Dissident Politics

Thursday, July 17, 2025

Blog note: Security fix

For people with Google Chrome, a urgent security update is needed, as discussed at this article. Update your Chrome browser to version 138.0.7204.157.158 for Windows and Apple macOS, and 138.0.7204.157 for Linux. To make sure the latest updates are installed, navigate to More > Help > About Google Chrome, let the update install and then select Relaunch. It took about 1 minute for the update and relaunch.

Congress Under Pressure: Trump, the Recissions Bill, and the Abdication of Oversight

At this moment, President Trump is pressuring congressional Republicans to retroactively authorize his earlier unilateral spending decisions—decisions that have already faced legal challenges for potentially violating Article I of the Constitution, which reserves the power of the purse to Congress (1)(2). The centerpiece is the recissions bill, which would approve billions in funding cuts already imposed by the executive branch, including dramatic reductions to foreign aid and public broadcasting (3). The strategy is clear: Trump uses the threat of political retaliation to drive near-total party-line support, so that—apart from three non-MAGA senators—the GOP has largely fallen in line, effectively relinquishing its traditional constitutional responsibility as a check on the executive.

The Three Non-MAGA Holdouts: Transparency and Bullying

The only open resistance has come from Senators Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and Mitch McConnell. All three have voiced concerns over the coercive atmosphere, with lawmakers expressing fear of direct retaliation if they dissent from Trump (4). Thom Tillis (who was driven to retirement for dissenting on the OBBB last month) They also cite being asked to vote amid extreme information scarcity, with the Office of Management and Budget providing little to no detail about which programs are affected or the scope of the proposed harm—an impoverished information environment, as Collins stressed. (5). This undermines not only basic legislative standards but also the legitimacy of Congress’s decision-making role. (Note: McConnell voted for the bill in the end as did both Wicker and Tillis who also complained about the lack of information on which programs would be affected.).

Beyond Ideology: The Rise of Personalist Rule

This situation reflects a pattern explored in prior analyses: the core organizing principle of today’s GOP is personalism, not classical ideology or oligarchy (6). Trump’s control is maintained less through established party traditions or organized interests, and more through direct loyalty, responses to threats, and deference to his preferences. These dynamics are distinct from rule by a stable economic or social elite; they prioritize individual influence, fear, and patronage over procedural or constitutional routine.

Reviewing the OBBB: Loyalty over Deliberation

Earlier Senate battles, notably over the “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OBBB), showed the transformation in sharp relief. There, Republicans were threatened with lost committee positions, hostile primaries, and presidential rebuke if they failed to align with Trump’s legislative priorities (7). Figures like Thom Tillis were driven out after warning that independent legislators were becoming “endangered.” The OBBB episode turned conventional deliberation into a test of loyalty—an explicit harbinger for the even more overt discipline seen in the recissions debate.

Congress Sidelined from Oversight

The recissions bill marks an escalation. The overwhelming majority of the $9 billion in cuts does not target public broadcasting—the focus of Trump’s rhetoric on Truth Social—but covers retroactive approval for sweeping executive reductions in foreign aid and domestic federal agencies (8). Senators have objected to being given almost no information, and to being pressured to become mere “rubber stamps” for decisions already made by the president without prior congressional input (9).

Conclusion: The Eclipse of Congressional Independence

The arc from the OBBB to the current recissions vote is unmistakable: the Republican majority in Congress is evolving from an autonomous legislative body into a compliant instrument of the executive. Fear, discipline, and the erosion of deliberative process now dominate, cloaked in public narratives about “fighting the left” but underpinned by a pursuit of post hoc legitimization for executive overreach. The result is a historic retreat from checks and balances, with Congress risking its role as a counterweight to the presidency.

Endnotes

WHYY News, July 16, 2025, “Republicans advance bill to claw back foreign aid and public media funding, send measure to full Senate vote.”
Analysis of Article I, Section 9 implications in recent Senate debates (See statements by Sens. Collins, Murkowski, and McConnell).
Carmen Russell-Sluchansky reporting, Senate floor debate excerpts, and official procedural records.
Reuters, April 2025: Congressional Republicans reportedly fear retaliation from Trump for dissent (see remarks by Sen. Murkowski and others).
Public remarks by Senator Collins, as quoted in WHYY and major national outlets, on lack of detail and OMB’s failure to provide basic information.
“Personalism with Features of Kleptocracy and Crony Capitalism in Trump 2.0,” as discussed in previous essays (see genealogy of recent GOP internal discipline trends).
See Senate records on OBBB debate; interviews with outgoing Sen. Tillis and reporting on threatened sanctions against critical lawmakers.
Breakdown of rescissions bill content: WHYY News, July 2025; remarks by Sens. Collins, Murkowski, McConnell on floor debate.
Congressional analysis: bipartisan and journalistic review of the lack of transparency, oversight concerns, and abandonment of appropriations norms in 2025 cycle.

Wednesday, July 16, 2025

A MAGA-Trump cost benefit analysis

A cost-benefit assessment seemed to be in order, now that some of the fog has cleared. The full Q&A is at this link. The question included fact checking and debiasing instructions to reduce the error rate in the response.

Q: Make a reasonable estimate of the effects or cost-benefit that Trump and MAGA politics and policies have resulted in related to the US economy, American society and American interests globally. Consider impacts on federal research, public health, democracy, the rule of law, civil liberties, technology (green energy efforts, etc.), the environment, social civility, economic and environmental sustainability, higher education, ....

A: Long analysis summarized:

Economic Impact
Negative Economic Effects - Medium to High Confidence

Federal Research and Public Health
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Democracy and Rule of Law
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Civil Liberties and Free Speech
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Environment and Climate Change
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Higher Education and Academic Freedom
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Technology and Innovation
Negative Impact - Medium to High Confidence
(that feels like an underestimate)

Wealth Distribution and Oligarchy
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Is anyone sensing a pattern here?

Social Civility and Polarization
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Media and Information Environment
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Christian Nationalism and Theocracy
Severe Long-term Risk - Medium to High Confidence

Assessment of Democratic Survival
Likelihood of Authoritarian Transformation by 2029: Medium to High Risk

Conclusion
The evidence suggests that Trump and MAGA politics have imposed significant costs on American society, economy, and democratic institutions while providing limited benefits primarily to wealthy elites and certain traditional energy sectors. The risk of authoritarian transformation is substantial, with multiple democratic safeguards already compromised. The likelihood of replacing secular democracy with a corrupt autocracy tinged with Christian nationalism appears to be moderate to high, particularly given the weakness of institutional opposition and the Democratic Party's structural problems.

Welp, that's sobering. Most Trump and MAGA supporters would very likely at least vigorously disagree with that assessment and reject it out of hand. And that is where America is today.