This paper was submitted on November 15th, 2020 as part of my coursework for SS202: American Politics.
I. INTRODUCTION
The research question of interest concerns why President Trump signed Executive Order 13933: Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence, taking a hardline stance on a controversial issue despite widespread national division and high racial tensions. The reasoning can be explained through electoral politics and the policymaking process of the federal government. Electorally, the President was reacting to the influence of Black Lives Matter (BLM), a large and growing social movement in the country. BLM was protesting perceived systemic injustice and institutional racism in the United States, which the President denied.[1] Systemic racism was emerging as a significant issue in the upcoming 2020 election and the President needed to combat the socialization of the conflict and the outside strategies employed by BLM. In terms of policy, the President was engaging in unilateral action, or acting independently of Congress, which he may have seen as necessary due to the division of Congress between the Republican and Democratic parties. The President relied on the state capacity of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ensure national monuments were protected from violent riots in cities across the nation.
II. POLICY HISTORY OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 13933
At the end of May 2020, during the first wave of COVID-19 lockdowns, George Floyd, a black man, died in an altercation with police officers who were called to investigate his use of counterfeit money. This event led to widespread outrage and, according to the New York Times, “prompted protests for police reform and social justice.”[2] The protests and demonstrations eventually turned to riots and looting, including attacks on buildings and statues of significance to American history. According to The Wall Street Journal, rioters targeted “statues of historical figures who owned slaves or otherwise participated in the oppression of minority groups, as well as statues that protesters say feature racially insensitive imagery.”[3] In a Tweet, President Trump denounced the protests as “lawless acts against our Great Country!”[4] On June 26th, the President released Executive Order 13933, directing federal law enforcement to prosecute any individuals found to be vandalizing federal monuments and threatening local governments with withdrawal of funding if adequate steps were not taken to protect monuments from vandalism.
III. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: UNILATERAL ACTION AND STATE CAPACITY
Executive Order 13933 “offers little in the way of new authority” but directs federal law enforcement to prosecute those who violate laws protecting public property in specific connection to the tearing down of statues.[5] In response to the order, the DHS issued a press release announcing the creation of the Protecting American Communities Task Force (PACT), which will be used to coordinate the actions of DHS law enforcement assets in protecting national monuments.[6] The DHS can be seen as the principal formal actor in the execution and implementation of this policy.
Unilateral Action. The implementation of this policy directly by the DHS is an example of unilateral action, where a President steps outside of his enumerated Constitutional powers and issues a policy directive that carries the force of law without any legislation from Congress. William G. Howell argues that, while unilateral action may be undesirable, “[w]ithout Congress’ active support, and the endorsement of its members, presidents cannot hope to achieve much at all.”[7] The political reality for the President in June 2020 was that the House of Representatives had a Democratic majority while the Senate had a Republican majority. It would be near-impossible for the Republican President to pass politically sensitive legislation through both houses of Congress in a reasonable amount of time.
State Capacity. The effectiveness of the Executive Order relies on the state capacity of the DHS. State capacity consists of “the knowledge, personnel, and institutions needed to effectively implement policies.”[8] According to the DHS press release, the PACT will use its resources and personnel to enact Executive Order 13933 and rely upon the expertise of its administrators, such as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad F. Wolf, to wisely allocate DHS assets towards the most effective implementation of the order. Without capable experts to carry out the policy, the order is meaningless and will not produce its intended outcome. While DHS responded most directly to the order with its creation of the PACT, other departments of the Executive branch were also involved in the implementation of Executive Order 13933. The Department of Justice was designated as the primary prosecutorial authority for those arrested on charges of vandalism and the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Defense were also mentioned in the order as officials authorized to provide personnel for the protection of federal monuments.[9] This shows how state capacity is fluid, in that multiple elements of the bureaucracy can be utilized together with their unique expertise and personnel in order to produce a desired policy outcome.
IV. BLACK LIVES MATTER: OUTSIDE STRATEGIES AND SOCIALIZATION OF CONFLICT
According to its own website, BLM believes that black people are “systematically targeted for demise” and that it seeks to “eradicate white supremacy” in the United States.[10] After the death of George Floyd, nationwide protests in the name of BLM took place and came to dominate the media cycle, both for their mass-mobilization and for the violence, vandalism, and looting that took place at many protests. It was this criminal conduct that spurred the President to sign Executive Order 13933. In this way, BLM did not lobby for the eventual policy outcome, but still played a large role in its implementation, nonetheless.
Outside Strategies. The success of BLM in affecting policy and public opinion is determined by its use of outside strategies. These are actions taken by informal actors outside of Washington, D.C. that are either “orchestrated by the group or [are] organized by a firm hired by the group.”[11] The most common outside strategies are grassroots lobbying, mobilizing public opinion, and electioneering.[12] There has been debate concerning whether BLM engages in grassroots lobbying—involving authentic direct involvement of members in advocacy—or AstroTurf lobbying—centrally organized efforts disguised to appear authentic—but the effectiveness of its efforts is not disputed. BLM became a nationwide phenomenon and raised awareness for issues such as perceived systemic injustices and institutional racism in America. BLM is also directly affiliated with Democratic political fundraising, as the “donate” link on the BLM website leads to ActBlue, which has raised nearly $8 billion for Democratic and leftist causes since 2004.[13] The popularity of this movement put immense political pressure on the President and other Republicans in government. Inaction on their part might have appeared to voters as a failure to combat the influence of a radical group, which could have large implications for the 2020 Presidential Election.
Socialization of Conflict. The primary success of BLM was the mass popularity that it achieved in the Summer of 2020. In a 1960 book, E.E. Schattschneider outlined a dichotomy in the path that the scope of a social conflict can take in politics. An issue can either become privatized, that is, “restrict[ing] its scope or to limit the use of public authority to enlarge the scope of conflict,” or it can become socialized, that is, “invit[ing] outside intervention in conflict and form[ing] the basis of appeals to public authority for redress of private grievance.”[14]
Privatizing an issue puts it in the hands of the ‘elites’ and keeps it from becoming a public conflict. Socialization of an issue makes it a conflict of national interest and is politically messier, but it cannot be silenced in the same way a privatized issue can. BLM’s advocacy against perceived social injustices is a clear example of socialization of conflict. For many weeks, Americans would be confronted by the issue of racism everywhere they went—there was protesting in the streets, a constant news cycle on television, and mass advocacy on social media. This further increased the pressure for a response from the President and the GOP. The best approach apparent to them seemed to be framing the issue not in terms of race relations, but in terms of the violence and destruction caused by the riots and protests.
V. POLICY IMPLICATIONS
As stated earlier, Executive Order 13933 does not add much new authority or enforcement power to the federal government, but it does make the position of the Executive branch very clear: any attempts to disrupt the social order of the United States for political purposes are to be met with criminal investigations and armed federal agents. The importance of this policy declaration is two-fold: it voices significant institutional opposition to the idea that America is an institutionally racist country and it provides clear ideological lines in the 2020 Presidential election. Christopher Flannery of the Claremont Institute writes, “the elections on November 3, 2020 hinge on one question: ‘Do you stand with the Party of 1619 or the Party of 1776?’”[15] He means to frame the election as one where America chooses to accept one of two versions of American history: the 1619 version, in which America’s original sin is racism and that America continues to be systematically racist (1619 being in reference to the year the first African slaves arrived in Virginia), or the 1776 version, in which America has held true to the founding ideal that “all men are created equal.” Executive Order 13933 is very clear that it opposes the “1619” version of American history: “Anarchists and left-wing extremists have sought to advance a fringe ideology that paints the United States of America as fundamentally unjust and have sought to impose that ideology on Americans through violence and mob intimidation.”[16] This belief will continue to guide the federal government’s actions on the issue of race relations in America for the remainder of the Trump administration. The issue of race and the positions that candidates take on it may have a critical influence on the outcome of the 2020 Presidential election.
VI. Conclusion
There will likely not be any specific legislation pertaining to the vandalism of federal statues unless the 2020 election results in a Republican majority for both the Senate and the House of Representatives, which is unlikely. Due to the highly personal and polarized nature of politics in the current moment, it would be difficult for the President to reach across the aisle and reach an agreement with those protesting his administration. The best way to defeat the riots, as determined by the President and his aides, seems to be legal action against dissidents. The national reaction to the President’s hardline stance against the BLM protests remains to be seen, but actions such as Executive Order 13933 are certain to be significant as voters choose the next President of the United States.
Bibliography
ActBlue. “ActBlue.” Accessed November 13, 2020. https://secure.actblue.com/.
Bianco, William T. and David T. Canon. American Politics Today. 6th ed. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2018.
Black Lives Matter. “About.” Accessed November 13, 2020. https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/.
Flannery, Christopher. “America’s Choice: Freedom or Shame.” American Mind, June 12, 2020. https://americanmind.org/salvo/americas-choice-freedom-or-shame/.
Howell, William G. “Power without Persuasion: The Politics of Direct Presidential Action.” In Readings in American Politics, edited by Ken Kollman, 249-62. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2019.
Restuccia, Andrew. “Trump’s Executive Order Calls for Limiting Federal Funds to States if They Can’t Protect Monuments.” Wall Street Journal, June 26, 2020. https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-signs-executive-order-to-increase-penalties-for-damaging-monuments-11593211631?st=hgjtmza6bxh45uk.
Schattschneider, E.E. The Semisovereign People: A Realists’s View of Democracy in America. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1960.
Shear, Michael D. “Trump Issues Executive Order Targeting Vandalism Against Monuments.” New York Times, June 26, 2020. https://nyti.ms/3dC01Ei.
Trump, Donald, Twitter post, June 26, 2020, 5:48 p.m. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1276633518433538049.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. DHS Announces New Task Force to Protect American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues. July 1, 2020. https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/01/dhs-announces-new-task-force-protect-american-monuments-memorials-and-statues.
U.S. President, Executive Order, “Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence, Executive Order 13933 of June 26, 2020,” Federal Register 85, no. 128 (July 2, 2020): 40081. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-07-02/pdf/2020-14509.pdf.
[1] U.S. President, Executive Order, “Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence, Executive Order 13933 of June 26, 2020,” Federal Register 85, no. 128 (July 2, 2020): 40081. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-07-02/pdf/2020-14509.pdf.
[2] Michael D. Shear, “Trump Issues Executive Order Targeting Vandalism Against Monuments,” New York Times, June 26, 2020, https://nyti.ms/3dC01Ei.
[3] Andre Restuccia, “Trump’s Executive Order Calls for Limiting Federal Funds to States if They Can’t Protect Monuments,” The Wall Street Journal, June 26, 2020, https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-signs-executive-order-to-increase-penalties-for-damaging-monuments-11593211631?st=hgjtmza6bxh45uk.
[4] Donald Trump, Twitter post, June 2020, 5:48 p.m., https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1276633518433538049.
[5] Shear, “Trump Issues Executive Order Targeting Vandalism Against Monuments.”
[6] U.S. Department of Homeland Security, DHS Announces New Task Force to Protect American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues (2020), https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/01/dhs-announces-new-task-force-protect-american-monuments-memorials-and-statues.
[7] William G. Howell. “Power without Persuasion: The Politics of Direct Presidential Action,” in Readings in American Politics, ed. Ken Kollman (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2019), 253.
[8] William T. Blanco and David T. Canon. American Politics Today, 6th ed. (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2018), 462.
[9] U.S. President, Executive Order, “Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence, Executive Order 13933 of June 26, 2020,” Federal Register 85, no. 128 (July 2, 2020): 40081. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-07-02/pdf/2020-14509.pdf.
[10] “About,” Black Lives Matter, accessed November 13, 2020, https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/.
[11] William T. Blanco and David T. Canon. American Politics Today, 6th ed. (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2018), 359.
[12] Ibid., 360.
[13] “ActBlue,” ActBlue, accessed November 13, 2020, https://secure.actblue.com/.
[14] E.E. Schattschneider, The Semisovereign People: A Realists’s View of Democracy in America (Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1960), 7.
[15] Christopher Flannery, “America’s Choice: Freedom or Shame,” American Mind, June 12, 2020, https://americanmind.org/salvo/americas-choice-freedom-or-shame/.
[16] U.S. President, Executive Order, “Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence, Executive Order 13933 of June 26, 2020,” Federal Register 85, no. 128 (July 2, 2020): 40081. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-07-02/pdf/2020-14509.pdf.
Cammack Shepler 
Leave a comment