Ambition

Ambition failed us. 

The incentives for top Republicans were not to check lawless power. They were to consent to it. 

"But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. . . .

Ambition must be made to counteract ambition."

Federalist 51 is dense reading. I will summarize. Alexander Hamilton or James Madison addressed the People of New York explaining that the proposed Constitution would have both the power to act forcefully when necessary, and yet be constrained from itself being becoming tyrannical because each branch of the government would be independent. Therefore, holders of powers in each branch would jealously guard their own prerogatives. Representatives and senators would not let a president become a dictator because in that case their power to make laws and control the finances would be lost, which they naturally would oppose. Ambition counteracts ambition.

People told me that yesterday's post was naive, and gave too much credit to Liz Cheney. I wrote that she was acting from principle. After all, she saw Trump lie about an election to hold onto power, first with legal fictions and then a whipped-up crowd that attacked the Capitol.  Of course she would object. The criticisms of my post argued that in any action by a politician, don't presume principle. Assume self-interest and figure out what that is, they said. Principle fails. Ambition does not

OK. Maybe Liz Cheney is a strategist playing the long game and the road less travelled. Liz Cheney's own concession speech reported her political self-interest as she wanted it understood. She said she won her former primary easily. She said all she had to do was go along with Trump and she would have won again and still been in House leadership. She positioned herself as selfless. Cheney-the-martyr.

But assuming ambition is paramount, possibly this is her strategic long-shot route to the White House in a post-Trump world. She observes a large field of Trump-compliant potential candidates--Cruz, Hawley, DeSantis, Haley, Rubio, Stefanik, McCarthy, Don Junior, Ivanka--and as the outsider, she is Plan B. If Trump becomes toxic for some reason--always a real possibility--then she is the person who was right all along. She would be like Winston Churchill, brought into power when it became evident that his warnings about appeasing Hitler were right all along. It could work. 

I think she is principled, but one can assume the opposite. Either way, she is doing what she is doing. 

Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy were in the positions that Federalist 51 presumed to be the check on Trump. Their original emotions and instincts were what Hamilton and Madison predicted. They were shocked and offended by the Capitol riot and Trump's behavior leading up to it. They said so publicly. So far, so good.

However, their incentives were not as predicted. Their major incentives were to retain their positions as leaders, not to protect the legislative branch. McCarthy went to Mar-a-Lago and came back all-in for Trump. McConnell mumbles when it comes to Trump and the insurrection. Trump insults him but McConnell doesn't comment. McConnell says he will do everything he can to get "electable candidates," whatever their policies, to get a Republican majority. He also says he will support the Republican nominee for president, including Trump. 

McCarthy realized within a few days after January 6 that GOP House members were with Trump all the way. McCarthy scrambled to get back in front of his team. McConnell mumbles because the senate includes people who voted for impeachment. McConnell's incentive is to be any-and-all agnostic on Trump. Let Trump be Trump. Let people believe what they want.

Had McConnell and McCarthy stuck with their original observations, they might have led their members and the GOP electorate away from Trump. That wasn't their incentive, not when it meant persuading House and Senate members to persuade their Republican constituencies. Trump won the battle of persuasion. Republican voters believe Trump. GOP leaders didn't want to risk trying to turn the stampeding herd. They wanted to get in front of it.

[Note: To receive the blog daily by email go to https://petersage.subtack.com Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]