During the recently concluded presidential campaign, Democrats were fond of warning the voting public that Republican Candidate Donald Trump was set and determined to destroy “our democracy,” by making it clear that they thought he considered himself “above the law,” which no one is.
At its root, the charge was (and is) that Donald Trump wanted to make himself an Absolute Monarch, in the manner of a 17th century Tudor or Bourbon monarch. It is true that those dynasties claimed to rule by Divine Right, but I think the Democrats have mistaken their autocracy. The real pattern for the Trump model is not Absolute Monarchy, but the British Parliamentary system of a ruling party in parliament led by a Prime Minister.
In the British system, and in many of the Continental republics as well, policy is determined by the ruling political party, under the direction of the Prime Minister, who is elected by his colleagues in parliament. This system differs only in detail from the U.S. Electoral College, by the way, but that is a fight for another day.
Once the policy is determined by the party, whether Conservative, Labour, Liberal, or (these days) Reform, it is not subject to any serious change or challenge. Government (the ruling party) submits legislation to the House of Commons, which indeed has committees which hold hearings, but while in theory changes could be made in committee, in practice they are not. Questioning of the party line is not tolerated. The legislation in question will be reported from the committee to the floor, where it will be passed virtually unchanged from its original form.
Government enforces its will on the legislators by a whip system of exceptional vigor (or vigour). Party leadership issues a one, two, or three-line “whip notice” for each bill as it comes up for consideration on the floor of the House of Commons. Members crossing Government on a three-line whip are subject to a discipline that few are willing to incur, including virtual expulsion from the party.
When President Trump declares on Truth Social (whatever that is) “Republicans must GET TOUGH — AND MUST GET TOUGH VERY FAST,” that sounds very much like a three-line whip to me.
I have from time to time entertained foreign elected officials in Washington, and led them thru the U.S. legislative process, explaining that after introduction, proposed legislation could be amended at any number of points along its way from conception to engrossment: in subcommittee, in full committee, on the floor (usually), in a conference committee between House and Senate when they pass different versions, in Congress again if the bill were to be vetoed by the president. And of course by the unelected bureaucrats writing regulations to implement the legislation, but that too is a fight for another day.
My guests were amazed, as most of them were used to some variety of the Parliamentary model described above, where party discipline is all, and Government’s decree settled all details. I was always proud of the openness of the U.S. system as I conducted these tours. It has always seemed to me that the division of power between legislative and executive was an indispensable bulwark for the liberties of the American people.
My pride no longer seems warranted.
Under Donald Trump, what we are seeing is the emergence of a unified government with the president proposing measures to Congress with no toleration for dissent from his will. Dissenters are threatened with primary opposition, financial support of opponents, personal attacks in the press and social media, withdrawal of some of the perquisites of seniority in the House and Senate, even threats to their personal safety. Few are able to resist these pressures, particularly in view of the fact that dissenters often agree with much of the Government’s policy agenda.
Even Trump’s signature de-regulatory weapon , the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency, has eerie echoes of the QUANGOs that infest the British system. In the words of whoever answers when I call upon Google these days, A QUANGO is “A body which has a role in the processes of national government, but is not a government department or part of one, and which accordingly operates to a greater or lesser extent at arm’s length from Ministers.”
I do not impute to President Trump any nefarious desire on his part to destroy the balance of power that has prevailed in this country since its inception. I do not think he thinks very much about such “details” at all.
Nevertheless, that is the direction in which things are moving. There is only one hope, and that is that Congress will recognize that direction, and assert its right to question, challenge, modify, amend, improve, even reject, proposals and nominations by the Executive Branch.
After 30 years in Washington, at what he calls “the nexus between politics and policy,” Gordon S. Jones returned to Utah, where he founded Mount Liberty College, a college in the classical, Socratic tradition. He continues to teach at the school – but he does not teach government. The views expressed here are strictly his own.
