TRUMP AS FORMER PRESIDENT: A DISCORDANT OUTLIER

Over the 245 years of the American republic, the people of the United States have come to expect certain behavior from former presidents. As with every other aspect of his association with the presidency, Donald Trump now flaunts those expectations. His conduct looks especially egregious when compared with his real peers, other one-term presidents. No matter how long his predecessors served, however, Trump looks like an aberration. 

During our lifetimes, the United States has had three one-term presidents, chief executives who got elected, served one four-year term, stood for re-election, and lost. This definition, therefore, does

not include John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Gerald Ford. Kennedy won one-term and was assassinated. Johnson finished Kennedy’s term, won one of his own, but didn’t seek re-election. Ford succeeded Richard Nixon after his resignation, but lost the 1976 election. 

The presidents who fit our definition come from both parties – Democrat Jimmy Carter (1977-81) and Republicans George H. W. Bush (1989-93) and Trump (2017-21). The similarity in conduct between Carter and Bush, as one-term former presidents, when juxtaposed with that of Trump, provides more evidence of 45’s decadence.

The Former President Model

Our constitution says nothing about the “role” of a

former president. We established the  conventions and traditions by example. The nation’s first president, George Washington, served two terms and didn’t run again mainly because he worried about doing anything that resembled a monarchy.

 

The colonists fought a bitter war for independence from a tyrannical king. Washington wanted nothing that suggested the new country was installing something similar. 

The two-term maximum continued as an informal limit on presidential tenure until Franklin Roosevelt won four terms, prompting the 22nd amendment that made the two-term limit law.  The country has

had 13 two-term presidents, along with some who got reelected but couldn’t finish their terms for reasons like assassination or scandal (Abraham Lincoln, Nixon). We’ve had eight one-term presidents under our definition.  There’s also the strange case of Grover Cleveland who was elected in 1884, lost in 1888, then regained the office in 1892 and served out that four-year term.

By and large former presidents, whether they served one term or two, have assumed a senior statesman role. Generally, they’ve left themselves out of the country’s day-to-day political machinations.

 

James Earl Carter, Jr. and George H.W. Bush

Jimmy Carter and the first Bush weren’t much alike as presidents. In truth, they weren’t all that alike as former presidents except in ways that speak volumes about how they conceive of the

presidency. Carter devoted himself to good  works – helping Habitat for Humanity, promoting election reform in the third world, fighting poverty, etc.  The first President Bush spent more time doing things people do when they’re retired, though he took on humanitarian relief projects at the behest of his son, President George W. Bush. These included joining in 2005 with the man who defeated him, Bill Clinton, in raising money for tsunami victims.   

If Carter and Bush did some things differently in their post-presidential lives, they also did some important things alike. Neither injected himself into politics much beyond benign activities like speaking at his party’s convention and receiving the party’s nominee during the fall campaign. Both honored the office they held by quietly counseling their successors when asked and behaving as if their election hadn’t anointed them with a divine right to influence and manage the political process though they no longer occupied the oval office.

Trump’s Mischief

Since landing at Mara Largo on January 20 this year, Trump has remained a loud political  presence. Though social  media companies banned

him for distorted, untrue statements on their platforms, at rallies, through press releases, and in interviews on friendly outlets like Fox News, Trump infects our politics on a daily basis. He retains the loyalty of millions. He keeps raising money for future campaigns and, no doubt, his own use, including his mounting legal bills. He blesses favored candidates and meddles in Republican politics nationwide.

In some states, winning a Republican primary requires Trump’s endorsement. Even established GOP leaders will bow to his wishes because they so fear being out of favor with his voters. Recently, he pressured Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Trump sycophant now faced with dropping poll numbers in his state, into ordering an “audit” of Democratic-leaning counties, even though Trump carried Texas in 2020 by 630,000 votes. No one could imagine Carter or H.W. Bush doing such a thing.

Trump, of course, keeps hinting he’ll run again in 2024. Some people who know him think he can’t resist, while others believe he won’t because he can’t stand the prospect of another defeat. He did, however, recently hold a rally in Iowa, a key early state on the 2024 primary calendar.

We know Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, both two-term presidents who can’t run again

themselves, have campaigned for Democratic nominees who wanted to follow them into the oval office. Obama, particularly, helps Democrats raise money,

partly through direct mail solicitation of small donors.  But neither has muddied the water like Trump (nor has Trump’s fellow Republican, two-termer  George W. Bush). Neither has thumbed his nose at the expectation former presidents will maintain a sense of decorum and behave as protectors of the instruments and traditions of democracy.

The American presidency was never intended as a repository for unfettered political ambition or as a mere vessel for accumulating power its holder could dispense in service of those ambitions. By tradition and experience, the nation established norms for former holders of the job that honor the limits we put on the office itself. Trump has disregarded those, just as he flaunted so many norms while he was president.  The country should call out his behavior.  We just did our part.     

    

THE BILLIONAIRE SPACE RACE: WHAT PRICE EXPLORATION?

Fifty-two summers after America put the first men

on the moon, in 2021 a “space race” again captivated the nation. This one generated not the unity the events of 1969 did, but a variety of views that conjured up longstanding questions about equity and

privilege when juxtaposed against the lure of adventure in space. Our reactions reflected that, ranging from the innately practical, through middle range theories, to the spiritual.

This race involved privately funded space forays that to some seemed like joyrides for the rich.  On

July 11, English entrepreneur Richard Branson flew on his company’s Virgin Galactic spaceplane above the 50-mile altitude the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recognizes as the beginning of space. 

Nine days later, the anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing, Amazon chairman Jeff Bezos and three

others used his company’s Blue Origin rocket  and spacecraft for a ten-minute suborbital flight to an altitude of 66 miles. Bezos and his crew essentially mimicked NASA’s 1961 suborbital missions by Alan Shepard and Gus Grissom, America’s first men in space.

      

Woodson: First, Pay Your Fair Share of Taxes

Jeff Bezos’s space explorations don’t excite me. I 

view this as I view dead beat dads who drive expensive vehicles but don’t make child support payments.

According to ProPublica, a nonprofit news organization that investigates abuses of power, Bezos’s wealth exploded by $3.8 billion in 2007.  In that year and in 2011, he paid no federal income taxes. Between 2006 and 2018, his wealth increased by $127 billion and he paid a .98 per cent tax rate. During the same period, the median household in the United States earned $70,000 per year and paid a 14 per cent tax rate.

Following his flight, Bezos made unintelligible comments about Americans one day traveling into space when the earth becomes unlivable. A seat on that first flight went to the highest bidder at $28 million. That seems out of reach for most Americans.

Bezos said later, “I want to thank every Amazon employee and every Amazon customer because you guys paid for all this.” Mr. Bezos, Americans paid for “all this.” We held the country together with our tax dollars while you withheld yours for your private project.

Robert Reich, President Clinton’s first labor secretary, responded, “Amazon workers don’t need Bezos to thank them. They need him to stop union busting – and pay them what they deserve.”

Bezos should pay his fair share of taxes and let the American people decide when they want to spend money on space exploration. We need him to help the rest of us strengthen our social safety net, save the planet from greenhouse gases, and rebuild our crumbling roads, bridges, and schools.       

Rob:  A Mixed Bag

Few Americans cared more about space exploration than I did during the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo days. I rose at the crack of dawn for launches, missed school a few times, and could name every

astronaut in NASA’s first four groups. I was into it. I still am. I believe space exploration benefits humankind in general and the United States in particular through technological advancement, national security, and scientific progress.

Space exploration, manned and unmanned, can help us address problems like climate change, energy inefficiency, and manufacturing processes. I do not, therefore, condemn the efforts of billionaires as they vie for a role in space exploration.  As one commentator pointed out after the Bezos flight, many things we take for granted began with a wealthy person experimenting with something that seemed far-fetched and just another pleasure for the idle rich. SCHEDULED commercial air service? Nah, that’ll never work.  

Having said that, I’m not unsympathetic to the arguments of the critics, including my brother Walker. Both those who contend billionaires should spend their resources on other things (like higher

wages for their employees) and those who argue space exploration is a job for government have a point. I thought about that as I watched Bezos take off. But, it was still fun. I’m a sucker for rocket launches. Always have been. Always will be.      

Henry:  Discovery

I don’t find billionaires investing in space exploration difficult. It’s not my focus in this post. I agree with Woodson’s sentiment and  hope those moneyed interests will use their funds to invest in space exploration and in practical and immediate efforts that benefit humankind. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. The issue reminds me of the love I have had, and still have, for flight and space exploration.

As a kid I collected model airplanes and subscribed to every publication I could on flight and space. My

junior high career book detailed a career in the Air Force as a test pilot and space explorer. I sought appointment to the Air Force Academy to further that dream, but my senators weren’t ready.

Today, my cell phone contains Skyview, NASA, Skywalk, and Satellite Tracker apps. I may have

cared more about space exploration than Rob during the early days. I agree with him on the benefits of space exploration. An aspect of the human spirit demands this stretch of the imagination and investigation of the difficult and

seemingly impossible. My longing tugs at philosophical and spiritual components. That we still reach for the stars strengthens my faith in our ability to carve a path toward our destiny. We are a part of all that space contains.

              If in a twinkle lies eternity

               and all we discover is known

               all encompassing must be the Power

               to hold us and time for so long

 

                If I am stretched from boundary to boundary

                and yet can be reduced to less than a single atom

                where lies that in between for all 

                and rushes forth for each of us to complete

 

                If we are but a single thought

                strung throughout Eternity

                of what wonderful thread

                to form us are we sewn 

THOUGHTS ON THE NEW ADMINISTRATION’S AGENDA: A LITTLE ADVICE FROM FRIENDS

 

In a month, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. takes the oath of office as the 46^th President of the United States and Kamala Devi Harris the oath as the 49^th Vice President of the United States.  She becomes the first woman to hold either office.

They take over at a difficult, perilous time. A once-in-a-century pandemic rages, accompanied by devastating economic consequences. The country remains politically and racially divided as killings by police of African Americans continue and criminal justice reform remains undone. Climate change poses an existential threat to the entire planet. Biden and Harris have plenty to do and we have some advice for them on their agenda.

COVID, COVID, COVID
Biden has long acknowledged subduing the Coronavirus pandemic would represent his first and most pressing challenge. It’s difficult not to view the leadership void on COVID-19 as the Trump Administration’s greatest failure. As to Biden’s challenge, we recognize that not only did Trump fail through inaction (e.g., never effectively using the Defense Production Act) and lies (“We’re turning the corner.”), he made things worse by poisoning the well with the public in ways that will make Biden’s job more difficult. 

Biden thinks (correctly) we can tamp down the virus through measures like mask wearing and social distancing until vaccines essentially eviscerate the disease. Because of Trump’s politicization of mask wearing and social distancing, Biden will have difficulty getting buy-in on sacrifices that fight the virus in the interregnum between now and widespread vaccine distribution next spring and summer.

By tying vaccine development to his re-election campaign, Trump made some think vaccines now being rolled out were rushed for political purposes. Combine that with a growing, general anti-vax crowd and skepticism about medical researchers based on history in the black community, not as many people may take a vaccine as needed for complete effectiveness.

Biden must enlist every political icon (former Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama say they’ll get vaccinated publicly), celebrity, community leader, and trusted religious figure in encouraging vaccination and adherence to the measures still needed for suppressing the virus. Without beating COVID-19, Biden can’t get the economy going. He must push for a new stimulus/relief package from Congress. Yes, we know Mitch McConnell will likely stand in the way, but Biden must make clear to the American people who stands with whom. A president who pushes for what many Americans need so badly could make a difference. Biden can show there remains that thing called the “bully pulpit.” 

Race
At some point, every American president gets an exam question on race. Nearly all fail. Biden has a unique opportunity because, based on the protests last summer, much of the country seems ready to try. The old political barriers remain, but that’s no excuse for inaction. We see several legislative approaches Biden should support and push for:
·    enactment of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act (it’s already passed the House);
·    revising many of the actions taken in the 1994 crime bill Biden played a role in passing, emphasizing reducing incarceration for minor drug offenses;
·    limiting criminal and civil immunity in police shooting cases;
·    ending no-knock warrants; and
·    reform measures that would foster increased use of psychologists and social workers, not police officers, in certain domestic situations and other encounters that often lead to police shootings.

State and local governments probably can accomplish more on some of these things, but federal legislation could establish goals and guidelines.

We also think there’s merit in dusting off President Clinton’s “National Conversation on Race” idea. We have an open mind about what form such an effort should take. We know one thing: if we won’t talk about a problem as big, as morally important as this, it won’t ever get solved.

Climate
We’ve written on this a few times, but not enough. We promise we’ll do better. This year – this awful 2020— demonstrated the issue’s importance. Wildfires in the west, storm damage in the middle of the country, and hurricanes and tropical storms in the Southeast and on the Gulf Coast represent the most visible examples of the gravity of the climate change problem.  At least now we have a president who doesn’t deny the science and accepts that not much time remains for addressing the problem.

Biden has taken two steps we heartily endorse. He says he’ll immediately put the United States back into the Paris Climate Accord. This signals the new administration’s seriousness about making America a major participant in anti-climate change efforts. 

Second, Biden has named former State Secretary John Kerry his special climate advisor. Kerry knows this issue well and will sit on the National Security Council since climate change constitutes a national security issue.

We suggest an “all of the above” climate 

approach that advocates multiple ideas. Some special interest will fight every climate proposal. Even corporations professing

support for action on climate change present much different ideas than climate activists. The administration, therefore, should not hang its hat on any one solution. It will lose legal, legislative, and administrative battles, so it needs a comprehensive, multi-faceted approach. We see this problem as so big and so important; Biden must remain creative and push every idea that might do some good.  

       What advice would you offer on the Biden-Harris agenda? 

    

PICKING A VICE PRESIDENT: START WITH WHAT, NOT WHO.

PERHAPS JOE BIDEN’S MOST IMPORTANT DECISION

Former Vice President and presumed

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has named his vice presidential selection steering committee. The group will help Biden with vetting potential running mates. Biden has already said he will choose a woman.

In due course, we’ll weigh in on prospective candidates. Pundits are floating about a dozen names. With the pick not

expected until late next month at the earliest, we’ll have time to comment on the pros and cons of possible choices. For now, we focus on what Biden should look for, not who. 

The unique circumstances in 2020 make this selection that much more important.  If

elected,  Biden would take office at age 78, older than any person ever upon first inauguration. He has hinted he wouldn’t seek a second term, putting his vice president in prime position to succeed him. Since the Second World War, six vice presidents have gone on to become president. In that same period, no major party has denied the presidential nomination to a vice president or former vice president who sought it. 

So, what qualities should Biden seek? We each made lists and factored them together, arriving at a four-part test we now present in no particular order. Each of us may assign more importance to one or another of these traits, but we really want someone with all of them.

Electability: You can’t Save Souls in an Empty Church

All three of us recognize the vice presidential candidate must help Biden

The Nightmare - The Art of Mark Bryan

win the election and end the Donald Trump nightmare. Woodson goes so far as to list the states – Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan – he thinks the vice presidential candidate must help Biden carry. Ideally, the person could help turn out core Democratic voters – blacks, browns, millennials, suburban women – perhaps putting in play states like Texas and Georgia.

The research on how much a vice presidential candidate can help presents

a mixed bag. A few studies say the second banana can make up to a three-percentage point difference. Others say it’s less, if any.

There’s disagreement about whether a vice presidential candidate can help carry a particular state, especially the candidate’s home state. John Kennedy – and most analysts of the 1960 election – believed Lyndon Johnson secured Texas for the Democrats that year. Some think Tim Kaine helped Hillary Clinton carry Virginia in 2016. On the other hand, Lloyd Bentsen couldn’t help Michal Dukakis win Texas in 1988. John Edwards didn’t claim North Carolina for John Kerry in 2004.

The Ready-to-Play Test: Can She Be President?

Henry states this as a matter of “experience in governance.”  For Rob, it’s “gravitas” – can we envision the vice president as commander-in-chief, confronting a foreign crisis (or a national pandemic)?  In the event of Biden’s death or incapacity, could the new or acting president rally the nation to a cause? 

John McCain paid a huge price for picking someone unprepared for national office in Sarah Palin. Though she gave McCain an initial boost in the polls, the more exposure Palin got, the worse the choice looked.   

Some of the women being suggested as possible running mates for Biden don’t offer the kind of resumes vice presidential candidates historically present.  They’ve only served as state legislators, been mayors, or briefly held

congressional seats. Only one or two have foreign policy experience. We know the paper resume doesn’t mean everything, but it has some importance.

Compatibility:  Are They on Same Page?

We had different ways of putting this point, but the more we thought about it, the easier reconciling our views became. All three of us think the president and vice president must  unify on policy, with the vice president strongly advocating the president’s agenda, even if she disagrees internally. Biden has said, based on his experience in flying right seat for Barack Obama for eight years, he wants someone who will dissent within the councils of the White House, but will go out and push for whatever final decision he makes. 

This presents more of a problem than might appear at first glance. Lyndon Johnson was miserable as vice president because of the way the Kennedys cut him out of a meaningful policymaking role. He was never an effective spokesman for the New Frontier. Former president Bill Clinton and James Patterson, in their bestselling novel The President is

Missing,  present a vice president with resentments and a separate agenda that, for a time, appeared to threaten the nation. Biden should pick a team player and treat her as such. 

Restorative Capacity: Putting the Country Back Together

Even if the coronavirus hadn’t ravaged the nation’s health and its economy, any Democrat elected in 2020 would face a monumental job in restoring the country's moral authority. Diminished respect for the

rule of law, broken foreign alliances, mistrust based on ethnicity and hyper partisanship represent just some of the intangibles a new administration will face. The pandemic won’t have gone away by January 2021. A new vice president may have a big role in helping with the remaining economic and public health consequences.

Woodson says he wants a vice presidential candidate who can “relate to a broad coalition of people.” The vice president will need that capacity in helping Biden restore America’s place

and standing in the world. She must help the president bring together a cross-section of America in support of the reclamation project the next administration must undertake.

Our criteria ask a lot of potential vice presidents, but we don’t think we ask too much. Biden, if he wins, will have a big job. The woman on his wing will have a lot to do.