The dystopian atmosphere of turmoil in the new administration has caused many Americans to feel uncertain and anxious. According to a recent Associated Press/NORC Center for Public Affairs Research survey, 60% of Americans disapprove of the job the president is doing and nearly 50% “strongly” disapprove. Sixty-five percent think that he has little or no respect for our democratic traditions.
In the months since his inauguration, the president has set out to alter or abolish several longstanding governmental policies, for example, the previous president’s health care plan. This causes anxiety and uncertainty especially among older and lower-income persons because health is a crucial area of concern in our lives. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that under the president’s current plan to replace the Affordable Care Act, up to 24 million people are likely to lose health benefits. In this kind of environment, people are apt to wonder when the “other shoe will drop.”
Journalists report virtually every day on disturbing information from testimony in Congressional hearings, leaks, and the president’s tweets. Shortly after reportedly telling the head of the FBI what a great job he was doing, the president fired him, giving varying reasons for having done so. This is reminiscent of his reality show — The Apprentice. While those firings may have been interesting as television entertainment, in real life such presidential actions can have far-reaching and negative consequences; not only can they damage the office of the president but can adversely affect other governmental institutions as well.
During a recent Senate Committee hearing, the fired FBI director James Comey testified under oath that the president had invited him to a private White House dinner and, with no one else nearby, asked him to “let go” of the investigation of General Michael Flynn, whom the president had hired as national security adviser and then subsequently fired.
Another of the president’s worrisome decisions involved foreign affairs – the withdrawal of the U.S. from the 2016 Paris accord on climate change. The leaders of nearly 200 nations joined this global initiative because they realized the need for greater attention to the health of our planet. These countries pledged to voluntarily restrict pollutants adversely affecting the earth’s air and water and, in general, to work toward a cleaner environment in any other ways they could.
Very early in his term, the president signed an executive order temporarily banning people from several predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States. Several federal appellate courts have invalidated this ban and as well as its subsequent replacement. The judiciary continues its review of this second executive order; it may ultimately reach the Supreme Court for decision because of the importance of the issues it raises.
The president has entered uncharted territory in other unsettling ways. He has refused to release his income tax returns in spite of numerous requests during his campaign and into his presidency. He claims that he cannot release this information because his returns are under audit by the Internal Revenue Service; however, the IRS has stated that an ongoing audit does not impede him from releasing his own tax information.
For decades both Republican and Democratic presidents, and even some presidential candidates, have released their tax returns for the American public to see. The release of these returns are important for two reasons: one, being honest and transparent would indicate that he has nothing to hide, and two, especially important in his case, is that, unlike virtually all previous presidents, he has significant business interests worldwide. This could create a conflict between his personal financial interests and the interests of the nation. His clear duty is to the nation, and any such conflict could invoke the Constitution’s emoluments clauses.
Lastly, during the president’s recent trip abroad, he showed an astonishing lack of respect for Montenegro prime minister Milo Djukanovic at a gathering of NATO dignitaries who were about to be photographed. The footage of this, aired on nightly news programs, shows the president coming from the back of the group and physically shoving aside the prime minister, apparently in order to reach a more prominent position at the front of the assembled group. This disrespect for the prime minister, whom the president likely considered to be his inferior, is not only a breach of good manners but of diplomatic decorum as well. Courtesy and respect should and must still matter, and it is embarrassing that the president who represents us failed to show the deserved respect and courtesy on this occasion.
Perhaps coincidentally, after the president’s May trip abroad some of our strongest allies have wondered aloud whether America is losing its place as a world leader. For example, in his speech before members of NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization), the president did not affirm the collective security guarantee in Section 5 of this 1949 agreement – that an attack on one member of the alliance is considered an attack on all, and the president’s lack of reaffirmation of this section in his speech surprised and bothered many NATO allies. NATO is an important alliance and this 1949 agreement was an important pillar in the restoration of Europe after the loss of lives and the political and physical devastation caused by World War II.
The prime minister of Montenegro seems not to have been as inconsequential as the president thought when he pushed him aside in his rush to reach a prominent place for the photograph of NATO representatives. Just a couple of weeks ago – on June 5, the 28-nation NATO group became 29 after it admitted the country of Montenegro. Perhaps our president will treat its prime minister more courteously the next time they meet.
