[[link removed]]

THE CASE FOR A SHADOW CABINET  
[[link removed]]


 

Kenny Stancil
March 5, 2025
The American Prospect
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ High-energy progressives can provide a compelling daily account of
everything going wrong and coordinate opposition to the Trump-Musk
nightmare...a daily press conference, held on Capitol Hill or at
televised town halls across the United States. _

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14) and Senator Bernie
Sanders (VT), Photo is a work of the U.S. federal government and in
the public domain // Revolving Door Project

 

During his March 4th address to Congress, President Donald Trump
defended the first six weeks of his already disastrous
[[link removed]] second
stint in the White House the way he defends all of his indefensible
actions: by bullshitting into a mic. Senate Minority Leader Chuck
Schumer (D-NY) in turn tapped
[[link removed]] Sen.
Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) to deliver the Democratic Party’s rebuttal, a
troubling continuation of the ostensible opposition party’s
“opposition” to Trump 2.0.

Slotkin, an ex-CIA agent who served
[[link removed]] as a national
security adviser in the Bush-Cheney administration—a precursor
[[link removed]] to
Trump’s bloodthirsty
[[link removed]], anti-intellectual
[[link removed]],
and authoritarian
[[link removed]] reign—holds
the distinction of being the first
[[link removed]] Democrat
endorsed by Dick Cheney’s daughter, former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY).
Even though the elder Cheney’s 2024 endorsement
[[link removed]] of
Kamala Harris hurt
[[link removed]] her
chances of defeating Trump in November, Schumer remains committed to
his ill-fated strategy
[[link removed]] of courting
[[link removed]] “moderate”
Republican voters in wealthy suburbs rather than focusing on the
Democratic base, including disaffected working-class voters who have
been leaving the party
[[link removed]] in
droves.

Slotkin’s support for some of Trump’s cabinet nominees
[[link removed]] and
for the GOP’s Laken Riley Act
[[link removed]],
which eliminates due process
[[link removed]] for
immigrants _accused_ of crimes, gives her the bipartisan
credentials fetishized
[[link removed]] by
the likes of Schumer. And those same right-wing votes make her
ill-suited to combat Trumpism. At a time when we need a full-throated
defense of public institutions that are under attack, Slotkin paid lip
service to the need for “a more efficient government,” going so
far as to praise Ronald Reagan—a key figure in the neoliberal
counterrevolution against the New Deal.

If Schumer-esque appeals to the “good ole days” of bipartisan
comity are destined to fail
[[link removed]],
what’s the way forward for Democrats? Contra James Carville
[[link removed]],
Democratic officials inside and outside of Congress ought to be taking
action simultaneously on three overlapping planes: ideological,
rhetorical, and practical. This activity—ideally coordinated by a
“shadow cabinet” of progressive counterparts to Trump’s ghoulish
cabinet members—should convey to the electorate that Democrats, not
Republicans, care about working people and are going to improve their
lives if given the chance in coming years.

IDEOLOGICAL WORK

Ideologically, Democrats need to frame themselves as the
anti-billionaire party. This shouldn’t be hard to do because Elon
Musk is the personification of billionaire avarice. Democrats need
to foster
[[link removed]] and
harness growing public disgust
[[link removed]] at
how Musk, his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) austerity
squad, and members of Trump’s billionaire cabinet
[[link removed]] are
decimating the public good to benefit themselves and a tiny minority
[[link removed]] of
super-wealthy elites.

Musk, a bona fide eugenicist
[[link removed]] with
unprecedented access to government data, has anointed himself the sole
arbiter of which public services are worthy of taxpayer support and
who is an undeserving “parasite.” At home, DOGE and the White
House have put virtually every good thing the government does in
their crosshairs
[[link removed]],
from public health
[[link removed]] and anti-poverty
programs
[[link removed]] to bank
regulation
[[link removed]], tax
law enforcement
[[link removed]], weather
forecasting
[[link removed]],
and public lands management
[[link removed]].
In the world’s poorest countries, the richest man in history is
literally “snatching nutrient paste out of the mouths of starving
babies,” as the _Prospect_’s Ryan Cooper put it
[[link removed]].

Before Musk became ubiquitous, left-wing critiques
[[link removed]] of
billionaire power may have seemed abstract. Now that Musk has
purchased the U.S. government and is trying to annihilate people and
projects he deems inferior, the existential danger of allowing a
handful of individuals to accumulate economic and political power
without restraint should be obvious to everyone.

Democrats must vocally oppose the current, grisly manifestation of
plutocracy if they want to convince voters that they care about
small-d democracy. Corporate and billionaire-friendly Democrats who
complain should be made to answer which they fear more: downward
redistribution or full-fledged fascism?

RHETORICAL WORK

Rhetorically, Democrats must relentlessly highlight how the Trump
administration and Musk’s DOGE wrecking crew are inflicting
material harm
[[link removed]] on
ordinary people, all while failing to address the cost-of-living
crisis
[[link removed]] that
they said would be their biggest priority.

There’s no shortage of foretold catastrophes being created or
enabled by the White House and DOGE:

* Airplane crashes
[[link removed]];
* The resurgence of measles
[[link removed]] and
other previously eradicated diseases;
* The cruel abandonment of cancer patients
[[link removed]];
* The capitulation to unrestricted poisoning of our food
[[link removed]], water
[[link removed]],
and air
[[link removed]];
* The surrender to a potential bird flu epidemic
[[link removed]];
* The unleashing of predatory scam artists
[[link removed]] on
vulnerable people;
* The escalation of anti-union policies
[[link removed]];
and
* The intensification of planet-heating pollution
[[link removed]],
which exacerbates extreme weather disasters and increases the odds of
an insurance-triggered mortgage crisis
[[link removed]].

Rather than letting Trump and Musk set the terms of public
debate—for instance, ludicrously and offensively calling
the January 29 plane crash
[[link removed]] in
Washington, D.C., a “DEI crash”—Democrats need to go on offense.
While the investigation into that aviation disaster is ongoing,
there’s no reason why Democrats can’t warn people about the
escalating risk of “DOGE crashes” brought about by the Trump-Musk
assault on federal workers.

What’s happening in the aviation sphere reveals the “logic” of
Musk’s smash-and-grab operation. Two days after Transportation
Secretary Sean Duffy fired
[[link removed]] hundreds
of Federal Aviation Administration workers, including those
who maintain
[[link removed]] air
traffic control infrastructure, he announced
[[link removed]] that he was
inviting private-sector consultants to help “deliver a new,
world-class air traffic control system that will be the envy of the
world.” And who do you suppose was first on the list of invitees? Of
course, it was none other than SpaceX, one of Musk’s companies. You
break it, you get it!

Meanwhile, food and housing are getting more expensive
[[link removed]],
as the Trump administration ignores corporate consolidation
[[link removed]], launches
ill-conceived trade wars
[[link removed]], terrorizes
and deports immigrant workers
[[link removed]],
and inflames the fossil fuel–driven climate emergency
[[link removed]].
This story of brutal class war not only jeopardizes the general
welfare but could also culminate in an economic crash
[[link removed]].

As Osita Nwanevu pointed out
[[link removed]] recently,
Musk’s overarching innovation is that he has, through DOGE,
deregulated and privatized the work of deregulation and privatization.
For Democrats to credibly criticize Trump and Musk’s war on the
public good, they can’t favor a return to the status quo ante of
government-led deregulation and privatization over today’s unelected
billionaire-led versions. They need to oppose any further enclosure of
the commons, advocating for the restoration of New Deal institutions
that have been sacrificed at the altar of financialization—and for
the creation of new ones to expand the public domain and reduce market
dependence.

PRACTICAL WORK

Practically, Democratic officials need to inconvenience everyone
involved in advancing Trump’s objectives, including the rogue Musk.
Democratic attorneys general have slowed
[[link removed]] the
Trump-Musk assault via lawsuits. We need to see the same energy from
congressional Democrats, who have so far failed to meet the moment
[[link removed]].
Indivisible has explained how House Democrats
[[link removed]] and Senate
Democrats
[[link removed]] can
“delay and defy” Trump’s agenda. Democrats may not control
either chamber, but contrary to House Minority Leader Hakeem
Jeffries’s (D-NY) claims
[[link removed]],
they do have multiple points of leverage
[[link removed]] to
disempower Musk and protect crucial programs.

The message
[[link removed]] from
congressional Democrats should be as follows: Either Trump and Musk
follow existing laws, or we stop participating in the development of
new laws. That means Democrats should be a “no” on everything
[[link removed]] until
DOGE stops sabotaging the government and starts following the law.

Congressional Democrats can also spotlight abuses and ask the
Government Accountability Office to conduct investigations at every
turn, as my colleague KJ Boyle wrote
[[link removed]] recently.
The important follow-up step is to _use_ those requests to garner
headlines and media appearances
[[link removed]] to
amplify their message.

The same goes for formal hearings, where congressional Democrats can
invite expert witnesses—such as fired former government
officials—to explain the negative impacts of DOGE’s rampage, as
well as informal hearings
[[link removed]],
like the one held last week
[[link removed]] by
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) with former Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau officials.

Finally, Democrats can also take long shots, such as trying to
impeach
[[link removed]] Trump
personnel like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who has supported
[[link removed]] and evidently
lied
[[link removed]] about
Musk’s infiltration
[[link removed]] of
the federal payments system. While unlikely to be successful, such a
move would raise the issue’s salience and force Republicans to
defend it.

A SHADOW CABINET TO COORDINATE OPPOSITION TO THE TRUMP-MUSK BARRAGE

The three planes of action outlined above are intertwined, and apart
from congressional oversight, none are limited to Democrats on Capitol
Hill. There’s plenty for state and local Democrats—governors
[[link removed]],
AGs, legislators, mayors, and other officials—as well as prominent
party members to do.

Moving forward, Democrats could take inspiration from parliamentary
systems and set up a “shadow cabinet” full of energetic
progressives who ruthlessly criticize every bad move made by their
official Trump counterparts. Of course, to emulate such a model, there
needs to be a “shadow prime minister” who organizes these efforts.
If one thing is clear, it’s that neither Schumer nor Jeffries
seems interested
[[link removed]] in
providing that leadership.

By contrast, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is already off to a good start
with his anti-oligarchy tour
[[link removed]]. At
stops around the country, he’s explaining to working people in
districts that flipped from Biden to Trump how the Republican
president and Musk are making their lives worse. Though she
was denied
[[link removed]] a
leadership position on the House Oversight Committee by the Democratic
Party’s corporate-friendly old guard, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
(D-NY) has also been a frequent and vocal critic
[[link removed]] of
Trump, Musk, and DOGE. Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez, Progressive Caucus
Chair Greg Casar (D-TX), or another like-minded lawmaker would make a
fine “shadow PM.” So too would former Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH),
who was barely ousted from the Senate by a deluge of corporate money,
or flight attendant union president Sara Nelson.

Imagine a shadow Treasury secretary explaining the tangible downsides
of Bessent’s pro-billionaire actions; a shadow interior secretary
condemning Doug Burgum’s public lands giveaways; a shadow labor
secretary denouncing Lori Chavez-DeRemer’s attacks on worker
protections; a shadow transportation secretary underscoring how Musk
stands to benefit from the privatization of air traffic control
infrastructure; a shadow health and human services secretary defending
public health from RFK Jr.’s ill-informed blitz; a shadow housing
and urban development secretary slamming Scott Turner’s attempts to
hurt low-income tenants; a shadow Environmental Protection Agency
administrator ripping Lee Zeldin’s accommodation of polluting
corporations; and a shadow U.S. trade representative explaining how
Trump policy is undermining a nascent manufacturing renaissance.

Now picture all of that happening during a daily press conference,
held on Capitol Hill or at televised town halls across the United
States. At each one, shadow secretaries are flanked by displaced
government workers who describe how they used to protect the public
before Musk’s coup made it impossible to do so, and what they would
do if given sufficient resources.

That kind of past-, present-, and future-oriented storytelling and
organizing is necessary to defeat the fascist threat. If Democrats
think that sucking up to Big Tech executives
[[link removed]] and
promoting a purportedly centrist agenda
[[link removed]] devoid
of economic populism is the way to go, we’re doomed.

Trump’s regressive policies
[[link removed]]—including the incoherent tariffs
[[link removed]] and
Musk’s evisceration
[[link removed]] of the
government functions that enable broad economic prosperity—have
already made a recession more likely
[[link removed]].
When that happens, Trump and his co-conspirators must be made as
infamous as FDR made
[[link removed]] Herbert
Hoover. A shadow cabinet can do that.

_[KENNY STANCIL is a senior researcher at the Revolving Door Project
[[link removed]].]_

[[link removed]]

_The Revolving Door Project, a Prospect partner, scrutinizes the
executive branch and presidential power. Follow them
at therevolvingdoorproject.org
[[link removed]]._

Read the original article at Prospect.org
[[link removed]].

_Used with the permission. © The American Prospect
[[link removed]], Prospect.org, 2025 [[link removed]].
All rights reserved. _

_ Support the American Prospect [[link removed]]._

_Click here [[link removed]] to support the Prospect's
brand of independent impact journalism_

* Congressional oversight
[[link removed]]
* progressive politics
[[link removed]]
* progressive platform
[[link removed]]
* Elon Musk
[[link removed]]
* Trump 2.0
[[link removed]]
* Donald Trump
[[link removed]]
* Congress
[[link removed]]
* Democrats
[[link removed]]
* Republican Party
[[link removed]]
* GOP
[[link removed]]
* Town Halls
[[link removed]]
* DOGE
[[link removed]]
* federal government
[[link removed]]
* federal employees
[[link removed]]
* State and Local Government Layoffs
[[link removed]]
* social safety net
[[link removed]]
* Medicaid
[[link removed]]
* Medicare
[[link removed]]
* Social Security
[[link removed]]
* Red States
[[link removed]]
* 2024 Elections
[[link removed]]
* Elections 2026
[[link removed]]
* AOC
[[link removed]]
* Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
[[link removed]]
* Bernie Sanders
[[link removed]]
* The Squad
[[link removed]]
* Progressive Caucus
[[link removed]]
* Working Families Party
[[link removed]]
* WFP
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]