In recent weeks, several Republican congressmen who have chosen not to run for reelection in 2018, as well as a number of other Republicans, have denounced Donald J. Trump’s “reckless, outrageous and undignified” behavior; his “casual undermining of our democratic ideals;” “the personal attacks, the threats against principles, freedoms and institutions [and] the flagrant disregard for truth and decency.” Those are the words of Sen. Jeff Flake, but they echo those of former President George W. Bush and senators John McCain and Bob Corker, among others who have spoken out.
What makes these condemnations of the occupant of the Oval Office so unusual is the fact that most Republican lawmakers have remained silent in the face of Mr. Trump’s relentless assault on our democracy in the apparent belief that he will help advance their party’s legislative agenda.
One might well question whether the Trump legislative playbook has been successful up to now.
Nine months in, the Affordable Care Act remains the law of the land, three successive executive orders to limit immigration have been rejected by the courts and that “beautiful” border wall that Mexico will pay for hasn’t been built.
However, Republican plans to overhaul the tax code remain on the agenda so obsequiousness must be paid to the tweeter-in-chief.
I have commented previously about the so-called tax “reform” proposal and its extreme tilt to the wealthy.
But what about the rest of the Trump administration’s agenda?
How is Mr. Trump fulfilling his pledge to his populist base to transfer power from Washington back to the working class?
Anyone suggesting that the interests of low and middle income Americans are ill-served by the Trump agenda is immediately dismissed as “elitist.”
Nonetheless, I’ll take the risk of examining some of the actions that have been taken in Trump’s name to see whether they benefit everyday Americans.
Just a few days ago, the Senate voted to overturn a rule that would allow customers to bring class-action lawsuits against banks and other financial institutions.
So, the next time Wells Fargo opens an unauthorized account in your name, or otherwise engages in fraud or malfeasance, you’ll have to bring your claim to an industry-biased arbitration panel.
Lots of luck with that.
Is it “elitist” to object?
How do you feel about allowing coal companies to dump their mining debris into the water? Not very healthy, wouldn’t you say?
Congress overturned a rule protecting us from such dumping.
Is it “elitist” to object?
How about allowing the use of a pesticide linked to developmental problems in children? Scott Pruitt, the Environment Protection Agency chief, rejected a staff recommendation to ban the pesticide.
That’s good for Dow Chemical, which donated $1 million for Mr. Trump’s inauguration, but not so good for the health of your children.
Is it “elitist” to object?
Unable to repeal the ACA, Mr. Trump is making it harder for people to sign up, shortening the open enrollment period and cutting funding for advertising and outreach.
In addition, Mr. Trump is doing violence to the actuarial basis for insurance by allowing the sale of bare-bones health insurance policies that do not protect people with pre-existing conditions and that will destabilize the insurance marketplace.
Plus, he’s eliminated the subsidies that help middle-class families pay their insurance premiums.
Is it “elitist” to object?
Concerned about workplace safety? The Trump administration isn’t.
They’ve repealed record-keeping and reporting rules on workplace injuries and labor and safety violations.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is even proposing rule changes that would weaken workers’ protection from exposure to an industrial mineral estimated to cause about 100 deaths a year.
Is it “elitist” to object?
Worried whether the for-profit college in which you or one of your children is considering enrolling will actually prepare you for a good job or whether your debt will be too burdensome?
Trump’s Education Department isn’t, having delayed implementation of an Obama-era rule requiring disclosure by these colleges of their graduates’ success in getting jobs and how much they owe upon graduation.
Is it “elitist” to object?
About that tax “reform” plan I wrote about earlier.
Now Republicans are looking at a reduction in the limits of 401(k) contributions to offset their proposed tax cuts. Imagine that, reducing a tax break for rank-and-file workers in order to lower taxes on the wealthy.
Is it “elitist” to object?
I could go on, but it should be clear by now that Donald Trump has not been “the voice” of regular people.
Instead, he is doing everything in his power to destroy or cripple the programs that protect the health, safety and economic rights of consumers.
Mr. Trump and his enablers are doing this in total disregard of the fact that these programs benefit the health and economic and financial well-being of the working class voters they claim to be helping.
Moreover, studies have shown that those corporate tax cuts that Mr. Trump is insisting upon do very little to increase workers’ paychecks and very much to enrich shareholders.
In spite of Mr. Trump’s pledge to the working class, he is transferring more power to Wall Street, the fossil fuel industry, the chemical industry and other special interests at the expense of the populist base that voted for him.
And it is not “elitist” to point this out.
Jay N. Feldman
Port Washington
