A key aspect of the far-right Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 document is its aim to significantly increase executive power for the next Republican administration. However, despite President-elect Donald Trump’s clear victory and a Republican-controlled Congress, one expert remains skeptical about how easily this expansion can be achieved. The complexities of governance and potential resistance within political structures suggest that implementing such sweeping changes may not be as straightforward as it seems.
According to a recent report by The Guardian, Donald Trump is poised to become the most powerful U.S. president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s historic four-term leadership in the early 20th century. When he takes office in January, he’ll have the advantage of a Republican-controlled Senate and potentially a Republican-led House of Representatives. Additionally, with a six-member Supreme Court supermajority that includes three justices he appointed, some fear Trump’s influence will be unchecked. Keep in mind, throughout his campaign, Trump confidently pledged to exercise decisive authority from “day one,” and voters responded by granting him both a substantial Electoral College win and the national popular vote.
Former Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Illinois), known for being one of Trump’s most vocal Republican critics, has issued a compelling warning. He explained to the Guardian that a second Trump term would essentially be “a revenge tour on steroids.” This stark imagery underscores the potential intensity and impact of another term, urging us to consider the serious implications carefully.
“I don’t think people realize what’s coming. He is emboldened,” Walsh said. “If I were the rest of the world and the country, I’d be scared to death because we just put an absolutely out-of-control authoritarian in the White House. That’s scary s—.”
But Elaine Kamarck, who has the experience of serving in former President Bill Clinton’s administration, presents a compelling argument against the likelihood of Trump easily achieving absolute power. She asserts that Trump’s aspirations for expanded authority hinge significantly on Congress voluntarily relinquishing some of its own power—a scenario she confidently states is “not going to happen.”
Furthermore, she highlights that despite a 6-3 Supreme Court composition, only 11% of lower court judges were appointed by Trump. This means that the majority of the federal judiciary remains unlikely to support granting him the extensive executive powers he desires. Her insights underscore a robust system of checks and balances that stands as an obstacle to such ambitions.
“For him to expand presidential power, Congress has to give up power and they’re not in the mood to do that,” Kamarck said. “They’ve never done that. There are plenty of institutionalists in Congress.”
“Now, there might be things that the president wants to do that people don’t like that the Republican Congress goes along with him on but that’s politics. That’s not a dictatorship,” she added.
Republicans maintained control of the House in Election 2024 but Democrats are projected to gain two seats, resulting in a narrow 220-215 margin. With such a small margin, extreme MAGA legislation will probably face significant obstacles in the House due to the number of old-school, non-MAGA Republicans representing moderate constituencies.
If our projection is accurate, just three Republican defectors could halt these proposals, highlighting that their approval is far from guaranteed. Remember, when Republicans pushed through the massive Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017, they had a significant 47-seat advantage over Democrats with 241 members to 194. Now, it’s 5.
SocietyRSS Fact: The Enabling Act of 1933 gave then-Chancellor Adolf Hitler the authority to create and enforce laws independently of the legislature or President Paul von Hindenburg and set the stage for Nazi Germany’s ascent. That act, which was passed by Nazis in Congress and their right-wing non-Nazi enablers, effectively dismantled the essential system of checks and balances within the government, concentrating power in a way that facilitated unchecked authoritarian rule.
So, consider this: Even the Nazis in the German parliament required assistance to pass the Enabling Act of 1933. Similarly, MAGA will not have sufficient support from fellow House Republicans to push through radical legislation.
Moreover, the structure of the U.S. Congress is intentionally crafted to prevent any single party from easily pushing through its agenda, ensuring a balanced and fair legislative process. Even with Republicans holding 53 seats in the 100-member U.S. Senate, Democrats have several strategies at their disposal to influence proceedings.
One key tactic is invoking cloture on GOP-sponsored bills, which demands a substantial 60-vote majority to proceed. This approach was notably utilized by outgoing Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), who effectively employed cloture as a strategic tool to challenge former President Barack Obama’s legislative efforts, setting records for its use since he became the leading Senate Republican in 2007. This demonstrates how both parties can leverage procedural tools to shape the legislative landscape actively.
Furthermore, it’s crucial to understand the significance of the “unanimous consent” process in the Senate, as highlighted by the Congressional Research Service. This procedure is essential for conducting most business efficiently. When unanimous consent is achieved, it streamlines proceedings by limiting debate time and restricting amendments to legislation under review. However, if even one senator withholds this consent, it opens up endless possibilities for debate and amendments. This effectively stalls progress and hinders the majority party’s ability to implement its agenda. Therefore, securing unanimous consent is vital for maintaining legislative efficiency and advancing key initiatives.
The events of 2023 highlighted the significant impact a single senator can have on the legislative process. Senator Tommy Tuberville from Alabama demonstrated this power by consistently blocking unanimous consent for advancing hundreds of high-ranking military promotions. His actions were primarily in protest against President Joe Biden’s Department of Defense policy, which reimburses travel costs for service members seeking abortion care out-of-state if they reside in areas where abortion is banned.
This prolonged blockade, lasting ten months, drew sharp criticism from both sides of the aisle, including his fellow Republicans who voiced their concerns on the Senate floor. They argued that such actions posed a threat to national security and undermined the strength of the U.S. military. Although Senator Tuberville eventually withdrew his objections, this episode serves as a compelling reminder of how individual decisions can ripple through our government systems and affect broader national interests.
Summary
Yes, a Trump dictatorship is a concern. And it should be. However, such a scenario won’t happen without a lot of turbulence thanks to the checks and balances in place on the legislative level, MAGA’s inability to pass extreme legislation through the House, and the high number of lower-level judges who have no pro-MAGA bias.