ShareThis Page

Team Trump gets down to business

| Monday, Jan. 23, 2017, 9:00 p.m.

With Donald Trump, the nation is about to embark on a bold experiment in government management. To guide the economy, he has selected billionaire deal makers and folks with marketing expertise, and shunned seasoned policy experts.

To lead his tax reform, international trade and infrastructure and deregulation efforts, he has selected Steven Mnuchin at Treasury, Wilbur Ross at Commerce and Carl Icahn as a special White House adviser. All have amassed fortunes as opportunistic investors but have scant experience inside government or managing delicate interactions with Congress.

At the White House, they will be supported by Mr. Trump's campaign marketing gurus and another Wall Street financier — Steve Bannon, Kellyanne Conway and Gary Cohn — as chief strategist, counselor to the president and director of the National Economic Council.

Many conservatives and Republicans — these days those cannot be assumed to be one and the same — have harbored the view that Washington is not just corrupt but run by a bunch of bumbling dolts, and if business people were put in charge, they could miraculously transform the place for the better.

Now we will test the hypothesis that private-sector experience is generally transferrable to government and from one radically different kind of activity to another — for example, Mr. Ross' experience with steel and textile mills to making international economic policy and rebuilding the nation's failing infrastructure.

This requires a bold leap of faith and unusual disregard for history, because experience elsewhere indicates that private-sector management skills don't necessarily transfer well across industries or into the public sector.

Republicans are promising to spend huge sums on new roads, rails and the like. Much of it, according to Ross and White House economist Peter Navarro, can be financed by the private sector. However, the record of private investment and management of public infrastructure is hardly encouraging.

Toll roads are generally unpopular with motorists and often don't generate expected traffic, and private operators have filed for bankruptcy in Indiana and Texas. Private equity takeovers of waterworks in New Jersey, California and other places have resulted in huge rate hikes; takeovers of emergency services and fire departments have resulted in dangerously shoddy, underfunded services and bankruptcies.

Democrats in Congress are behaving as if Mr. Trump's election was an aberration and that they can ride out four years until returning to power by setting up roadblocks to the implementation of his policies.

Republicans like to see the Trump program as another Reagan revolution — lower taxes, deregulation and privatization. However, his notion that the government is in need of a wholly different approach to management may be more remindful of Jimmy Carter, also a successful businessman, who campaigned as an outsider and promised to clean up the mess in Washington. To his dismay, he found both Congress and the bureaucracy too difficult to manage, and he was out in four years.

More than sour grapes, Democrats may be right, and 2020 could be a good time to be the successful Democrat governor of a large state with high ambitions — enter Andrew Cuomo.

Peter Morici is an economist and business professor at the University of Maryland.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.