The Two Biggest Problems to Emerge From Trump's First Week

One victory may turn into a loss, and it's clear the GOP doesn't get the legislative terrain.

Photo by Javier Quiroga on Unsplash

Donald Trump made almost nonstop news during his first eight days back in office, including a war of words with Colombia’s president on Sunday that ended with both backing down to some degree.

Yet, there are two major warning signs for Trump to emerge from the week plus — one of which, ironically, stems from a victory.

That win, the narrow confirmation of Pete Hegseth to be Defense Secretary by a 51-50 margin thanks to Vice President JD Vance’s tie breaking vote, could backfire significantly on Trump. Hegseth is manifestly unqualified to run the Pentagon in dangerous times (or any times really), as former Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell made clear in a scathing statement explaining his vote against Hegseth’s confirmation. Additionally, negative news about the new Defense Secretary’s mistreatment of his second wife and his drinking habits continue to emerge.

This combination creates two risks for Trump: first, it’s entirely possible that the flood of negative stories about Hegseth’s personal life will continue. A non-disparagement agreement with his-ex wife, and a confidentiality clause in a settlement over a sexual assault allegation protect Hegseth from the most explosive potential bombshells. Yet, it’s clear that the background investigation into his past was too limited, and there may still be skeletons to emerge from his closet. At best, these would distract from Trump’s agenda and focus. At worst, they could force Hegseth’s resignation, which would create even more of a distraction and leave the Pentagon leaderless for a period.

But it’s the second risk that could destroy Trump’s presidency. If the U.S. were to face an attack or a conflict, and Hegseth handles it incompetently, the political damage to Trump would be massive. Hegseth’s lack of strategic thought and planning also run the risk of leaving the military flatfooted in some way. Appointing a Defense Secretary without the requisite experience and background is probably the most dangerous cabinet choice a president could make (an unqualified Secretary of Health and Human Services or Secretary of the Treasury would be the other contenders).

As McConnell noted, running the Pentagon is exceedingly difficult. George W. Bush learned this the hard way, despite selecting Donald Rumsfeld, someone with ample experience to run DOD, and expecting his presidency to largely focus on domestic policy. Rumsfeld totally botched the planning for what would happen after an invasion of Iraq, and it torpedoed Bush’s political standing (not to mention the massive damage it did to both the U.S. and Iraq). It was a vivid reminder that the wrong secretary of defense can do major harm to an administration. Hegseth, with his pithy talking points and culture wars focus, magnifies and increases the dangers.

Trump probably would’ve been better off with the nomination failing narrowly. For some presidents, that might’ve been a black eye. But for Trump, it simply would have fueled the sense of grievance that drives him and his followers. He could’ve played the martyr, attacked the senators responsible, and selected someone else who was more qualified but just as MAGA aligned.

Something similar happened when his first nominee for attorney general, Matt Gaetz, withdrew from consideration because he lacked the votes to be confirmed. Trump quickly pivoted and appointed former Florida attorney general Pam Bondi, who while much more qualified, is a longtime Trump ally. In the long run, the more competent Bondi is likely to prove more useful to Trump than Gaetz, whose best skill is trolling, would’ve been.

Instead, Trump will now live with the consequences of a Defense Secretary, who — at least on paper — seems to be in over his head.

The second problem for Trump is that congressional Republicans don’t seem to understand that they’ve boxed themselves into a corner.

They seem determined to use the budget reconciliation process to ram through a large swath of Trump’s agenda without threat of a Senate filibuster. Yet, they also seem to have concluded that they can’t use this process to pass an increase in the debt ceiling, because they lack sufficient Republican votes. That means raising the debt ceiling will have to come as part of some sort of bipartisan legislation, possibly the bill to fund the government that Congress must pass by mid-March.

Now, it’s possible to work on parallel partisan and bipartisan tracks in Congress. Joe Biden and congressional Democrats did just that in 2021 and 2022. Yet, what is likely to go into the two bills may well make it impossible to achieve both. Right wingers and deficit hawks have made deep spending cuts their price for supporting the tax cuts that Trump wants in the reconciliation bill.

Democrats, however, vehemently oppose cutting the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps), Medicaid, and scores of other domestic policy programs. It seems questionable, therefore, that they’d agree to a deal to keep the government funded and raise the debt ceiling — their two major points of leverage over the Republican majority — at precisely the moment when the GOP is negotiating to slash spending massively. Such cuts would render moot any funding boosts Democrats secure for the programs they prioritize.

Meanwhile, the sort of deal Democrats would require in order to do Republicans’ heavy lifting for them will infuriate the right in the House GOP caucus, and make passing a reconciliation bill with Republicans’ slim margin exceedingly difficult. That leaves Speaker Mike Johnson, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune caught between the people they need for the bill through which they intend to enact Trump’s immigration and tax priorities, and the people they need to keep the government open and to raise the debt ceiling.

Now maybe Democrats cave and give the GOP exactly what it wants. When Republicans reneged on a government spending deal in December, Democrats basically acquiesced to seeing their priorities stripped out of what eventually passed. They’re not exactly known for strategic acumen, and successful use of hard ball tactics. But if they stick together, they have real leverage, and it’s hard to see how Johnson and Thune can thread the needle.

Despite this seeming predicament, Republican senators basically laughed off an offer from their moderate Democratic colleagues to try to work together on immigration and taxes. Such talks might well have failed. But Democrats are in disarray, and moderates are looking to work with Trump where possible. They want to prove to voters that they understand the electorate’s unhappiness with their party amid a sense that it moved too far to the left.

While such a pathway would inevitably require concessions from Republicans, it might have freed Republicans from the vice they’re in. There are ways to square the circle, and pull off a partisan reconciliation bill, while using Democratic votes to keep the government funded and raise the debt ceiling. That’s especially true if Democrats don’t stick together. But it’s a difficult task — one that raises the chances of Trump’s agenda going bust.