Familiar faces
Nov 09, 2016
WASHINGTON, DC -- President-Elect Trump is known to make frequent use of that word but in the case of last night it was the textbook definition of the term.
Aside from the gut feelings of some personal friends, perhaps, the conventional wisdom we all consistently heard from all the major political prognosticators was that it would be nearly if not totally impossible for Donald Trump to win the White House.
Everyone seemed to discount the possibility that Trump’s rust-belt strategy, significantly based on his opposition to trade deals including the Trans Pacific Partnership, could pay off despite polls in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin showing close contests, some even within the margin of error.
As of the close of business on election day, Democrats were absolutely confident that Secretary Clinton would break the 300 mark in the electoral college, retake the Senate albeit by a small margin, and take a big bite out of Speaker Paul Ryan’s House majority.
Negative down-ballot pressure, it was thought, would doom the reelection chances of at least the four GOP senators from Wisconsin, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire, while Democrats would hold on to Sen. Reid’s seat in Nevada, giving Democrats the 50 votes they would need to regain control of the Senate, with a Vice President Kaine on speed dial to break any tie. Plus, Democrats smelled blood in the water in Indiana, Missouri and North Carolina and some even felt they had a shot at knocking out Florida Senator Marco Rubio, a rising star in the GOP whom Democrats were eager to unseat in order to take the polish off.
The House GOP majority was never believed to be in any real danger given the small handful of competitive races, about 37 out of 435, with the Democrats required to win nearly all of them to wrest control of that chamber. It just wasn’t in the cards and most pundits put the damage to the GOP in the low double digits but allowing that the list of Republican casualties could grow.
But, when the dust began to settle last night, ahem, this morning, it was Trump whose electoral college votes soared to near the 300 mark. Moreover, the Democrats managed to defeat just one Republican senator (Illinois) while hanging onto what many believed was the only Democratic-held seat in real contention (Nevada) — only last night was it revealed just how close the senate contest in Colorado was, with the Democratic incumbent there winning against an unknown, unfunded opponent by a margin closer than Occam’s razor. In New Hampshire, however, another potential Democratic pick up opportunity does still exist, although the Democrat leads the incumbent Republican by just over 700 votes and the race is still too close to call. There is also still a run-off election in Louisiana where the Republican leads based on last night’s returns.
Meanwhile, House GOP losses appear to be confined to just seven. Four races are yet to be decided but the Republican holds the lead in each. The two upsets were the defeat of a twelve-year House incumbent from Florida who apparently got snuck up on by a young political novice, and a Freedom Caucus sort from New Jersey who was next in line to chair the Budget Committee.
Impacts on Committees of Importance to Agriculture
Parochially speaking, Senate Agriculture Committee Members, Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT), John Boozman (R-AR), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), John Hoeven (R-ND), and John Thune (R-SD) all coasted to victory last night, while Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO) won a surprisingly close race.
Retention of Senate control by the GOP means Senator Thad Cochran (R-MS) will presumably want to keep the helm of the Appropriations Committee and, in turn, Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS) will continue to hold the gavel at the Agriculture Committee. While Democrats are not term-limited as chairmen or ranking member, they do leave for greener committee pastures from time to time. However, Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) has made clear she intends to remain Ranking Member of the Agriculture panel.
Senator Stabenow will not only need to partner with Chairman Roberts on the development and passage of the next Farm Bill but she must do so in a politically charged environment as seven of the nine Democratic members of the Senate Agriculture Committee face reelection in 2018, including Senator Stabenow. Plus, there are two other Democratic senators representing GOP farm states who will be up in 2018. In total, Democrats will defend 25 seats in 2018 compared to the Republicans’ eight, making this coming election cycle potentially tough sledding for Senate Democrats. No Republican member of the Senate Agriculture Committee faces reelection in 2018. Democrats will undoubtedly press hard for a Farm Bill and Republicans will be on the hot spot to deliver.
Over on the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, Senators Jerry Moran (R-KS) and, as previously mentioned, Senators Hoeven and Leahy, coasted to reelection, while Senator Roy Blunt (R-MO) won a closer than earlier anticipated race against a guy best known for his ability to assemble an assault rifle while blind-folded.
So, in sum, there are no membership changes to either panel that would result from last night’s election.
On the other side of the dome, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway (R-TX) and Ranking Member Collin Peterson (D-MN) were both reelected last night and expected to continue to lead the panel. Rep. Conaway coasted in with 90 percent of the vote while Rep. Peterson had a much closer race than usual, reminding those who care about agriculture not to take good friends like Rep. Peterson for granted.
As for the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, perhaps the biggest question is who will serve as Chairman should Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-AL) be selected by his conference to serve as Chairman of the full Committee? Rep. Aderholt has reportedly expressed interested in the top post as has Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ). Due to retirements, there are three subcommittee posts that will lack chairmen and a fourth should either Rep. Aderholt or Frelinghysen assume the full Committee chairmanship. The next four members on the full Committee without a chair include Reps. Kevin Yoder (R-KS), who weathered a fairly close race last night, Rep. Steve Womack (R-AR), Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE), and Rep. Tom Rooney (R-FL). Subcommittee GOP members Reps. David Valadao (R-CA) and David Young (R-IA) also weathered close calls last night.
In terms of leadership, after a stellar evening for Republicans, one would not anticipate any desire for a shake up in either the Senate or House although there has reportedly been talk among both Freedom Caucus members and folks upset with Speaker Ryan’s handling of Mr. Trump after the famous “locker talk” recording that some House Republicans might like to consider other potential Speakers. Be that as it may, Rep. Ryan is likely stuck with arguably the worst job in Washington. On the Democratic side, Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) is the heir apparent to Senator Reid and Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) currently serves as whip. The question is whether members of the Democratic caucus will want more liberal representation in some leadership capacity.
Possible Agriculture Secretaries
There is naturally much speculation on who President-Elect Trump will select as his Agriculture Secretary. This usually amounts to nothing more than a guessing game, although there are some names that are often listed as possibilities in this instance, including Kansas Governor Sam Brownback; former Nebraska Governor Dave Heinemann; former Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue; former Texas Governor Rick Perry; Nebraska businessman and rancher Charles Herbster; Iowa agri-businessman Bruce Rastetter; and a handful of Hoosiers such as Kip Tom, a successful farmer who ran for Congress recently; Ted McKinney, the director of the Indiana Department of Agriculture; Don Villwock, the President of the Indiana Farm Bureau; Chuck Conner, president of the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives and Deputy Secretary under George W. Bush; and Mike McCloskey of Select Milk Producers, Inc. and Fair Oaks Farms. Mr. McCloskey and, I am sure, the other Hoosiers on the list have come to know Vice President-Elect Mike Pence who, when he was in the House, served as an exemplary Member of the House Agriculture Committee and as a whip for the 2002 Farm Bill.
The President-Elect on Policies Affecting Agriculture
Presidential candidates don’t spend much time anymore talking about farm policy as they once did but the President-Elect has made statements supportive of farm policy, including crop insurance, the Renewable Fuels Standard, revoking environmental regulations such as the Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) and the Clean Power plan rules, enacting tax relief including the repeal of the death tax and capital gains tax relief, and making significant investment in infrastructure. He has also stated that he would be very deferential to the Agriculture Committees on farm policy details. And, of course, Mr. Trump has also stated his strong opposition to TPP, NAFTA, and similar trade agreements.
The 115th Congress
Were this a piece about what to expect had Secretary Clinton been elected President with a Republican House and/or Senate, I would have probably written that we ought to expect more of the same. However, I do not mean that critically of either in that case. I simply would have meant that the stand-off between a Democratic President and an at least partially Republican Congress would have continued.
But, the results of last night’s elections mean something altogether different: namely, hang onto your Make America Great Again hats because there is a lot to do, a pathway to do it, and a whole lot of pent up demand amongst GOP lawmakers to make it happen.
Of course, unilaterally, the new President can unwind regulations and executive orders unilaterally put in place by his predecessor. Prime examples are WOTUS and Climate regulations. The President-Elect has certainly said he would do just that.
Both Mr. Trump and Congressional Republicans are eager to do tax reform and this may certainly be one of those areas where their philosophical interests may converge nicely with popular opinion, although with the caveat that bringing down rates on a budget neutral basis means closing a lot of “loopholes” that don’t look like loopholes to those who are using them.
Mr. Trump and Congressional Republicans are also eager to deliver on their promise to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act and, given premium increases and significant attrition among providers operating in the risk pool, this, too, may gel nicely with popular opinion.
Increased funding on infrastructure is also a big promise of the President-Elect and Congressional Republicans have already expressed willingness to use additional revenues generated by the growth resulting from tax reform on infrastructure.
Appointing Constitutional originalists in the mold of the late Justice Antonin Scalia will also be a top mutual priority.
The President-Elect and GOP lawmakers have also talked about the need for deficit reduction. However, where the two have parted company is on the need for changes to Social Security and Medicare where Mr. Trump has said he opposes alterations and GOP lawmakers say changes are necessary since both programs will be insolvent within the near future (2028, 2029). How the two sides reconcile their difference on this matter is important because of the sheer size of these programs which would make meaningful deficit reduction without their being in the mix both extremely difficult and awfully hard on those programs upon which the extra burden would fall. Food Stamps would presumably be part of the mix and, of course, this has repercussions for the Farm Bill rewrite expected to take place in the next Congress.
Trade, too, is another example where the President-Elect and the vast majority of Republican lawmakers take a different point of view. Reconciling differences over how to proceed on a U.S. trade agenda will be a difficult needle to thread since the states that gave Mr. Trump his margin of victory are comprised significantly of voters who strongly believe their families and communities have suffered terribly on account of trade agreements. TPP and T-TIP are the most immediately affected.
For those of you who have gotten used to stalemate, I would predict a change of scenery. Politicians make promises every election season and voters often numb to their going unfulfilled. But one gets the unmistakable impression that Trump backers took very much to heart the promises he made and one also gets the sense that he is going to move heaven and earth to try and honor them.
I am persuaded that either through the use of reconciliation — which allows the Senate to move legislation on a simple majority — or through changes in the Senate rules to navigate around the 60-vote threshold, the President-Elect and the GOP Congress are going to want to make a lot of headway on their priorities over the next two years. Under either approach they could get around Democratic opposition much as President Obama and Congressional Democrats did on the Affordable Care Act, though I anticipate institutionalists far and away preferring reconciliation over a change in rules. Moreover, renegade GOP members may have become accustomed to challenging their Leadership but it’s hard to imagine Mr. Trump countenancing defections on his side for long.
As for the Farm Bill rewrite, it may well be delayed and extended in favor of tackling bigger stuff or its passage may be hastened as part of a broader legislative agenda which could involve both roses and thorns. Recall that in 2005, for example, the Republican White House and Congress at least considered giving the Farm Bill a small haircut in a reconciliation process in exchange for a 10-year reauthorization.
In sum, the President-Elect is saying all the right things about agriculture, farmers, and ranchers and he has staked out many good position on issues affecting agriculture. Where the rub may lie is how that favorable approach and policy are affected by other policies being pursued.
But, two things are for sure. First, Trump apparently digs farmers and ranchers and by the looks of last night’s results farmers and ranchers dug him back.
And, second, all signs point to the 115th Congress being bigly, phenomenal, or huge, believe me.