The Democrats’ full-scale assault on President-elect Trump began this week with near-blanket opposition to his cabinet nominees, opening the Senate minority to charges of hypocrisy and political opportunism.
For eight years, Democrats accused Republicans of blocking President Obama’s nominees and legislative agenda for no other reason than their desire to derail his administration.
In opposing the Senate confirmation of nearly all Trump picks for key government agencies, the Democrats are borrowing from the Republicans’ 2009 playbook and promising more of the same.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s memorably commented back in 2010 that Republicans’ goal was to make Obama a one-term president. One could be excused for thinking, given Democrats’ wholesale opposition to Trump’s nominees and policies, that Democrats have the same plans for Trump.
A few of the Democrats’ favorite attack lines: Rex Tillerson, nominee to serve as secretary of state, has close ties to the Russian government; Steven Mnuchin, nominee to serve treasury secretary, ran a bank that scrutinized for improper foreclosures; and Sessions’ past record on race and voting rights. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., is even taking the unprecedented step of not just voting against Sessions, but testifying against him.
The base may be driving the current spirit of non-cooperation.
“So many of these nominees are offensive to the coalition that makes up the Democratic party that it would have been hard to limit [our opposition] without a full-on riot occurring,” said Rodell Mollineau, a Democratic operative who served as an advisor to his party’s leadership in the Senate during Obama’s first term.
Confirmation hearings began Tuesday with consideration of Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., Trump’s choice for attorney general. Additional nominees are scheduled to be vetted by the Senate throughout the week.
Democrats reject parallels drawn between their approach to Trump and the Republicans’ resistance to Obama. Mollineau said that there are troubles with Trump’s nominees that fall outside of the usual partisan concerns.
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., has been circulating a letter written by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., eight years ago, when he was the minority leader, to then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., expressing concerns over proper vetting of nominees.
Republicans contend that their opposition to Obama was principled and measured, and think Democrats are behaving worse.
Rather than block Obama’s nominees en masse, say Republicans involved in the party’s opposition strategy at the time, they honed in on a few high profile picks considered vulnerable and unacceptable. The GOP never doubted Obama’s right to assemble a government of his choosing, party insiders say.
That’s why most, like Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic nominee, were easily confirmed. Clinton served as Obama’s first secretary of state.
“They have dramatically upped the upped the decibel level when it comes to politicizing the confirmation process,” John Thune of South Dakota, the No. 3 ranking Senate Republican, said of the Democrats.
Some Democratic insiders are questioning their party’s kitchen-sink strategy to undermine Trump’s cabinet nominees.
Tactically, they fear that if all of the president-elect’s hires are painted as equally abnormal and unacceptable, the public will view the Democratic Party’s opposition as hyperbolic, and conclude that none of them are worthy of rejection by the Senate.
“There is a difference between Trump nominees and nominees from previous administrations,” said a former Democratic National Committee official, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about the party’s confirmation strategy. “Our path forward isn’t to copy what Republicans did. It’s incumbent on us to fight Trump where we can and use his nominees to make a broader argument about the problems with his polices.”
