​Unclear agenda: On Donald Trump and his policy agenda

The policy agenda of U.S. President Donald Trump suffered a political setback when a controversial memo issued by his administration’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), proposing to freeze federal funds for a range of social services was blocked by a District Court judge. In the wake of confusion and chaos regarding which programmes would be impacted, the White House rescinded the memo, a forced act of back-pedalling. Federal grants and loans worth trillions of dollars were potentially shut off for health-care initiatives for millions of low-income Americans — including within the Medicaid system — earlier this week when the OMB memo was apparently published “without vetting by key officials in the White House”. It appeared that funds for schools, hospitals and shelters were also in jeopardy, in most cases policies that would have assisted vulnerable groups. The administration has now clarified that benefits such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programme and student loans would not be affected by the freeze — nor would Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security payments and funds for small business, farmers, Pell grants, Head Start, rental assistance, and similar programmes. Despite the backdown, the Trump administration reiterated that it would not, at a broader level, compromise on the President’s commitment to review and recalibrate federal funding allocations towards cutting down on government waste and unrequired regulations. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on social media, “This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the memo”.

While there was little doubt that Mr. Trump would, during his second term, seek to slash public expenditure on certain social services, the ad hoc and apparently uncoordinated approach towards this cut left many, including some Republicans, baffled. The OMB memo also raised the spectre of Mr. Trump’s fiat by executive orders seeking to supplant the traditional role of Congress, which is the prime vector for appropriations and earmarking funds for specific projects across sectors. This is a precarious path to follow, and it is likely to face further pushback from Congressional lawmakers if it continues. There is also concern that Mr. Trump has surrounded himself with acolytes who subscribe to the ideas in the so-called ‘Project 2025’, which some regard as a right-wing agenda that could prove to be more divisive than it is capable of genuinely addressing urgent political priorities. While Mr. Trump may have become more adept at personnel management, it is equally important that he does not exacerbate the bitter polarisation of the American polity over the coming four years.