Architect of the Capitol via Flickr

Featured eBooks
Issues in City and County Management
Digital First
The Cybersecurity Challenge
Trump’s Agenda Quickly Collides With Reality on the Hill

From repealing Obamacare to building a border wall funded by Mexico, the president-elect’s campaign priorities have hit some early turbulence.

Re­pub­lic­ans who fully con­trol Wash­ing­ton for the first time in a dec­ade are fa­cing a rocky path in their quest to undo Pres­id­ent Obama’s policies and en­act Don­ald Trump’s.

Nearly every item on the list of pri­or­it­ies and pledges that Pres­id­ent-elect Trump and the GOP Con­gress cam­paigned on has en­countered early tur­bu­lence or un­cer­tainty—from rolling back Obama­care and fed­er­al reg­u­la­tions to build­ing a bor­der wall, fund­ing in­fra­struc­ture, and with­draw­ing from the in­ter­na­tion­al cli­mate pact.

The biggest ex­ample is Obama­care, as Re­pub­lic­ans face in­tern­al fric­tion over wheth­er a re­place­ment plan should be offered to go with bills that could pass with­in weeks to un­ravel the Af­ford­able Care Act, which has brought cov­er­age to 20 mil­lion people.

But re­cent days have re­vealed oth­er fault lines and signs that Trump will face hurdles in de­liv­er­ing on some of his prom­ises.

Take his fre­quent cam­paign pledge that Mex­ico would pay for a massive wall along the bor­der.

Trump told The New York Times that he’s now plan­ning to build first and some­how en­sure the U.S. is re­im­bursed by Mex­ico later, likely through his vow to rene­go­ti­ate the North Amer­ic­an Free Trade Agree­ment. But it’s un­clear wheth­er Trump could ever force such pay­ments.

Rolling back reg­u­la­tions is an­oth­er area where the GOP’s ap­pet­ite for change is lar­ger than what’s ac­tu­ally on the menu.

Last week, the House passed a GOP bill that would give Con­gress sweep­ing powers to nul­li­fy reg­u­la­tions is­sued very late in a pres­id­ent’s term.

But the bill stands al­most no chance in the Sen­ate, which means law­makers and Trump will be able to quickly nix only a re­l­at­ively small num­ber of Obama’s late-pres­id­ency rules us­ing a mid-1990s law called the Con­gres­sion­al Re­view Act. That means law­makers face tough choices about which reg­u­la­tions to tar­get for quick re­peal.

Trump, to be sure, has oth­er tools to undo vari­ous reg­u­la­tions, such as de­cid­ing not to de­fend them in court, or wa­ging lengthy ad­min­is­trat­ive re­peals, while he can quickly stop un­fin­ished rules in their tracks.

Trump’s plans for a sweep­ing in­fra­struc­ture pack­age, mean­while, are not on the near-term le­gis­lat­ive agenda, as Hill Re­pub­lic­ans are wary of spend­ing the kind of money the pres­id­ent-elect and his ad­visers have touted.

But Sen­ate Ma­jor­ity Whip John Cornyn told re­port­ers Monday in the Cap­it­ol that poli­cy­mak­ing takes time.

“I know we all like im­me­di­ate grat­i­fic­a­tion. I cer­tainly do. But it is not al­ways pos­sible, and this is go­ing to take some time,” Cornyn said when asked if voters who backed Re­pub­lic­ans will grow dis­sat­is­fied at the pace of change in Wash­ing­ton.

Cornyn said Re­pub­lic­ans are “ab­so­lutely com­mit­ted” to bor­der se­cur­ity, “be­liev­ing that that is the res­ult that people were vot­ing for when they voted for Mr. Trump.” He ad­ded that there are “a lot more pieces of that puzzle,” such as so-called e-veri­fic­a­tion and the refugee vet­ting pro­cess.

Asked if he feared voter con­cern about the im­ple­ment­a­tion of the GOP agenda, Cornyn replied: “I don’t think so. I think they are go­ing to see some im­me­di­ate re­lief, par­tic­u­larly on the reg­u­lat­ory front, start­ing Janu­ary the 20th. I think there is go­ing to be a lot of activ­ity and they will see a lot of mo­mentum.”

The GOP’s work-in-pro­gress ef­fort to kill the health care law rep­res­ents the most vi­ol­ent polit­ic­al col­li­sion between long-stand­ing Re­pub­lic­an goals and the hard polit­ics of achiev­ing them.

The Sen­ate will vote on a budget doc­u­ment this week that paves the way for re­peal­ing large por­tions of the law in the com­ing weeks with sub­sequent bills that are im­mune from Sen­ate fili­busters.

But Re­pub­lic­ans face in­tern­al dis­sen­sion, as some of their mem­bers ex­press con­cern about the ab­sence—for now—of a plan to re­place it with a GOP al­tern­at­ive. (Sen­ate Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Mitch Mc­Con­nell told CBS on Sunday that a re­place­ment would oc­cur “rap­idly” after re­peal, but offered no time frame.)

Sev­er­al high-pro­file Re­pub­lic­ans, in­clud­ing Sens. Rand Paul, Bob Cork­er, and Tom Cot­ton, say that law­makers should be present­ing their re­place­ment plan es­sen­tially along­side the re­peal of the law.

Paul told The Wall Street Journ­al on Monday that he spoke with Trump on Fri­day and that the pres­id­ent-elect “agrees com­pletely” with the Ken­tucky sen­at­or’s view that Obama­care re­peal and re­place­ment should hap­pen at the same time.

Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans may speed up their ef­fort to re­place some pieces of Obama­care. Cornyn told re­port­ers that the re­peal meas­ures that the Fin­ance and Health Com­mit­tees will craft in the com­ing weeks might also con­tain some of the “re­place” side of the equa­tion.

“We are ac­tu­ally look­ing to try to find some way to do that,” Cornyn said. “We are look­ing to do as much as we can do in the bill, but I am not pre­pared right now to give you an in­vent­ory of those is­sues, but we are try­ing to do as much as we can.”

The slow gears of Wash­ing­ton and Trump’s evolving po­s­i­tions could force Re­pub­lic­ans in­to de­cisions that dis­ap­point some of their most hard-core sup­port­ers.

Con­sider Trump’s plan to aban­don the United Na­tions Par­is cli­mate-change pact—the type of pledge that res­on­ates with a hard-right fac­tion that dis­putes the sci­entif­ic con­sensus on hu­man-caused glob­al warm­ing and has no love for the U.N. either.

Trump has waffled on that plan.

Cork­er, the Sen­ate For­eign Re­la­tions Com­mit­tee chair­man, said there’s not a clear ra­tionale for try­ing to quickly take steps to­ward jet­tis­on­ing the Par­is deal, not­ing that it does not cre­ate bind­ing emis­sions man­dates on na­tions any­way.

“When you are com­ing in­to of­fice and you have got crises that are go­ing to come up that you are totally un­aware of at present, it is best to come in­to of­fice and get your feet on the ground and then fig­ure out which battles to pick. Again, the Par­is ac­cord has zero ef­fect on the United States. We are not bound to do any­thing,” Cork­er said in the Cap­it­ol on Fri­day.

He pre­dicted that the new ad­min­is­tra­tion would not try to bail on the Par­is deal on “Day One,” not­ing that it could in­stead just neg­lect it.

“The Trump ad­min­is­tra­tion could con­tin­ue to be ‘a party to it’ and just not in­vest dol­lars to­wards that end. The real is­sue is not stat­ing wheth­er you are in the ac­cord or not,” he said.