In a highly unprecedented move, President-elect Donald Trump is holding up the presidential transition process by refusing to provide the legally required ethics pledge.
The Presidential Transition Act requires the president-elect to sign an ethics agreement that applies to everyone on the transition team and includes a pledge vowing to avoid conflicts of interest once sworn into office.
Only after the president-elect has signed the pledge and disclosed to the General Services Administration (GSA) all nonfederal contributions received for the transition, can their transition team receive access to federal agencies.
The transition period is a critical junction for our country and a point of extreme vulnerability for national security. Delaying a smooth transition of power will have negative consequences felt throughout the government.
The transition team sets the stage for the new administration in a number of ways. These highly skilled professionals are trusted with the immense responsibility of guiding a president-elect to the White House by managing critical pre-election and postelection matters before a candidate assumes office.
The consequences of a mishandled transition period extend far beyond these few months: Grimly, the 9/11 Commission cited the shortened transition period following the 2000 presidential election as a contributing factor to the 2001 attack on the World Trade Center.
The transition also sets the tone for the administration’s approach to transparency, accountability and public trust — which is why it is so essential that this team pledges to ensure their duties are carried out with the public’s interest in mind.
It is unclear exactly why Trump has not signed the agreement or shared who has contributed to the transition efforts; however, his most recent financial disclosure reports point to one potential reason.
Trump has a number of holdings that raise significant conflict of interest concerns: including his new cryptocurrency business, majority stake in the social media network Truth Social, real estate properties, books, and licensing deals.
If the president-elect were to sign an agreement vowing to avoid conflicts of interest, it would suggest that he should divest from many — if not all — of these holdings.
In addition, it is possible that the president-elect does not want the public to know who has been contributing to his transition or place a limit on individual contributions.
In order to receive government services and funds to aid with the transition, a president-elect may not receive more than $5,000 from an individual and must disclose these contributors to the GSA, who will then make that information available to the public.
It is possible that Trump — who has no shortage of wealthy allies with special interests — would rather accept unlimited contributions, which would create significant conflicts of interest, than receive the necessary transition services from the federal government to keep the country safe.
From this point, there are three possible paths the president-elect might take. First, he can propose strong ethics requirements as past transition teams have done, albeit belatedly, and signal to the public that he will respect ethics standards, the rule of law, and the public’s trust and safety.
Second, the transition team may propose a substandard ethics guideline that satisfies the legal requirements but amounts to little more than window dressing. The transition efforts could move forward but would do little to reassure the public that the team is operating at the highest ethical level.
Third, the transition team may refuse to adhere to any ethics standards at all, effectively choosing to operate with no transparency into or accountability for possible conflicts of interest. This path has little precedent in modern history
The president-elect already signaled his refusal to adhere to robust ethics requirements by failing to provide the public with a timely ethics code for the transition team as required by the Presidential Transition Act.
Both major party presidential candidates were required to establish ethics plans for their transition teams by October 1. Trump blew through that deadline.
Missing the first ethics requirement in the path to the Oval Office is a concerning premonition of what ethics enforcement could look like under a second Trump administration.
It is especially concerning given Trump’s flippant attitude toward and blatant disregard of ethics laws and norms required to sustain public trust.
During his first administration, Trump notoriously refused to divest from his business interests despite the thousands of conflicts of interest they posed. He also repeatedly refused to hold his senior officials accountable for ethics violations and rescinded his ethics pledge executive order on his last day in office, paving the way for his officials’ unfettered use of the revolving door and a legacy of corruption and waste.
This conduct does not go unnoticed by the public. Public trust in government hit some of the lowest levels in over 60 years during Trump’s last administration, when only 17% of Americans trusted the government to do what was right.
In the absence of swift, concrete action by the president-elect to signal his dedication to ethics standards, all signs point to a second term that will prioritize personal interest over public good, and a declining trust in public institutions.