During the presidential campaign, he’s repeatedly distanced himself from the tentpole of conservative second-term planning called Project 2025, setting up and selling his own idiosyncratic overview of his plans for radical state administration sweeps, including carving out roles for the key market-disruptors Robert F Kennedy Jr and Elon Musk. Kennedy, one of the leading conspiracy theorists in the US, would be free to rework the public health system, while Musk could potentially decimate the federal workforce in a ‘start from scratch’ effort that includes sweeping cuts – potentially automated.
At the same time, Trump revisits the need for health care reforms at his rallies, promising to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Reforms such as these bump up against the hard realities of US governance, which might limit radical reform through procedural checks and balances. The senate confirmation process, for instance, and the possibility of a filibuster could severely limit the prospect for radical reforms. The wish for figureheads such as Kennedy to be responsible for radical government reforms remains untenable, if not impossible, coerced as they are by the interplay of political ambition and legislative restraint.
After all, Trump and his colleagues are pushing for a radical overhaul of both health care and how the government itself functions, but as many legal and political commentators have noted, the sheer complexity and procedural constraints of the US governmental system are powerful determinants of what is likely to happen. Bold changes of this sort, as so many analysts and politicians agree, are not only deeply controversial, they may also be difficult if not impossible to deliver, suggesting a yawning gap between what is promised on the campaign trail and what can actually be done in governing.
Source: Yahoo
