Trump and the NRA: Was the President Finally Using His Business Communication Skills?

Donald Trump chairing school safety meeting

Will Congress respond to Donald Trump's business deal-making skills?  After sending some tantalizing  tweets about gun control, Mr. Trump called a bipartisan White House meeting of Congressional leaders. He told the attendees not to fear the NRA, and he suggested better mental health policy and improved school security, which have been standard conservative talking points in the past week, but also advocated banning bump stocks, improved background checks, and confiscating weapons owned by mentally disturbed people, none of which pro-gun advocates have been willing to consider.

Donald Trump bump stocks tweet

President Trump handled this meeting like a business planning session. He began by guiding the meeting into an urgent purpose:

"We have to do something about it. We have to act. We can’t wait and play games and nothing gets done. And I really believe that the people — this is bipartisan. It’s a bipartisan meeting. We’re going to discuss safe schools and we can really get there. But we have to do it."

This opening statement stressed urgency and bipartisanship. He insisted on the need to end congressional gridlock on this controversial subject. He introduced both conservative and liberal talking points. He noted that most shootings occur in gun-free zones, leading him to advocate more armed response in schools. This is a common conservative position. He expressed agreement with Senator Chris Murphy's advocacy of background checks for gun buyers, a common Democratic position.

Mr. Trump also expressed a strong position about stopping mentally ill people from buying guns, another Democratic position; indeed, he advocated something like civil forfeiture in these cases:

"We have to do something about the mentally ill not being able to buy a gun. They have so many checks and balances that you could be mentally ill and it takes you six months before you — prohibit it. We have to do something very decisive. Number one, take the guns away immediately from people that you can adjudge is mentally ill. The police didn’t take the gun as way. That could have been policing. I think they should have taken them anyway, whether they had the right or not. You have to have very strong provisions for the mentally ill. People are saying I shouldn’t be saying that. I don’t want mentally ill people to be having guns."

After expressing hope that mentally ill people shouldn't be able to buy guns, he called on Senator Marco Rubio to give a position. After Rubio's vague statement, he asked Senator Chuck Grassley to speak. Grassley noted that many mentally  ill people are not dangerous.  

Mr. Trump told Grassley, "You’ll be a great help. I have no doubt." Grassley said, "To get a consensus." Many business leaders seek consensus, which means general agreement. Mr. Trump emphasized, "You’re going to be a great help. Thanks, Chuck. I would like to ask Joe and Pat, in your bill, what are you doing about the 18 to 21?" This made for an excellent transition, as Mr. Trump sought to encourage all of the different group members to express an opinion. This is good communication practice, is the leader, by calling on many different people to speak, can ensure that all different opinions are heard.

When Senator Pat Toomey asked Mr. Trump whether he would sign a background check bill, the president, not quite ready to commit himself, responded that he would give it "a lot of thought." After Toomey spoke, Trump offered encouragement and called on the next Senator, Steve Daines:

"I know where you’re coming from. And I understand that. I understand that. I think it’s a position. It’s a position. But I think we’re going to use you as a base, the two of you, I think you’re going to have to iron out that problem. I’m asked that question more than almost any other question. Are you going to 21 or not? Anybody? Yes, Steve."

At another point, Mr. Trump played off a comment by Senator Amy Klobuchar, saying that: "If you can add that to this bill that would be great. If you could add what you have also and I think you can into the bill —"

This meeting gave Mr. Trump a chance to showcase his business negotiating skills. The discussion could have been a little more freewheeling but, given the number of people involved, he was wise to maintain control and keep everyone on the agenda. He made sure that different people with different perspectives had a turn to speak. He maintained a friendly atmosphere, encouraged different ideas, offered corrections when he felt that someone had made a mistake, and encouraged people to reach a consensus.

What Mr. Trump did not do was to encourage interaction and debate among the participants. This might have brought their true disagreements into the open.

Unfortunately, politics and business are not the same. Politicians need to respond to different constituencies. Both parties need to respond to their voters, and both parties need to respond to their donors. Thus, although the individual members of the group probably shared fairly similar ideas, external pressure to disagree prevented them from reaching a lasting consensus. We will examine that phenomenon in my next post.