No 'draining of the swamp' yet

Those who thought that a new era would take place in Washington under our new soon-to-be Commander-in-Chief are surely starting to feel some trepidation.

Throughout Donald Trump’s campaign, he mocked his opponent’s reliance on large donors and championed the cause that he would not be owing allegiance to anyone because he was self-funding his campaign.

While the self-funding part was true for his primary campaign, that notion was thrown out once he ran for president.

 

With his recent choice for Labor Secretary, fast food entrepreneur Andrew Puzder, President-elect Donald Trump has now rewarded six big donors and fundraisers by selecting them to serve in his administration.  Together, with their families, Trump’s six choices gave $11.6 million to support his presidential run. 

One of his latest appointees, Linda McMahon, wife of World Wrestling Entertainment magnet Vince McMahon, gave $7.5 million to his campaign.  She was rewarded with the job of head of the Small Business Administration.  She and her husband were also the largest donors to Trump’s private foundation to the tune of $5 million.

Sorry to say this but apparently reward patronage is still alive and well in Washington for Mr. Trump continues the practice of filling  administrative positions based upon the size of one’s donation rather than qualifications. So far there is little evidence of “the draining of the swamp.”

If it looks like a politician, acts like a politician, and walks like a politician, we should all just accept the fact that after winning the election Donald Trump is now just a “good ole” establishment politician.  How disappointing!

Trump's first bailout

Thursday, President–elect Trump held a photo-op at the Carrier plant, in Indiana, where his Vice President-elect served as governor.  He announced that he had convinced Carrier not to move 1100 jobs to Mexico and keep its Indiana facility open; in reality it’s only 800 jobs because some are still going to Mexico.

On the surface this appears to be a great achievement.  However, like most of what Trump has recently done, it doesn’t jive with what he claimed he was going to do to get companies to stay.

Trump’s campaign rhetoric was very clear about how he would stop companies from leaving; punishment, by tariffs and border taxes. 

“Companies are not going to leave the U.S. any more without consequences,” he stated throughout his run for president and reiterated again at the Carrier plant.  This was one of Trump’s major focal points during his election bid. 

However, the deal to save jobs at Carrier involved donating $7 million of Indianan tax payers’ money to the company.  This is certainly not a consequence or punishment for Carrier, and in fact is more like a state funded bailout.

Trump, throughout his campaign mocked politicians who advocated low-interest loans and tax abatements to keep factories in the United States.  He ridiculed Obama for his financial bailout of the auto industry with taxpayers’ money.

Additionally, Trumps’ initial use of incentives to keep these jobs from going overseas causes major problems for Republicans with their emphasis on free-market economics.

 

The other confusing and somewhat hypocritical nature of Trump’s rhetoric is the fact that Trump’s anti-outsourcing stance is completely the opposite of what actually occurs with his family businesses which rely on low-wage laborers around the globe to produce most of its branded merchandise.

Even his daughter, Ivanka, has her own separate brand of jewelry, shoes and clothing produced in China.

Maybe this entire hypocritical confusion can best be summarized by Bernie Sanders, the former contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, when he states, “Trump had said he would force the company to ‘pay a damn tax’ if it closed the plant.  Instead of a ‘damn tax,’ the company will be rewarded with a damn tax cut.”

Guess that pretty-well sums it up, for one never knows what the ‘shoot from the hip’ President-elect will do next.  Hopefully Trump has not created a dangerous precedent.