Many strides have been recently made in Donald Trump’s presidential transition process. The most notable of these advancements has been the nomination of several important cabinet members such as Rick Perry for Energy, Scott Pruitt for EPA and Rex Tillerson for Secretary of State.

Although these selections have been highly lauded by Trump and his team, members of the media and other politicians have pointed out the obvious conflicts of interest that accompany each of these nominees.

Rick Perry faces an especially unique dilemma. Perry’s unsuccessful 2012 run for president is most remembered for a debate in which he forgot the name of the third cabinet department he would eliminate if elected. It was a memorable gaffe. However, the most interesting part of the anecdote is that the department Perry forgot was the Department of Energy, which he is now nominated to lead.

Perry is not the only nominee who appears to be opposed to the bureau he might lead. EPA nominee Pruitt is famous for the two lawsuits he is currently engaged in with the EPA.  Both Pruitt and Trump have called global warming a hoax and believe it to not have as much of an impact on the world as scientists claim.

Recently, Reince Priebus, Mr. Trump’s Chief of Staff, clarified the president-elect’s stance: “As far as this issue on climate change, the only thing he was saying, after being asked a few questions about it, is, ‘Look, I’ll have an open mind about it. But he has his default position, which is that most of it is a bunch of bunk. But he’ll have an open mind and listen to people.’”

Despite an extreme amount of criticism, it appears the president-elect may have a method to his madness. Trump has chosen to follow a strategy that Ronald Reagan used with the Interstate Commerce Commission during his presidency. Essentially, by nominating a person who is completely opposed to the actions and ideals of the department he will be in charge of, Trump can effectively neutralize that department and its impact without having to appeal to Congress and have the department officially shut down. Although, this may be an effective method for neutralizing a department, the question of whether the department has been effective in the past, and if it provides a useful service, still arises.

Global warming has indeed been proven by many scientists to be an issue that greatly impacts our earth and environment. However the area in which scientists disagree is whether or not humans are the number one contributor to this issue. Trump has taken the hard stance that global warming is not man-made and is actually a lot less of a threat than people perceive it as. While many argue with Trump’s unconventional beliefs, measures could be taken to fund research into the true root of global warming, instead of Trump effectively shutting down the agency that can most significantly help with this hot button issue.  

Regardless of how a person may feel about the legitimacy of global warming or the usefulness of the energy department, it is doubtful that this was actually an ingenious move by Trump.