This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up to get stories like this sent to your inbox.
Among Donald Trump’s staunch supporters, the belief persists that he can effortlessly manipulate Congress and fill his administration with loyalists.
However, this assumption overlooks his controversial choices for Attorney General, Secretary of Defense, and intelligence agency leadership, as well as his potential picks for the CDC. These selections appear designed to challenge the Constitution’s checks and balances.
Even Trump’s allies acknowledge the challenges ahead: Incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune recently stated that the confirmation process for Trump’s nominees will not be easy, highlighting the lack of guaranteed support.
To understand the reaction to Trump’s unconventional choices, consider outgoing Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell’s public and private statements.
“Institutions worth preserving have to be defended. And this is the work which, by necessity, has occupied my focus during my time in Washington,” McConnell stated at a recent event. “It’s been quite evident to me that a credible check on majority rule was worth preserving even when it didn’t serve my party’s immediate political interests. Because wild swings in policy with every transfer of power don’t serve the nation’s interest. For consequential legislation to endure, it should have to earn the support of a broad coalition.”
McConnell explicitly emphasized that each nominee must undergo Senate vetting. While seemingly straightforward, this statement carries significant weight given McConnell’s influence. His comments prompted backlash from Trump’s supporters, who perceived the Senate’s lack of immediate approval as a rejection of Trump’s choices.
Without Senate confirmation, Trump would have to rely on recess appointments. This possibility has spurred speculation, though it requires House approval and faces significant hurdles.
Republicans privately doubt that widespread recess appointments are the best approach for forming a Cabinet and maintaining Senate credibility. However, they also anticipate a White House disregarding norms and traditions, potentially retaliating against dissent.
Thune, a close associate of McConnell, is unlikely to relinquish his role in protecting Senate processes.
McConnell’s statements are seen by many as a signal for quiet dissent. Similar to former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, McConnell, despite formally relinquishing his leadership role, retains considerable influence, potentially causing friction with colleagues unwilling to relinquish power.
The ongoing tension between Trump and McConnell offers Thune a delicate balancing act, aiming to maintain Trump’s favor while upholding Senate norms. Thune acknowledged recess appointments as an option, but recognized the necessity of unanimous Republican support, a highly improbable scenario.
This situation is rooted in McConnell’s extensive Senate experience and his known skepticism toward Trump’s approach. He has consistently resisted Trump’s attempts to circumvent Senate rules, as exemplified by Trump’s 2018 demand to eliminate the 60-vote threshold for legislation and Biden’s similar attempt in 2022. Both requests were effectively ignored by McConnell.
Thune is expected to follow a similar approach, a strategy that benefits the Senate’s stability and maintains its traditional functions, even if it frustrates both Trump and Biden.
The Senate’s inherent inertia contrasts with Trump’s impulsive style. Historically, unilateral Cabinet appointments are unlikely to succeed. Opposing Trump is risky, but attempting to reshape Senate processes to accommodate controversial nominees could prove even more problematic.
Make sense of what matters in Washington. .
“`
