The mid-term elections are only a few weeks away and it looks as thought life might get interesting. Nate Silver, last I looked, was giving the Republicans about a 65% chance of taking control of the Senate. Given the sweep of governorships the Republican won during 2010, a critical redistricting election cycle, the baked in advantage from rural districts outnumbering urban ones, and the Democratic party’s base for not showing up on off-year elections, it looks all but certain that the Republicans will retain control of the House. I see no signs of a wave election, for either party, and if forced to guess I would hold that in November the Republicans will have control of the Legislative branch of the United States Government. I am not sold that this is going to work out all that well for the Republican Party in the long term. If they want to move legislation from bill into law they will have to pass bills that the President can sign. Right now, with the Democrats controlling the Senate, the Republicans have been having a responsibility free ride in their legislative actions. They can pass repeals of the ACA all they like, knowing perfectly well that the bills will die in the Senate, with the majority of American unaware of their existence. Once they control the Senate the landscape changes, but the internal dynamics of the Republican Party does not. The Tea Party base will brook no concessions, no compromises with President Obama, but to pass bills into law they will have to compromise. The Hassert rule, which is really more of a guideline but they adhere to it like it was the 11th Commandment, means nothing gets out of the House unless the Tea Party faction is happy with it. You cannot make them happy with compromises and you can’t violate the rule, leaving the Republicans in a position where their options are to pass nothing, or pick fights with the President, fights that they will lose. Why will they lose those public relations fights? Because it is easier for the White House to stay on message then it is far the vast number of Representative and Senators to do that same. Because the President will offer compromises, just as he already has on Social Security (offending his base) and the Republicans will be forced to publicly reject them. Because it it the Republican’s philosophy that government is the problem and when government is locked up in a partisan fight people tend to assume that the Republicans like it that way. If this goes on for two years, the Republican nominee will have a headwind he or she will not need. They may very become the Dog that caught the car and asked, now what?
[Update: apparently Silver’s latest projections have the Republican Take-over down to 53%. Interesting]
Confused. In what way is “restraining” the President not also hurting the country?
We currently have: more than 200 presidentially-appointed positions unfilled. In the last few years the directorship of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, key positions at the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve and numerous federal judgeships have been left unfilled for reasons that have little or nothing to do with the quality of the nominees. Additionally, in the middle of all this yelling about a response to the Ebola virus, we do not have a Surgeon General, due to congress dragging its feet – in part at the behest of the gun lobby who object to the current candidate’s statements about gun deaths being a public health crisis. How does THIS improve the country?
While were on health care, while the AFA has serious problems, those problems stem not from the act itself but rather from the fact that we should have had universal health care (And minimized the profit motives in health care) decades ago. This is just the first president who managed to get something done. Does it suck? Yes. And anyone who thought that whatever was done would not suck was naive at best. We don’t know what we are doing with this issue and we will be a decade or more figuring it out. How is restraining ANYONE from working on this issue helping the country?
What do I hope? Is what I already said. Restraining Obama.
With the political warfare of the last 8 plus years, I foresee no attempt at any substantive deal-making on the part of either side.
[Update: apparently Silver’s latest projections have the Republican Take-over up to 58%. Interesting]
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html
Obama’s job approval now shows 41% approve vs 54% disapprove.
Somehow I don’t think the Republican ‘dogs’ will have the kind of political trouble you predict. Not with Obama in office, especially considering Obama’s promise of executive action ‘amnesty’ for millions of illegal aliens once the election is conveniently behind the Democrats.
Brad; What do you hope to see accomplished by a Republican Congress during the remainder of the Obama presidency and what can the Republicans offer Obama and the Democrats to get it?
2016 and the Republicans can take care of themselves. In the meantime I hope the Democrats are crushed, to stop them from doing any more damage. Certain Democrats in particular.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/colorado/release-detail?ReleaseID=2080