David Dayen, executive editor of The American Prospect, dives deep into the turbulent landscape of Donald Trump's cabinet choices. He reveals how figures like Matt Gaetz and Pete Hegseth amplify the chaos, serving as distractions from pressing issues. Dayen argues that the real power may rest with White House czars rather than traditional cabinet members. He discusses the implications of centralizing authority in the Trump administration, suggesting upcoming appointments could reflect a strategically chaotic approach that prioritizes loyalty over governance.
Trump's administration shows a significant shift toward centralized power with White House czars overshadowing traditional cabinet roles, impacting decision-making processes.
The reliance on non-confirmed officials like Tom Homan and Stephen Miller raises concerns about potential autocratic governance and extreme policy implementations.
Deep dives
The Disruption of Traditional Cabinet Roles
The podcast highlights a shift in how cabinet roles are viewed and utilized under Trump’s administration. It suggests that traditional cabinet secretaries may become mere figureheads while real power resides with czars and officials within the White House. The rationale behind this strategy is to centralize authority and minimize the influence of bureaucrats who could obstruct presidential directives. This dynamic allows Trump to streamline decision-making and prevent leaks of information that could hinder his agenda.
Key Figures Influencing Policy from Within
Several individuals are identified as crucial to shaping policies in Trump's administration, often from positions that do not require Senate confirmation. Names like Tom Homan, a hardliner on immigration, and Stephen Miller are mentioned as likely key players behind immigration policies, such as mass deportation. These figures, while not officially leading major agencies, are expected to heavily influence those who do, ensuring alignment with Trump’s hardline stance. This arrangement emphasizes a departure from traditional governance, where cabinet secretaries served as the primary policy architects.
The Impact of Centralized Power on Governance
The discussion in the podcast points to concerns about the implications of centralized power in the executive branch. With key decisions made within the White House and limited checks from traditional cabinet roles, the potential for autocratic governance rises. This new structure allows the administration to bypass typical bureaucratic hurdles, which could lead to the implementation of policies that are more extreme than those crafted through conventional processes. The narrative indicates a broader trend of weakening institutional checks, as power dynamics shift to favor a more authoritarian approach.
Donald Trump’s picks for cabinet positions are causing a lot of rolling of eyes and gnashing of teeth. But even though they don’t have official titles or well-known names, the future of Trump’s agenda might lie with a group of White House-appointed “czars,” who are also being announced with less fanfare.
Guest: David Dayen, executive editor of The American Prospect.
Want more What Next? Join Slate Plus to unlock full, ad-free access to What Next and all your other favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the What Next show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.
Podcast production by Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme and Rob Gunther.