A shadow Cabinet for Donald Trump

Early selection of potential policymakers could deflate his opposition

By Cal Thomas
Washington Times
Monday, May 9, 2016

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has broken just about every political rule and precedent this election cycle, so what difference would it make if he broke one more?

If Mr. Trump wants to gain credibility with voters who are either wary of or vehemently opposed to him becoming president, he should borrow from the British system and name a shadow Cabinet.

For those unfamiliar with the term, a British shadow Cabinet is made up of a group of senior people from the opposition party who create an alternative Cabinet to that of the government. The role of shadow ministers is to criticize government ministers. If their party wins a majority in a future election, most are frequently appointed to Cabinet positions.

If Mr. Trump were to adopt such a strategy now, it would present him with several opportunities. First, each of his appointees, presumably, would be people with the knowledge and experience Mr. Trump lacks. Second, each of his shadow Cabinet members could focus on what they consider the failures of a particular government agency or program and offer alternatives to make it better. Third, some of Mr. Trump’s shadow Cabinet could recommend doing away with Cabinet agencies and programs by making the case that they cost too much and fail to live up to their purpose.

In Britain, the shadow Cabinet is presided over by the opposition leader. In Mr. Trump’s shadow Cabinet, his choice for vice president, who should be named before the convention to allow the public time to become comfortable with his choice, might be the one to keep his people focused on their goal. Should Mr. Trump win, all of the shadow Cabinet members could be nominated to real Cabinet positions.

How would this work? The shadow minister for education could make the case for the dissolution of the unnecessary Department of Education, which was Jimmy Carter’s promise to the teachers unions in 1976 in order to gain their endorsement. DOE educates no one and is another one of those Washington bureaucracies that thinks it knows better than local school districts and parents how best to educate. The shadow minister might also make the case for school choice, focusing on poor and minority children trapped in failing government schools whose liberation would offer them a chance to succeed.