Trump’s Congressional Address Highlights Washington’s Stagnation and Inaction

Last week, President Donald Trump delivered his first address to a joint session of Congress since reclaiming the White House. As anticipated, the event resembled a traditional rally speech.

While he voiced complaints about Joe Biden being responsible for skyrocketing egg prices, the president expressed frustration over the lack of applause from Democrats, praised the “Gulf of America,” and amusingly distributed Junior Secret Service decoder rings to children.

According to polls, viewers were largely engaged.

In contrast, the Democrats showcased their youthful exuberance by sending out 77-year-old Rep. Al Green, who waved his cane and vented about — what exactly? The aftermath of Jan. 6? The abandonment of Ukraine? The escalating national debt?

Nope! Instead, he focused on potential cuts to specific welfare programs, which is very typical for Green’s party. Meanwhile, the other Democrats sat silently with paddles, resembling participants in a rather dreary charity auction.

The following morning, the Supreme Court justices, who had politely greeted the president the night before, delivered a ruling reminding him that he does not possess certain powers. Specifically, he cannot unilaterally suspend foreign aid approved by Congress merely based on his whims.

The president swears an oath to ensure the faithful execution of U.S. laws — not just those he favors. Legislation is the responsibility of Congress, not the president. While the Supreme Court remains cognizant of this fact, Congress often seems to forget it.

There exists a bipartisan agreement among Congress members regarding one particular issue: their collective reluctance to fulfill their duties.

In general, congressional Democrats seem trapped in a state of perpetual adolescence, clinging to the nostalgia of the protest movements of the 1960s and 1970s — two decades that, aside from their music and film, marked a cultural low point in American history.

While Washington enjoys a clean trifecta of one party controlling the presidency and both congressional houses, significant legislation has often been passed in spite of complex interbranch and intramural dynamics.

Consider the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the bipartisan compromises that yielded the budget surplus during the Bill Clinton-Newt Gingrich era. These were outcomes of negotiation, not imposition.

This collaborative process is how a government in a constitutional republic is intended to function.

Lyndon Johnson, a former senator, did not secure his civil rights legislation by wielding a cane against his opponents.

He achieved this by excelling in political strategy.

At the time, President Johnson had to be skilled in politics — Congress was still behaving in accordance with Article I of the Constitution, which grants lawmaking authority to its chambers.

Nowadays, Congress often resembles what my Dispatch colleague Jonah Goldberg refers to as the “parliament of pundits,” comprising individuals more interested in gaining social media influence and cable news exposure than in actual lawmaking, which they tend to relegate to the president via “executive orders.”

Every now and then, the Supreme Court intervenes (as seen with Trump and foreign aid, or Biden and student loans) to remind the president that “I am the law” is a quote from “Judge Dredd,” not a principle defined by the Constitution regarding presidential authority.

Democrats and Republicans alike in Congress demonstrate a shared inability or unwillingness to engage in ordinary legislative politics; however, their motivations differ. Democrats often fail due to their self-righteousness, focused on dominating the opposition when in power and complaining when they aren’t.

On the other hand, Republicans seem to avoid legislative responsibilities by letting Trump take charge — along with the criticism — while they prioritize fundraising and enjoy their comfortable positions in mostly unchallenged districts and states.

There’s a reason Congress is designated as the Article I branch. Our constitutional framework establishes Congress — not the president or the Supreme Court — as the ultimate federal authority, empowered with responsibilities such as spending money, levying taxes, declaring war, ratifying treaties, and confirming high-level appointments in both executive and judicial branches.

Only Congress holds the power to remove a president or a Supreme Court justice, while the president lacks the authority to dismiss even a minor House member or an excessively bothersome senator.

Neither can the Supreme Court.

In regard to my fellow Texan, Rep. Green can do more than just wave his cane and lament about transfer payments.

He and his colleagues from both parties could, if they chose to, start acting like they truly govern the country — because, on paper, that is indeed their role.

It is the responsibility of Congress to ensure that our Constitution transcends mere paperwork. Unfortunately, for the time being, Congress is failing to fulfill its responsibilities.

This is not only lazy and foolish — it could ultimately prove to be perilous.