100 Days with Donald

It is a completely arbitrary, pointless, and probably harmful deadline. But since the legendary beginning of Fraklin Roosevelt's administration, political media have been attracted to the first 100 days as a measure of the direction of a presidency and how successful it is likely to be. We've arrived at that point in the Trump presidency, and while the number itself is meaningless it's still useful to take advantage of an opportunity to step back and evaluate what has been happening.

The word I would use to describe the state of the government in the last 100 days is erosion. There has been a slow but consistent undermining of political norms across the board. Trump has not remotely removed himself from financial interests in his companies, and his children still run those companies. He regularly conducts state business at the exclusive club he owns, in the presence of people whose membership fees have risen sharply since he won the election. He has insulted closely allied nations with words and actions and his diplomatic incompetence has already sparked a war scare with North Korea. 

He has made decisions about legislative strategy and even content without consulting his party's leadership. He and his inner circle have purposefully excluded the regular bureaucracy from the policymaking process, which has created open distrust and conflict between the chief executive and a significant portion of the executive branch. He insists that the news media are attempting to oppress the people of the country with lies when they point out the extensive falsehoods he himself has inflicted upon us. He has directly insulted the courts and has threatened to break up a circuit court that has delivered rulings he doesn't like.

And that is only a partial list.

All of those things are a break with precedent, both in theory and practice. The president is supposed to conduct foreign policy with respect for allies and at least follow rules of seasoned diplomacy with respect to potential adversaries. The president is supposed to lead the party with respect for the legislature as a coequal branch of government. The president is supposed to respect the courts even in disagreement. The president is supposed to understand that for all their faults, the news media are the ultimate guardians of democracy. The president is supposed to administer the executive branch in good faith.

There is a reason those norms exist. Because executive power is the most direct and easily abused form of power, those norms serve to put the inidividual at some distance from the office itself. The things that the president is simply expected to do regardless of party or ideology keep the most powerful office in the world from becoming a personalized form of power, because personalized power is prone to arbitrary application and outright abuse.

It has not dominated the news, but the longest-term consequences of these first 100 days will come from the erosion of the barriers between the person and the presidency. The separation of powers and the expected respect for institutions in government by the individuals in power have both been weakened. The precendents have been set, and will be there still when Trump is no longer president. While its worst consequences may never come to fruition, it must be acknowledged that we have taken a few steps down a dangerous path. A sustained commitment not only to defeating Trump politically but to restoring the institutions themselves will be required to reverse those steps.