopped liver?
Trump is President of the United States and the leader of the Republican Party. He ran on an anti-GOPe platform and beat those guys senseless.
I don’t see how it can be argued that Paul Ryan and the GOPe are running wild on their own and screwing things up behind Trump’s back.
Fixing Obamacare was one of Trump’s big campaign promises. The AHCA was Trump’s bill. He pushed for it, fought for it, and after it got shot down, he hasn’t said boo about the bill or the GOPe, though he did have some very public words about the Freedom Caucus.
Trump is either incompetent or he didn’t care that much about the bill either way. I tend to go with the latter. I think he just wanted to check healthcare off his punch list and move on for now.
But this rationalization that it was Barzini all along, i.e. Paul Ryan and the GOPe, seems a groundless return to GOPe bashing.
What I didn’t know until this day is that it was Barzini all along.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryzgDTU_aIY
And to recap.
The MSM/left/Democrats are loving the circular firing squad that is developing. It’s counterproductive.
The Republican House had 20 fewer members than did the Democrat House when the ACA was passed.
Dr. Tom Price, HHS Secretary had input and will continue to roll back regulations that are responsible for some of the costs of the ACA.
An interesting dynamic may form out of this. Trump has made it clear that he’s willing to work with Democrats on this. They’re not going to go near this in the short term, but long term, this does apply a squeeze play on the FC. It’s a shame that major legislation relies on one side or the other blinking first, but that’s the Washington way. Trump didn’t invent it and with mistakes, he’s playing it fairly well.
It might be well to read Trump’s speech after the bill was pulled.
http://time.com/4713107/donald-trump-transcript-ahca-bill/
He does squarely place the blame on the Democrats.
“TRUMP: Thank you very much. We were very close, and it was a very, very tight margin. We had no Democrat support. We had no votes from the Democrats. They weren’t going to give us a single vote, so it’s a very difficult thing to do.
I’ve been saying for the last year and a half that the best thing we can do politically speaking is let Obamacare explode. It is exploding right now. It’s — many states have big problems, almost all states have big problems.”
Big Maq, I believe was critical of the idea that we let Obamacare “implode” before fixing it, but that is, unfortunately how Washington works. Solutions are only found when it is a “crisis”. That’s not unique to Washington.
Brian E: It’s no mystery that the Dems were going to oppose the Trump bill. That was a given. That was the reality Trump had to live with. It means nothing in this discussion that Trump blamed Democrats.
However, there is a GOP majority that could have carried the bill had the GOP been unified. They weren’t.
And conveniently, in your post, you omit the fact Trump also blamed the Freedom Caucus, while not mentioning Paul Ryan and the GOPe at all.
The real takeaway in the Trump quote is the second paragraph that Trump is willing to let Obamacare explode.
That’s why I think Trump didn’t care much about the bill. He wanted to look like he was making good on a campaign promise.
If it had passed he would have used the AHCA “savings” to justify tax cuts — which is Trump’s real goal right now. If it didn’t pass, Trump lets Obamacare blow up.
None of this supports your claim:
As to the “fumbling” of this health care bill, the blame squarely rests on the GOPe/RINO’s
“My prediction was that Trump would be a disaster for the country and for conservatism.
I’ve already expressed my opinion about who should get the lion’s share of the blame for this fiasco, and I won’t repeat it.
But I will note that the actual alternative to Trump wasn’t a different Republican- it was Hillary Clinton. None of the other candidates had a snowball’s chance of beating her, because they all had the same failed political playbook handed down from the Bush administration. That is, amnesty, open borders, crony capitalism, and nation building. Foreign nations, not America.
That is, “conservatism.” The real disaster for all THAT was the Bush administration, long before Trump, because “conservatism” gave us disaster. No thank you.
“Trump’s promise to let the current law “explode” so he can blame the Democrats is both cruel — take your eyes of the political horse race for a moment folks — there are real lives at stake — and incredibly naive. If it explodes it’s on him, now. That’s what you sign up for when you:re the freaking president.”
”
Real lives at stake? Cruel? Gosh, did the people who had their lives upended by the destruction of the individual health insurance market by Obamacare count?
I’d say not at all, because neither the democrats nor the GOP ever seemed to care, and still don’t. Those folks tend to vote GOP- Michelle Malkin lost her insurance, for example- so whatevs. But democrat-voting 0care recipients might lose insurance- oh, that’s just totally unacceptable, somehow.
And no, Trump is not responsible for Obamacare, period. For one thing he’s still working to replace it. For another he didn’t write it, and no Republican voted for it. The impending collapse is all the fault of the left.
“Character is destiny. Get ready for a lot more disappointment”
You mean like how George Bush the first casually broke his word not to raise taxes? Or how his son openly betrayed his Oath of Office to enforce US law when he refused to secure the US border and stop illegal immigration?
I don’t even have to mention democrats to express my disappointment. So far, Trump has been a glorious breath of fresh air, compared to his predecessors.
Yugely.
Xennady: What is your point?
If Trump becomes the gateway drug for Dems to blow out the electorate in 2018 or 2020, as they were almost about to with Hillary in 2016, do you still support Trump?
People (maybe not Xen and Brian, but many trump cheerleaders) were arguing that all we needed was to bring in trump, a man with CEO experience, like a messiah, to snatch the reins of government from the hands of the left, and restore competency.
To borrow that rather imperfect analogy of CEO, he is at the top of all the successes and failures of the organization he leads (and, right now, trump IS the leader of the GOP).
One failure can be explained as the fault of an underling. Maybe even a second on something “unforeseen”.
But, once failures begin to accumulate, one has to wonder if it is the underlings, or exogenous events, etc., whatsoever.
.
Xennady and Brian can place the entirety of blame on Ryan and the GOP all they want.
Of course they get blame!!!
BUT, they didn’t work entirely alone.
To leave trump innocent in all this is more than naive.
.
IDK.
Neo made a great point about the pace this took.
It was treated as irrelevant, with an argument that didn’t indicate any IRL experience in convincing any oversight bodies at any senior level.
Wish life were that simple, but as long as folks think it actually is so, they will forever be disappointed.
.
Seems, still at this point, there’s nothing that will convince many in trump’s base, as there is nothing that trump can do wrong (shoot someone on 5th Ave and all that).
Outside that core, these trump supporters should know that the blame game trump (and they) play just doesn’t provide them with any convincing credibility nor trust – something they need (even if they don’t realize it) to get things they want done (so long as we are still a democracy).
“Xennady and Brian can place the entirety of blame on Ryan and the GOP all they want.”- Big Maq
Big Maq, let me say this for the fourth time. Wasting time blaming either Trump or the conservatives, or even Ryan for the failure to move the AHCA out of the House is counter-productive.
I did say the RINO’s are to blame– for creating the false expectation that they were on board to repeal the ACA. As others have surmised, I think even neo raised the question, the liberal GOP never intended to repeal Obamacare. At least, that’s what it looks like.
As to the strategy of peeling off members of the FC, Trump claimed they were 10-15 votes short, which means some of the FC would have voted for the AHCA.
I’m not convinced that even Republicans are as motivated to repeal Obamacare now as they were 7 years ago, or 2012 or 2016 as the full effects of Obamacare started to be felt. If you had company sponsored health insurance you may have felt little or no effect.
But if it makes you feel better blame Trump. I’m not sure what’s to gain from the exercise. As I see it, the FC is under increased pressure to find a compromise– not so much by being primaried, but by becoming irrelevant next year when a few Democrats may take up Trump’s offer to help craft a replacement.
As to failures, I don’t consider it a failure, or even a setback. I understand why they went first with AHCA, but I think it’s a good thing this is taking longer.
I’m listening to Lou Dobbs right now, and the blame game is shifting to blaming Ryan and Priebus. We’re back to process and not substance. Yuk.
Ryan and Priebus. According to the story, both told Trump they had or were going to get the votes.
Hmmmm.
Xennady:
You’re relatively new here, so you may not realize that we’ve discussed that business of “no other GOP candidate could have won” many times before.
I do not agree, and have written many times on the subject, most recently in this thread, in my response to John Guilfoyle (see this and this).
“I do not agree…”
That’s fine, as people honestly disagree about this question.
But these other candidates weren’t even able to beat Trump in the primaries, despite his obvious baggage and despite the obvious hostility much of the Republican party had for him.
I see essentially zero chance any one of them could have won Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, etc, – especially if the establishment had successfully torpedoed the Trump campaign in one their endless schemes. Myriad Trump voters would have simply stayed home on election day, as they had in previous elections- or voted for the democrat, as they usually did.
Shrug. I presume this has also been discussed many times here.
Xennady:
Beating someone in the primaries is a very different animal than winning the general. Each party hopes that the person who does the first can do the second, of course. But it doesn’t follow. The traits and principles and positions a person has to have to do the first are somewhat different than the ones the person needs to accomplish the second.
That’s why, traditionally, many candidates have been more extreme in their views during primaries and then tacked to the center in the general. It’s also why the GOP has often argued for nominating a centrist rather than a conservative—the need to appeal to the middle in the general. Needless to say, those arguments don’t always pan out (McCain, for example), because elections are more complex and difficult to predict or generalize about than that.
I will be very blunt, though—I think Rubio would have cleaned Hillary’s clock, for various reasons I’ve written about before. But we will never never know.
“I will be very blunt, though–I think Rubio would have cleaned Hillary’s clock, for various reasons I’ve written about before. But we will never never know.”
Perhaps, but I think we can make some pretty good guesses. Evidence suggests that he had a knack for infuriating the exact same sort of people who made Trump the nominee and then the president-like me- so my conclusion is that he’d have gotten blown out in the typical Republican fashion, like others before him. I’ve not forgotten the occasion when one of his staff casually mentioned that he believed Americans were lazy, thus helping explain why Rubio lept at the chance to join the Gang of Eight bill to import more immigrants moar.
I think all that ended his 2016 chances before they began- but I presume this all been debated to death before.
“Xennady: What is your point?”
That Trump is not the author of the GOP’s downfall, nor is he responsible to write legislation. He is neither a genius playing sixth dimensional chess nor an idiot wrecking the world.
The GOP establishment offed itself before he even came into the picture, by its own hand. Hence, the outcome of the election.
“If Trump becomes the gateway drug for Dems to blow out the electorate in 2018 or 2020, as they were almost about to with Hillary in 2016, do you still support Trump?”
Ask me when that actually happens. As the anti-Trump people have predicted approximately 792 of the last zero Trump political collapses I won’t be holding my breath.
He plainly has a lot to learn- but unlike the people of the GOP establishment, he seems capable of actually learning.