by Tom Scotto

SATURDAY, April 29, marks the passing of the first 100 days of Donald Trump’s presidency. The idea that the first 100 days of a presidency should contain measurable achievements dates back to Franklin Roosevelt, who, in his first year, retrospectively noted the legislative successes of his New Deal Great Depression era economic relief programme to counter the Great Depression. Early accomplishments of subsequent presidents vary, but tT This period now is a benchmarking point for media and elected officials.

In an October 2016 campaign speech in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, Mr Trump promised to undertake more than 25 actions as president during his first 100 days. Beset by low approval ratings, an awkward and divided inner circle and notable missteps, the president is described by many as a complete failure. A closer inspection of pledges made in the campaign speech and his subsequent actions points to some limited successes. Mitigating these small victories is Mr Trump’s failure to engage effectively with Congress and his seeming lack of interest in growing public support beyond the core base that narrowly elected him this past November.

His “wins” come in the areas where the US constitution gives the president the power to act relatively unilaterally or similar to a chief executive officer. He scored early victories by winning Senate approval of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and cabinet appointments that will allow him to shift the posture of executive agencies. Although a handful of Mr Trump’s controversial picks withdrew before confirmation hearings and there was the spectacular failure with the early resignation of the National Security Adviser, Michael Flynn, those confirmed will play key roles in putting his brand on their cabinet departments. For example, the newly appointed Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, issued memos instructing Justice Department officials to take a hard line on illegal immigration.

While actions of cabinet secretaries are subject to judicial scrutiny, there is little doubt Mr Trump shifted the policy direction of these agencies in his first 100 days. However, his antipathy to federal bureaucracy limits his success in the “President-as-CEO” role. Hundreds of positions requiring presidential appointments remain vacant. In the absence of direction from Mr Trump, the Obama-era status quo likely prevails in a federal bureaucracy consisting of career civil servants who, by and large, consider the president an anathema.

Mr Trump can take credit for acting early on his constitutional power to negotiate treaties, following through a campaign promise of withdrawing the US from talks for a trans-Pacific trade partnership. By his use of executive orders and memoranda, the president also limited hiring by the federal government and revived controversial energy pipeline construction plans. These actions constitute a fulfilment of policy proposals from the Gettysburg speech.

Mr Trump’s key weakness is his failure to come to terms with constitutional limitations on the president’s power. Under the American system of government, the president executes but does not make laws. Mr Trump has yet to convince Congress to take on seriously legislative priorities such as tax, trade or immigration reform. His mismanaged attempt to cajole the Republican House to repeal Mr Obama’s Affordable Care Act shows “outsider status” can win the hearts and votes of populist citizens in the mid-west and central states but can also limit a president’s ability to shape public policy. Mr Trump’s dealings with Congress evoke memories of Democratic President Jimmy Carter, who wore the outsider cape into Washington but never quite understood how his Democratic counterparts on Capitol Hill conducted their business. In Mr Carter’s case, it contributed to a one-term presidency.

Mr Trump’s low approval ratings compound the challenges he faces in getting Congress to act on his priorities. Most polling shows his approval averaging 40-45 per cent, and many of his initiatives are widely unpopular – at one point, surveys indicated fewer than one in five voters approved of Republican efforts to repeal Obamacare. Heading into mid-term elections where members of the president’s party historically face headwinds, many Republican members of Congress must seriously consider whether backing his legislative priorities bodes well for their political fortunes.

Mr Trump acted early on many of his campaign promises and had success where the president receives, by the constitution or tradition, leeway in taking action. Early wins in exercising executive authority in the manner promised make attaching the moniker he has used of others – “total loser” – to him a bit unfair. However, Mr Trump has probably hit the limits of what he can accomplish as a CEO president. His future success rests on building an effective working relationship with Congress and reining in the behaviour of himself and those around him so as not to evoke judicial scrutiny of his actions or embarrass the US on the world stage. This may allow him to build popular approval among groups that so far have been cool to this most unusual of presidents. Changing the conduct of a 70-year-old man prone to act impulsively might be difficult, but when legacies and political fortunes are in the balance, even the most stubborn and egotistical of politicians may heed the calls to reverse course.

Tom Scotto is a professor of Government and Politics at Strathclyde University