By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Stay informed on the 2024 US Presidential election with the FT’s comprehensive coverage, including news, analysis, and data. A free guide offers insights into the new administration, covering cabinet appointments and policy plans. Readers can also access in-depth perspectives and analysis on the state of democracy following record voter turnout. Explore the dedicated election hub and Democracy 2024 sections for complete coverage.
Read the original article here
Biden aims to Trump-proof his legacy with a late-stage policy blitz, a flurry of activity in his final days in office. The underlying hope is to solidify achievements and make them more resistant to reversal by a potential Trump administration. However, the effectiveness of this strategy is highly questionable.
The inherent challenge lies in the nature of executive orders. These can be easily undone by a successor president, rendering any attempts at long-term policy protection futile. Only legislation passed through Congress and signed into law stands a chance of withstanding a change in administration. This is a fundamental limitation Biden’s approach cannot overcome.
The argument could be made that Biden’s actions, and those of his predecessors, are ultimately temporary measures easily reversed. A potential second Trump term might effectively erase years of progress, potentially returning the country to a pre-modern state. This paints a pessimistic picture of the long-term impact of any policy changes.
The sentiment amongst some is that the current political climate makes “Trump-proofing” an impossible task. The perception is that a significant portion of the electorate actively rejects democratic norms and principles. This perception creates a sense of hopelessness regarding the possibility of enacting enduring policy changes.
Criticisms are leveled at the timing of Biden’s efforts. Why wait until the final days? The argument is that a more proactive and consistent approach throughout his term would have yielded more significant, lasting results. This lack of consistent action fuels frustration and skepticism regarding the sincerity of the current policy push.
The proposed solutions offered range from the practical to the symbolic. Legalizing marijuana is suggested as a way to provide immediate relief to the populace, while proposals for substantial student loan debt forgiveness are offered as potent measures to address economic inequality. These proposals are seen as both impactful and likely to inspire strong reactions from the opposing party.
However, some believe that these late-stage efforts are nothing more than a political strategy, an attempt to mask a lack of substantial action during the bulk of his presidency. The underlying concern is that these actions are too little, too late, and fall short of addressing the significant challenges facing the country. This is coupled with a sense of dissatisfaction with the Democratic party’s overall performance, highlighting their inability to maintain and protect their political gains.
Frustration is also directed at the Democratic party’s overall strategy. There’s a widespread feeling that their approach of playing within the existing political system is ineffective when facing an opposition that actively works to undermine the system itself. There is a belief that a more aggressive approach is necessary to counter this systematic opposition.
The broader conversation inevitably touches on Biden’s perceived shortcomings. His selection of Merrick Garland as Attorney General is questioned, with some arguing a more assertive approach towards pursuing legal action against Trump would have been beneficial. The opportunity cost of not taking stronger action earlier is highlighted as a crucial misstep, emphasizing the impact of such inaction on his legacy.
Despite the late-stage policy blitz, many see Biden’s legacy as already defined by the fact of a Trump presidency. This underscores the profound impact of Trump’s influence, highlighting that actions after the fact are unlikely to change the perception of his overall mark on American politics. This reinforces the perception of the limitations of any “Trump-proofing” strategy.
Ultimately, the overarching theme is the sense of futility felt by many. The possibility of undoing or preventing Trump’s impact feels insurmountable given the current political reality. This sentiment is a powerful commentary on the current state of American politics. The prevailing feeling is that the damage to the political system has already been done, and the effectiveness of even well-intentioned last-minute initiatives is severely compromised.