Actions by Trump administration focus of FSU forum

Dylan Pichnarcik / THE GATEPOST

By Dylan Pichnarcik News Editor The Center for Inclusive Excellence (CIE) hosted “The Trump Presidency So Far,” a forum for members of the FSU community to share their thoughts on the current political climate, on April 14. The event was moderated by CIE Director Jerome Burke, retired Political Science Professor David Smailes, and Sociology Professor Jonathan Martin provided presentations about the Trump administration and recent actions taken by it. Smailes' presentation focused on what he believes the Trump administration's interpretation of the United States Constitution is and the areas that are being affected. He said to understand the Trump administration, “We have to understand their particular interpretation of the Constitution, and in particular the executive power of the president.” According to Smailes, the Trump administration has taken traditional areas of activity for a president “to a much greater degree than any president ever has.” And the Trump administration has begun to put into effect an understanding of executive power that “goes well beyond what other presidents have argued,” he said. Smailes said in the field of political science, this is defined as a unitary presidency. He said a unitary presidency is the idea that “the President, not Congress, is fully in control of the federal government” and any law passed by Congress that restricts presidential authority can be ignored by the president. Smailes said the unitary presidency is put into effect through executive orders enacted by Trump. According to Smailes, executive orders are issued to express how presidents want their administration to operate. “What these orders can do is create new policies. It’s a way of doing things without having to go through Congress,” he said. Smailes said there are two ways to challenge executive orders. Orders can be challenged in court, and as of press time, there are at least 86 rulings that have temporarily blocked actions taken by the Trump administration, according to an article published by The New York Times. The second way is through congressional action. According to Smailes, Trump has also begun dismantling agencies Congress has power over, not the President. He said proponents of the unitary presidency theory believe Congress does not have the power to tell a President what to do. Smailes said two agencies that were affected by Trump were the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). He said the USAID is independent of the government, but the Trump administration “wanted to demonstrate their power over independent agencies in the government.” Smailes said Trump went after the IRS, an agency under the Department of the Treasury, in order to assert presidential power over a department. Both agencies were also chosen with public opinion in mind, according to Smailes. “Most of us, frankly, had never heard of USAID before they went after it. And many didn’t really know what it did. So, it was a pretty safe target,” he said. He added, “There are also not very many people who are going to run to the streets to defend the IRS.”

Dylan Pichnarcik / THE GATEPOST

After Smailes' presentation, Martin invited attendees to raise concerns or ask questions. Senior Deanna Girard, an education major, said she was concerned about Department of Education funding. Senior Sofia Wilson said she was concerned about LGBTQ+ rights and climate justice, and how they are being impacted by the current administration. Sophomore Regan LeBlanc said she was concerned about gun violence and climate change. Computer Science Professor David Keil said he is concerned about dictatorship and war. Freshman Millie Johnson said she was concerned about human rights. Leah Manzella, assistant director of the Counseling Center, said she is worried about how to counsel students whose identities are being threatened. “It feels really helpless to be in a position where I theoretically am there to help. It feels helpless,” she said. Martin then discussed Trump’s actions and how they have been shaped by social conditions and forces as well as institutions that “have shifted politics to the right over the past several decades and have made the Trump era what it is.” He said the growing class inequality in the U.S., particularly after the Great Recession and stock market crash of 2008, “encouraged some people to be open to a strong anti-establishment sounding message from Trump, even if it was highly distorted by misinformation.” Martin said Trump could not accomplish what he is currently doing without the support of the Republican Party, which currently holds the majority in Congress. The Supreme Court, which recently ruled Trump could not be held criminally accountable for actions as President, is also responsible. On the other side of the political aisle, Martin said the Democratic Party’s anti-establishment messages have been “weak.” Martin said prior to and during the Trump era, the Democratic Party has not offered a “bold, appealing, pro-working class agenda, especially regarding economic problems.” He added, “They've been somewhat better on cultural issues, but they've been particularly weak when it comes to economic problems.” Burke then reopened the floor to attendees to share their thoughts. Sociology & Criminology Professor Zeynep Gönen, who is an immigrant to the U.S., said she has lived through similar circumstances before. She said she is impacted every day by the Trump administration. Burke said that as an immigrant, he is also concerned with executive orders concerning immigration. Johnson said she was concerned with the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (S.A.V.E.) Act. She said she is fearful about getting married and having to keep her legal name so she can vote and that members of her family will not be able to vote. According to an article published by USA Today, the S.A.V.E. Act would require anyone who is registering to vote to appear in person at an election office with original or certified documents that proves their identity and citizenship status. For most Americans, that means showing a passport or birth certificate. When registering to vote, citizens would be required to bring both a Photo ID or driver’s license and a birth certificate or a record of naturalization - and all names on each document must match to be considered valid to allow for voting registration, according to the USA Today article. Smailes responded to Johnson and said it is important to keep in mind the difference between what is not constitutional and what is policy that an individual opposes. Currently, the S.A.V.E. Act is moving through Congress and is not a part of the constitutional process, according to Smailes. “The S.A.V.E. Act, as a matter of policy, is something that we all have to evaluate,” he said. Mathematics Professor Mohammad Salmasi asked that more meetings like this forum be scheduled. He said, “We live in an environment where we can have objective discussions. So we have an obligation toward our society as faculty and students to be at the forefront of not only resistance, but also arguing and discussing. And I encourage that we take that responsibility seriously.”