Trump ‘accountable?’ Easier said than done

Jan. 12, James Hollifield, professor of political science and director of the Tower Center at SMU Dallas, along with co-author Donley Studlar, professor of political science emeritus at West Virginia University, for a piece outlining the complexities and difficulties of removing President Donald Trump from the White House before the Jan. 20 Inauguration. Published in The Hill under the heading Trump ‘accountable?’ Easier said than done: http://bit.ly/3ij54xr

In the current controversy over President Trump’s challenge to the Electoral College vote and the attack on the U.S. Capitol, we hear a lot about accountability. But what does this mean in the context of U.S. political institutions that divide authority among three branches of government, and how can Congress hold the president accountable? 

Many observers, foreign and domestic, often are confused about the lines of authority in American government. In parliamentary systems, the direction is clearer. The elected legislature chooses the political executive, led by the prime minister and the legislature and parliament can remove the executive, either informally through internal party checks or formally through a majority vote of no confidence. The reasons for the removal of the government may be legal, including corruption, incompetence or simply policy differences. If a successful vote of no confidence occurs, the government steps down, to be replaced, perhaps after a caretaker government, through a general election or legislative (intra- or inter-party) negotiations.

Continue reading “Trump ‘accountable?’ Easier said than done”