Photo by Dan Scavino Jr., Assistant to the President & Director of Social Media. Official White House/Wikimedia Commons
Since 1933, and the beginning of the first term of Franklin D. Roosevelt, the initial effectiveness of US presidents has been measured by what they accomplish during their first 100 days in office. FDR set that standard in his first radio address to the American people when he outlined what he intended to do. Working with lawmakers, FDR pushed through numerous measures aimed at pulling the US out of the Great Depression – and in the first 100 days of the 73rd Congress, the New Deal was born.
In the decades since then, presidents have had varying degrees of success at the start of their first terms in office, depending on pressures and events at home and abroad – and in general, have been judged to have done pretty well. With the 100-day milestone approaching at the end of April, it’s time to take a look at the performance of the new administration of President Donald J. Trump.
Neither the President nor the Congress are doing well, according to opinion polls. The Gallup Poll shows that Donald Trump’s approval rating fell steadily during the two months after Inauguration Day, hitting 36% in late March. That number was the lowest for any new US president since polling began, and has risen a few points since then.
As for Congress, Gallup’s numbers show an even worse assessment, with an overall approval rating of just 20%. This reflects disappointment with its failure to pass any significant legislation despite Republican control of both the House and Senate.
Leading up to his inauguration President Trump had pledged to make big changes at the start of his term, changes based on the bold promises he repeated over and over during his long run for the White House. Promises included tax reform, scrapping and replacing the Obama administration’s health law, deporting millions of immigrants and building a huge wall across America’s southern border, rebuilding the nation’s roads, bridges, and transportation systems, and “draining the swamp” in Washington. These and other initiatives were intended to keep the promises made to voters, to change the direction of the country, to “Make America Great Again.”
Instead, no significant laws have been passed, and the President has had to be satisfied by repealing numerous Executive Orders signed by Barack Obama. Despite a significant push by Trump and congressional leaders to get votes lined up, the repeal of the Affordable Care Act – Obamacare – was pulled before a vote could be taken, because Republicans couldn’t agree on what would replace it. More than 20 million Americans are currently covered under the ACA, and without a working replacement – something both Trump and almost all elected Republicans promised when running for office – those Americans would be left without health insurance.
The White House order banning entry to the US by people coming from predominantly Muslim countries continues to face legal challenges.
Then there is the criticism from both Republicans and Democrats who say that Trump has either switched positions on, or backed away altogether from, multiple promises made during a 15-month election campaign.
For instance, as a candidate he was often harshly critical of China, accusing Beijing of manipulating its currency to undercut US markets; as President, he says that’s not the case. As a candidate he pledged to push through major tax reform proposals immediately; as President, he moved first on health care, then pivoted back to tax reform, and now says health care is the first priority. He promised White House empathy for the rural poor and the jobless middle class; many Cabinet posts and top agency jobs have gone to billionaires and bankers and former lobbyists.
Trump often criticized NATO and offered praise to Russian President Vladimir Putin; as President he has criticized Putin and embraced NATO. For years he pushed the Obama administration to stay out of Syria; in his most dramatic moment as President, he launched a missile attack against a Syrian airbase after seeing video of a poison gas assault on civilians by the Assad regime. Do these changes indicate that the new President is learning on the job? Only time will tell.
On the positive side – as emphasized by the White House – the stock markets have risen since January, seemingly a result of Trump’s promises of tax reforms and promises to increase spending on infrastructure projects. His latest initiative, “Buy American-Hire American,” is another reflection of efforts to fulfill campaign promises, though it is too early to tell what the end results will be. On trade, Trump has softened criticism of China, citing new chemistry with President Xi Jinping – averting the likelihood of lasting damage to relations between the world’s two largest economies.
Perhaps the biggest foreign policy test of the new administration is yet to come, as North Korea continues its drumbeat of threats to use ballistic missiles to deliver nuclear weapons against the United States. Vice President Pence and other US officials have said the “era of strategic patience” is over, and Trump has called on North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to “behave”. The world is watching this verbal battle, hoping that no larger conflict will break the decades-old armistice that halted, but did not end, the Korean War. Estimates are that renewed fighting – in a much more crowded Korean Peninsula – could cause millions of deaths and injuries.
Previous presidents have come into office with plans, hoping to keep their promises and wishing for a honeymoon period when they could move quickly to get things done before events, and the obstacles of governing, got in the way. Some were more successful than others; some barely had time to unpack. President Bill Clinton, on taking office in 1993, famously said “I think my honeymoon was about 30 minutes.”
In years to come, historians will calculate the effectiveness of Donald Trump’s first 100 days, putting events in context and allowing for the passage of time to provide perspective. Meantime, the early verdicts are in and, for the most part, they reflect cause for concern – even alarm – about the possibility of domestic dysfunction and foreign policy stumbles during the remainder of his four-year term in office.
