Speaking with one voice on foreign economic policy
Things that belong together should be together, right?
Normally, yes. Bureaucracies, however, have other ideas. There, fiefdom outweighs virtually everything. The results are utterly predictable: more staffers than are really necessary, needless duplication of effort, lack of coordination when responsibilities overlap, turf fights over who gets to do what, budget battles, and so on and so on.
Let’s assume that soon after taking office – which can’t be soon enough, as far as I’m concerned – President Trump will do a government-wide review looking for ways to streamline the behemoth he inherited from the previous administration – which can’t leave town soon enough, as far as I’m concerned. Here is an idea that follows up on an earlier article where I suggested that the new secretary of state consider looking after the foreign economic interests of the United States as his primary responsibility. Put on the back burner “shuttle diplomacy” and other Kissinger-style exercises in futility (and worse).
The idea will seem childishly obvious once we look at the State Department organizational chart, where the under secretary for economic growth, energy and environment – State(E) – is shown as one of six under secretaries.
The idea I want to suggest is that State(E) absorb the responsibilities and personnel as necessary of three other offices that have similar missions: the United States trade representative (USTR), the Department of Commerce’s under secretary of commerce for international trade – USC(IT) – and its subordinate office, the International Trade Administration (ITA).
State(E) thus beefed up will make it considerably easier for the new secretary of state, and effectively the president, to speak with one voice on matters related to foreign economic policy, which will certainly be a key focus of the incoming administration, as President-Elect Trump has already indicated.
I realize that the idea is simple only on paper, but the benefits and the message sent to the rest of the government make it worth considering.
Ad Free / Commenting Login
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- Democrats in the Wilderness
- A Missing Person’s Alert So Identity-Specific It Stops Being Useful
- Naive Liberals
- Guardians of Liberty: Trump and the Constitution
- Supersizing the Curriculum: The University of Alabama’s Big, Fat Philosophy Class
- Massachusetts vs. the Second Amendment
- Florida Voter Fraud Case Could Overturn U.S. House Race
- Not Your Grandfather’s Foreign Aid
- Christian Morality, Migration, And The Good Samaritan
- Shaken, Not Stirred: The James Bond Complex
Blog Posts
- Lemon is Dead
- Trump has a point about the 14th
- The Bibas family and the antisemitic moral corruption of the world’s institutions
- It’s official: We live under the most bought-off Congress in history
- Leftist lawyer Benjamin Crump calls for crime to be legalized because it's just part of black culture
- Massachusetts schools teach antisemitism
- The deadliest mass crime wave in American history—who should be held accountable?
- Trump and Hegseth are killing it
- The death of community banks?
- Time for RFK Jr. to hit Big Pharma TV commercials
- Cloward-Piven hits the courts
- What’s behind Arab rejection of Trump’s plan for Gaza
- Uganda upset at lack of condoms, lubricants — blames USAID funding freeze
- Why would anyone be a Democrat?
- Protecting the Second Amendment is protecting the First