FIRST BIG DECISION FOR THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION: THE CLOCK TICKS

 

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris took office January 20, assuming the burden of righting the American ship. They have a big job and not long for getting it done.  They’ll have

tough decisions before long. Political reality and history teach that the clock has already started ticking on what they can accomplish.

Presidential terms run four years, but windows of opportunity for passing major legislation close quickly under the weight of pent-up frustrations in a president’s own party, approaching mid-term elections, and opposition candidates revving their engines on runways for the next presidential race. Biden enjoys no exemption from this cruel cycle. Anyone looking hard enough can 

see it looming in the distance.

Biden’s Burden

Biden’s first days have made clear his priorities: (1) get the pandemic under control,(2) fix the related economic problems, (3) address climate change, and (4) attack racial injustice. Biden’s team acknowledges things like infrastructure, tax reform, and rectifying some of former President Donald Trump’s  excesses must wait. That array of priorities creates challenges and opportunities.

Fires rage around the four priorities and many reasons exist for tackling them first.  The country watches carefully. Other than the rabid COVID-19 deniers, most Americans want an end to the death, pain, and personal sacrifice that go with the pandemic.  We can’t imagine anyone being happy with the job losses and business disruption. Many of us have been railing about climate change and racial injustice for years. A strong desire exists for taking on Biden’s targeted issues.

That doesn’t mean his solutions will get unanimous support, or even enough for solid progress. He has offered big, bold proposals for dealing with all four problems. He wants, for example, a $1.9 trillion COVID-19

relief package that includes big stimulus checks, minimum wage increases, significant dollars for cash-strapped state and local governments, and vaccine distribution money.

That’s where the hard choices come. Because Biden’s proposals will draw Republican opposition – even obstruction – he soon must choose between proceeding in the bipartisan way he prefers and taking what he can get with only Democratic support. Thanks to Harris as vice president, he enjoys a one-vote majority in the senate. Speaker Nancy Pelosi presides over a narrow Democratic advantage in the House. Biden has so far refused invitations to set deadlines, but everyone expects a day of reckoning will come. He can keep seeking bipartisan approval or go it alone, knowing he must act quickly or lose his chance. 

 

The Politics

Right now, Biden’s Democratic support results from a coalition of the willing. Moderate

Democrats cut in the mold of senators like Dick Durban of Illinois and John Hickenlooper, a rookie from Colorado, and progressives like Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and New York Representative Alexandria

Ocasio Cortez remain on board. Nobody knows how long Biden (and Harris) can keep this fragile alliance together. He’s avoided a fracture by making cabinet and staff appointments that have something for everybody and issuing executive orders addressing the pent-up frustrations of both sides of his potentially divided house, a house motivated by intense distaste for Trump. With Trump gone, how long this glue sticks remains an open question.   

Across the aisle, some Republicans see the virtue in working with Biden. How many isn’t clear. It’s likely a small number in either house of Congress. Assuming the filibuster rule remains, if it’s ten in the Senate, Biden could get 60 votes and potentially pass broad legislation, like he’s proposed on COVID-19. If it’s one or two, or zero, he’s probably reduced to a stand-alone vaccine distribution bill many Republicans would vote for or something he could pass under budget reconciliation that only requires 51 votes. It’s hard to imagine what such bills would look like, but they won’t have the big, bold provisions Biden wants.

Many Republicans will say they oppose Biden’s bills – especially the COVID-19 relief package -- because of cost. Ordinarily they’d have a point, but under the current unique circumstances, their argument holds much less weight. With interest rates as low as they are, the government can borrow for a big relief package for next to nothing. Given how much the pandemic costs in health care expenses, lost tax revenue, and infrastructure expenditures incurred in fighting the disease, arguably the nation can’t afford not enacting a big package.  

A Little History

Biden should keep in mind Barack Obama’s

2009-10 experience with the Affordable Care Act. Obama believed he could get Republican support if he scaled back the bill by (1) leaving out a public option and (2) modeling the program after what Mitt Romney implemented in Massachusetts. Democrats screamed, but Obama held firm. GOP votes  never came and Obama, having lost his 60-seat senate majority with the

death of Ted Kennedy and the surprise victory of Scott Brown in a Massachusetts special election, settled for no public option and passing the bill under 

the reconciliation 

procedure.

Biden was there, of course, as vice president, so he’s  aware of the dilemma he’ll soon face. The fact the country wants COVID relief as 

badly as it does arguably gives him cover. If he can make real progress on ending the pandemic, many people outside Washington won’t care what he asked Congress for and did or didn’t get. He can declare victory and take on the next problem with good will stored away.

Biden doesn’t have forever. Republicans have started showing their hand, complaining about the size and scope of many of his proposals and asking why he hasn’t  consulted

more with them. Nearly everyone wants bipartisan solutions to the nation’s problems -- except those who don’t and, unfortunately, some of them serve in Congress.   

                     

THE STRANGE CASE OF DONALD TRUMP AND THE DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT: A WAR TIME PRESIDENT WHO WON’T PULL OUT ALL THE STOPS TO WIN THE WAR

President Trump’s dance with the Defense Production Act of 1950 (DPA) makes us

wonder why he hasn’t embraced the DPA in getting ventilators and other protective equipment in the hands of those battling the coronavirus. In a March 18 Executive Order, Trump declared ventilators and protective equipment

“essential to the national defense” against the spread of the virus, the standard required by the DPA for production and distribution of critically needed equipment. The range of explanations spans a continuum from benign to cynical.  The

shortage of medical equipment compels a closer look at what’s happened.

The DPA gives a president broad powers that potentially could alleviate shortages. Trump doesn’t lack awareness of the law. He’s spoken, however, of “hopefully” not needing it against the virus and using it only in a “worst-case scenario.” The fact the nation now has more coronavirus cases than any other country sounds like a “worst-case scenario.”  

                                     

                     

Some History

The DPA’s roots rest in the Second World War. Congress gave President Franklin

Roosevelt broad authority for ordering that industry convert facilities and produce war material. When the Korean War started, President Harry Truman needed

Image Courtesy Wikimedia Commons

similar power. Congress enacted the DPA, a law that has been reauthorized over 50 times and has been regularly invoked since. Trump claimed the coronavirus pandemic makes him a “wartime president,” though, mysteriously, he’s not using all available resources for winning the war. 

The DPA gives presidents three kinds of power: (1) authority requiring that businesses accept and prioritize government contracts deemed necessary for national defense; (2) power for establishing regulations that allocate materials, services, and facilities for national defense; and (3) authority for managing the civilian economy assuring access to scarce materials for defense needs. Trump seemingly thinks the federal

government has only a limited role in the war since he declared the federal government isn’t a “shipping clerk.” Trump has acted as if each state is an independent nation, left to fend for itself. 

 

Trump, the Virus, and the DPA

General Motors, Medtronic, ResMed, Royal Philips, and Vyaire Medical could produce

essential supplies. None have shown enthusiasm at the prospect. Each, if ordered to produce essential supplies, could do so and, of course, would want a large share of the $2.2 trillion CARES bailout Congress passed and the president signed March 27.

The most visible company in the discussion, General Motors, could shift factories from building automobile engines to building ventilators. Trump’s order didn’t immediately require that GM convert to ventilator production.  GM, in fact, said it was going ahead with plans for manufacturing ventilators, but reportedly wanted $1 billion for doing so, millions of it upfront. A dispute over costs erupted between GM and the administration and discussions broke off. A bit later Trump said he’d use the DPA in requiring that General Motors accept and prioritize contracts for ventilators, the number being determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. 

Trump came under fire from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for his reluctance to use the

DPA. He finally, on April 2, said he was invoking the law and requiring that three companies – 3M, General Electric, and Medtronic – produce masks. Even GOP Senator Ted Cruz of Texas urged that Trump “exercise these delegated powers to the full extent necessary.”  Trump, however, hasn’t ordered that General Motors,

or any of the other companies, begin production of other needed materials and has even gone so far as saying invoking the DPA would effectively “nationalize” firms. We find Trump’s reluctance about invoking the DPA baffling and he hasn’t explained his reasons.  Still, we have some ideas.

A Range of Possibilities

We start with the most benign potential reason. Imagining any president hesitating about injecting the government into the business of private companies isn’t difficult. Democrats and Republicans say they believe

in limited government. Staying out of a firm’s decisions about what it will produce, when, and at what price comports with that philosophy. Republican orthodoxy mandates that the government avoid intrusion into the operational life of private business as much as possible (tax cuts notwithstanding). We see this explanation near one end of a benign-to-cynical continuum.

Nearer the middle of that continuum, we

might suggest a political rationale. Perhaps, Trump fears antagonizing his political base if he strongly and enthusiastically uses the DPA. Many are true believers in Republican orthodoxy, despite their willingness to feed from the $2.2 trillion CARES trough. These supporters would likely regard any deviation from the party’s antigovernment norm as heresy, punishable in right wing media (and maybe at the ballot box). When Trump strayed a little from the line and sought a compromise with Democrats on his border wall, howls from Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham forced his hand and he backed off the compromise idea.

                  

On the far end of the continuum, Trump might just be appeasing friends in the industry. If he goes all-in with using the DPA in forcing production of large amounts of different materials, imagining that he will ruffle the feathers of friends in the manufacturing world follows. Could the president simply want protection for his captains-of-industry colleagues from costs associated with converting their operations to producing medical equipment? Is Trump putting the interests of his friends above what is best for the country right now?

It’s possible Trump’s reluctance springs from a combination of the factors we’ve identified and others. His real reasons could cover our

entire continuum. The mounting death toll and the need for addressing the health needs of millions of Americans, however, suggests using every tool in the box, including the DPA.