By Jeffrey A. Rendall
Voters won’t be fooled by attempts to send checks to them to disguise inflation worries
Act of desperation. “The phrase ‘act of desperation’ generally denotes a risky action taken when in a bad situation, as defined by major dictionaries like Cambridge and Collins.”
The “risky action”, in this particular sense, means doing something you normally wouldn’t do because the situation dictates urgent action and the alternatives for said activity have dwindled to nothing. If this were a movie, it’s where the good guys are backed against a barrier and they must concoct a last-ditch effort to break out and save themselves.
Or perish trying.
Or, in the case of Republicans and President Donald Trump, propose treating a hemorrhaging political outlook with government money to brighten the mindset of voters worried about gasoline and diesel prices as well as inflation and the cost of living.
Common sense suggests Trump isn’t responsible for some of the conditions and the finger could just as easily be pointed in the opposite direction towards the Democrats – but it’s unknown whether Americans will recognize the socialism-touting liberal kook-fringe party for what they are and still reward them with another go-round in the majority on Capitol Hill in a couple weeks.
In the meantime, President Trump apparently thinks a little extra cash in citizens’ pockets will serve as balm for the nation’s current wounds.
In an article titled, “Checks galore: Trump seeks quick fixes to affordability issue at heart of midterms”, Tom Howell Jr. reported at the Washington Times last week:
“Mr. Trump has authorized dividend checks to troops, Medicare enrollees and certain Obamacare customers, and he is promising $5,000 to every adult citizen if the GOP retains its congressional majorities. He’s going all-out on diesel, hoping to blunt shortages from the wars in Iran and Ukraine by authorizing the sale of red-dye fuel for road vehicles and touting a controversial deal for hundreds of thousands of tons of Russian fuel.
“Mr. Trump is pushing these 11th-hour actions to energize voters without help from Congress. Lawmakers left Washington until the midterms, leaving him to find quick fixes to affordability concerns at the heart of the November elections that will determine control of Congress. Mr. Trump said the president’s party typically struggles in the midterms, so he’s looking for ways to buck the trend.
“’Nobody’s done what I’ve done, nobody, not even close. But no matter how good they seem to be, they’re at a big disadvantage,’ Mr. Trump told White House reporters [last week].”
I’ll have to wash my own mouth out after uttering an unclean phrase like this one, but Trump’s “Money for everyone” scheme sounds a lot like what a Democrat would do.
Ouch. Pass the soap! Is it mint flavored?
It’s the natural inclination of every politician to simply propose to get right with the voting public by dipping into the federal treasury to make people whole again. It’s another way of admitting, “My policy caused you temporary harm, so here’s a little something to square things until the world rights itself again.”
It appears as though, in his heart, President Trump doesn’t believe any of his policies have a down side, but if the voters think so, then they should be pacified until the eventual positive benefits of said order or decree reveal themselves. By doing so, Trump has shown himself to have very relatable political instincts, but this doesn’t mean it’s helpful to his cause (in the form of approval ratings) or the Republican Party as an entity.
In essence, proposing to send Americans money amounts to a naked pander at worst and an act of desperation at best.
It should be pointed out that the time to propose legislative fixes has long passed, and the reluctance/refusal of his party members in Congress – at least a handful of them – has forced Trump into a corner, where the president feels as though there’s only one recourse left… to ramp up the federal treasury printing operation and start pushing buttons.
Or send the loot directly to bank accounts. Same thing.
Congress, primarily the Senate, has moved at a glacier’s pace this year, with the usual suspect RINOs effectively damning up the institution so badly that only a voter induced-laxative could alleviate the symptoms of governmental constipation (better known as stalling, delay and gridlock). Many, many legislators and observers have proposed doing away with the filibuster in order to help move things, but this is a dead letter and not going to happen anytime soon.
And if Republicans do as badly as many predict in a couple weeks, the filibuster is “safe” for at least another few years. Even if Democrats took control of the senate, I doubt they’d kill the filibuster with a hostile president in the White House.
Democrats are evil, but they’re certainly not stupid. Too bad.
At the root of it all, President Trump’s worst miscalculation is assuming everything in life is transactional. We hear it from him all the time – “He needs to make a deal.” Trump said it about the Russians and Ukrainians. He said it about the Iranians. Heck, I think he even said it about the Israelis and Hamas, as if it were possible for ancient enemies to negotiate a tangible and very finite end for subject matter so infinite.
Trump has also indicated that North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un could be susceptible to economic incentive persuasion, and, of course, that the Canadians would come rushing to their senses by pressure from tariffs. In each case, “make a deal.”
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t, but not everything is for sale, a lesson Trump should’ve learned in reference to politics. The old saying is, “Everyone has a price” – but it may not be salient in the universe of voter preferences.
There’s also a good argument that Trump, by constantly offering payments to potential voters, is tacitly conceding his original policies in those areas weren’t right to begin with, or required an adjustment that mandated direct compensation for a misguided administration move.
If, for example, Trump thinks farmers need remuneration because of his tariff policies, then why are we setting them in the first place? Will a sizable check help sway the targeted group of voters to choose Republicans when they otherwise would’ve switched on the fly and favored the Democrat candidate instead?
It doesn’t make sense. Trump maintains the loyalty of his core group of MAGA voters, and they understand why price fluctuations – in either direction – aren’t necessarily permanent and it wouldn’t be in their best interest to allow Democrats to take over Congress. They’re the ones who would crawl over broken glass to vote for Trump’s supporters, so the debt-increasing transfer payments would have little positive effect for Republicans in the first place.
Further, if there is one policy area where Trump has been suspect from the beginning, it’s his cavalier attitude towards government debt and the need to put the brakes on congressional spending to plan for the future. For good reason, Trump cares a lot about inflation but he doesn’t appear to connect spending with rising prices.
Conservatives were concerned when Trump the candidate said entitlement spending was “off the table” in 2015 and 2016 and have more or less gone along with him when Trump refused to talk about incremental changes to Medicare and Social Security to ensure long term solvency.
Trump’s is the ultimate “kick the can down the road” philosophy, with the president apparently believing that future leaders will address the debt problem that was exacerbated during his terms in the White House. He was absolutely correct about wishing to provide tax relief to spur economic growth – and hence, address the debt issue with eventual greater tax receipts – but where was the corresponding demand to simultaneously scale back spending?
The worsening debt issue is destined to be a black mark on Trump’s legacy, the Make America Great Again leader having solved the illegal immigration problem and strengthened America’s standing militarily and abroad, but turning a blind eye to borrowing excesses.
Hiking tariffs alone would never bring in enough revenue. It’s like Democrats proposing to tax the “rich” to bankruptcy, but then realizing there aren’t enough wealthy people to stack up the revenue their Medicare for All ploys would require.
President Trump is a smart man with excellent political instincts in most ways. But he’s never learned that throwing money at a problem won’t necessarily solve it, and he surely hasn’t realized that government checks won’t buy him and Republicans love.
Republicans may still hold out in this year’s elections, but it won’t be due to dangling loot in front of voters.
Jeff Rendall is editor and publisher of GolfintheUSA.com and has written about golf and politics for over a quarter of a century. A non-practicing attorney from California, he moved to the east coast three decades ago to pursue and combine his interests in all things American history and culture. Jeff has worked as an intern on Capitol Hill and in various capacities in grassroots organizing and conservative organizations and publications, including a nearly two-decade stint at ConservativeHQ.com. Column republishing or other inquiries: Rendall@msn.com .