You're Hired: Tracking the Trump Administration Transition - January 3, 2017
Trump Administration  Vice President Mike Pence Cabinet • White House staff • Transition team |
Domestic affairs: Abortion • Crime and justice • Education • Energy and the environment • Federal courts • Firearms policy • First Amendment • Healthcare • Immigration • Infrastructure • LGBTQ issues • Marijuana • Puerto Rico • Social welfare programs • Veterans • Voting issues Economic affairs and regulations: Agriculture and food policy • Budget • Financial regulation • Jobs • Social Security • Taxes • Trade Foreign affairs and national security: Afghanistan • Arab states of the Persian Gulf • China • Cuba • Iran • Iran nuclear deal • Islamic State and terrorism • Israel and Palestine • Latin America • Military • NATO • North Korea • Puerto Rico • Russia • Syria • Syrian refugees • Technology, privacy, and cybersecurity |
| Polling indexes: Opinion polling during the Trump administration |
This is the January 3, 2017, edition of an email sent from November 2016 to September 2017 that covered Donald Trump's presidential transition, cabinet appointees, and the different policy positions of those individuals who may have had an effect on the new administration. Previous editions of "You're Hired" can be found here.
Welcome back and happy new year. As of today, Trump has announced 13 out of 15 cabinet nominations. Click here for a rundown of all of them. The two remaining major cabinet positions yet to be announced are the secretaries of agriculture and veterans’ affairs. We wrote about those positions and a few of the potential nominees on December 20 (agriculture) and December 21 (VA).
Robert Lighthizer as U.S. trade representative
Today, Trump announced his intentions to nominate international trade lawyer Robert Lighthizer as U.S. trade representative (USTR). Created in 1962, the Office of USTR plays a direct role in U.S. trade policy by negotiating with foreign governments and businesses, resolving disputes, representing the country in international trade policy organizations, and advising the president. The position requires Senate confirmation.
Lighthizer is currently an attorney at the firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom, where he specializes in international trade. He has a background in government and politics. Under the Reagan administration, he served as a deputy USTR and was the chief of staff of the Senate finance committee. In 1996, he was the national treasurer for Republican Bob Dole’s 1996 presidential campaign.
Lighthizer will work closely with Commerce secretary nominee Wilbur Ross and trade director Peter Navarro to shape U.S. trade policy under the Trump administration. All three hold views on international trade that compliment the president-elect’s (read about Ross here and Navarro here). In 2011, for example, while Trump was weighing a bid for the presidency, Lightizer wrote an op-ed defending Trump’s views on trade and China. He said, “Given the current financial crisis and the widespread belief that the 21st century will belong to China, is free trade really making global markets more efficient? Is it promoting our values and making America stronger? Or is it simply strengthening our adversaries and creating a world where countries who abuse the system - such as China - are on the road to economic and military dominance? If Mr. Trump’s potential campaign does nothing more than force a real debate on those questions, it will have done a service to both the Republican Party and the country.”
In a statement from Trump’s transition team, Lighthizer said, “I am fully committed to President-elect Trump’s mission to level the playing field for American workers and forge better trade policies which will benefit all Americans.”
Trade was a key component of Trump’s 2016 campaign. He promised to renegotiate the NAFTA and Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deals, both of which he has called “disasters” and “bad deals.” Trump also pledged to take a harder stance on China’s international trade practices.
Office of Congressional Ethics
On Monday night, the House Republican conference voted to give the House ethics committee oversight over the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE), a nonpartisan and independent federal office that investigates potential ethics violations by members of the House. Today, however, the conference nixed its proposal, following criticism from both Democrats and Republicans, including President-elect Trump.
Created in 2008 in response to a series of ethics violations, the primary function of the OCE is to conduct investigations and to report its findings to the House ethics committee. The OCE also has the power to release its findings to the general public. House Republicans voted to remove the OCE’s authority to disclose its reports to the public and prohibited the OCE from employing a spokesperson and pursuing investigations based on anonymous tips. House Republicans voted 119 to 74 to include the proposal in a rules package that the House as a whole is expected to vote on—and pass—today. Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), who proposed the changes, said in a statement, “The amendment ... improves upon due process rights for individuals under investigation, as well as witnesses called to testify. The OCE has a serious and important role in the House, and this amendment does nothing to impede their work.”
The House ethics committee, which would have jurisdiction over the OCE under Goodlatte’s proposal, consists of five Democrats and five Republicans. The OCE has six voting members plus two alternates. The speaker of the House appoints three members and an alternate and selects the chairman. The minority leaders appoints the other three members and the other alternate and selects a co-chairman. According to the OCE website, the speaker and minority leader must agree on the appointments. Members of the OCE cannot be lobbyist or federal employees and must agree not to seek federal office.
House Democrats criticized the proposed changes to the OCE, and GOP leaders, such as Speaker Paul Ryan and majority leader Kevin McCarthy reportedly lobbied members to vote against it. Trump also spoke out against the proposal on Twitter. In two tweets, he said, “With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it may be, their number one act and priority. Focus on tax reform, healthcare and so many other things of far greater importance!” Ethics reform was a major part of his campaign platform, particularly in the final months of the 2016 election. “Drain the swamp” was a common slogan at his campaign rallies, and in October he proposed a series of ethics reforms for federal officials, including term limits and restrictions on lawmakers seeking to become lobbyist after leaving office.
On Tuesday morning, McCarthy motioned to withdraw the proposal from the rules package. The House Republican conference adopted the motion by unanimous consent.
North Korea
Trump responded via Twitter to a televised New Year’s Day speech from North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in which Kim stated that his government was preparing to test an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of striking the United States with a nuclear weapon. Trump tweeted, “North Korea just stated that it is in the final stages of developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the U.S. It won't happen!”
Kim’s speech follows North Korea’s testing of a nuclear weapon in September 2016, the country’s fifth nuclear weapons test since 2006. The September test prompted the U.N Security Council to call an emergency meeting. The Obama administration reportedly told Trump’s transition team after the November election that North Korea's nuclear weapons development would be the leading national security threat the next White House administration would face.
What all do we know about where Trump stands on North Korea? Below we take a look at some of his past statements on potential threats posed by the country.
What Trump has said
- On speaking with Kim Jong Un: In a May 2016 interview with Reuters, Trump said he was open to speaking with the North Korean leader, saying, “I would speak to him, I would have no problem speaking to him.” Later in the month, Trump added that he would not visit the country, telling MSNBC host Joe Scarborough, “I wouldn't go to North Korea, Joe, I wouldn't go there. The last thing I'd do is go. I would never go to North Korea.”
- On China’s influence in North Korea: Also in the Reuters interview from May 2016, Trump said that he would pressure China to become more involved in confronting threats posed by North Korea: “I would put a lot of pressure on China because economically we have tremendous power over China. China can solve that problem with one meeting or one phone call.” He made a similar statement in a Republican debate in January 2016, saying, “China says they don't have that good of control over North Korea. They have tremendous control. ... I would get on with China, let China solve that problem. They can do it quickly and surgically. That's what we should do with North Korea.”
- On Japan developing a nuclear arsenal: In a March 2016 interview with The New York Times, Trump indicated that he would possibly not object to Japan developing its own nuclear arsenal as a deterrent to North Korean aggression. When asked if he would object to Japan developing a nuclear arsenal, Trump responded, “... at some point, we cannot be the policeman of the world. And unfortunately, we have a nuclear world now. And, would I rather have North Korea have them with Japan sitting there having them also? You may very well be better off if that’s the case. In other words, where Japan is defending itself against North Korea, which is a real problem. You very well may have a better case right there. We certainly haven’t been able to do much with [Kim Jong Un] and with North Korea. But you may very well have a better case.”
- On the Iran nuclear deal and North Korea: In that same March 2016 interview, Trump suggested that the U.S. should have used the Iran nuclear deal to put pressure on North Korea. He said, “Iran, we had a great opportunity during this negotiation when we gave them the 150 billion and many other things. Iran is the No. 1 trading partner of North Korea. Now we could have put something in our agreement that they would have led the charge if we had people with substance and with brainpower and with some negotiating ability. But the No. 1 trading partner with North Korea is Iran. And we did a deal with them, and we just did a deal with them, and we don’t even mention North Korea in the deal. That was a great opportunity to put another five pages in the deal, or less, and they do have a great influence over North Korea. Same thing with China, China has great influence over North Korea but they don’t say they do because they’re tweaking us.”
- (Note: New York Times interviewer David Sanger responded to Trump’s statement above by saying that China is North Korea’s primary trade partner. Trump responded by saying, “I’ve heard that certainly, but I’ve also heard from other sources that it’s Iran.”)
- On using force against North Korea: Trump declared that he would use force to control nuclear development in North Korea in his 2000 book, The America We Deserve. If he were president, Trump wrote, "North Korea would suddenly discover that its worthless promises of civilized behavior would cut no ice. I would let Pyongyang know in no uncertain terms that it can either get out of the nuclear arms race or expect a rebuke similar to the one Ronald Reagan delivered to Ghadhafi in 1986. I don’t think anybody is going to accuse me of tiptoeing through the issues or tap-dancing around them either. Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?"
See also
- You're Hired: Tracking the Trump Administration Transition
- Donald Trump presidential transition team
| ||||||||||||||||
