Yeah, the Democrats won, what’s next?

Originally posted at
http://cafzal.blogspot.com/2006/12/yeah-democrats-won-
whats-next.html on 10 December 2006.

Okay, the “thumpin’”, as President George W. Bush put it, is over.

The 2006 US midterm elections came to a close weeks ago,
believe me, after all the blogging I did during the elections, I am
relieved. Yeah, yeah, the Democrats took the House of
Representatives and Senate, respectively, by a landslide and a
margin, but what’s next? Time to celebrate for moderates and
liberals in the country? Time for change with the new majority
Democrats? Not exactly.

The upcoming Democratic-majority US Congress may well be as

bad as the current one. One positive: maybe the Dems will stick it
to President Bush. One negative: do they have enough of a
majority — even within their own party — to get anything done,
let alone show the president that he is not the sovereign leader of
America (or the world)? What about the fact that Bush has veto
power? Just the squabbling — regardless of political affiliation —
over Iraq, which, coupled with economy, was the main focus of
the voters this past election, shows that the American people
may be in for some ride these next years.

2006 elections
Even before the elections, political analysts were warning that
even if the Dems won not all would be well. First of all, winning
Democrats would most likely be unseating moderate Republicans,
replacing them with slightly conservative to conservative
Democrats, and, since they would not be able to get any
moderate or liberal change done, the Democrats would be sad
and worn out (as if they were not already). Meanwhile, the GOP
would be ready to rise up to the Democrats. America [usually]
loves an underdog, and keep in mind, a quarter of the electorate
are evangelical or fundamentalist Christians — predominately in
the South. The GOP would rally this massive demographic and
stall any good chance of reform by creating a Democratic
nightmare in 2008.

Gridlock, past and future

For the next two years, the Democratic Party will also have to
deal with the fact that, even though they control the legislature,
the executive still has its occupier — a Republican. I am speaking,
of course, of President George W. Bush.

Back in 1992, a man from Arkansas, a man with a hope for

America, was elected. President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, served
for eight years, many of which were probably not what he wished
they were. In 1994, Rep. Newt Gingrich and others launched what
they coined as the “contract with America”, now referred to as
the ‘Republican Revolution’ that resulted in massive seat gains
for the GOP in both houses of Congress. This disabled Clinton
from passing many of his sought-after laws. This also gave
Americans a good taste of what political gridlock really is.

After the 110th United States Congress is sworn in next January,

there will be at least two years of this gridlock. The differences
between the Clinton era gridlock and the upcoming gridlock
include the fact that back then the Democrats controlled the
presidency, the Republicans the Congress, and it is now the other
way around. The Dems also have less of a majority now then the
Republicans had back in the ‘90s, and there is an ever-increasing
conservative base ready to be fired up to come to the assistance
of the Republican Party.

Pelosi and the Democratic roadmap

It will be interesting to see what the first woman Speaker of the
House, Nancy Pelosi, will bring. Pelosi is third in line for the
Presidency (on the very off and unrealistic occasion that both
President Bush and Vice President Chaney were to pass away in
the next two years).

I am starting to feel a bit more optimistic about House Speaker-

elect Nancy Pelosi's vision for the Democratic Party and America
as a whole. Pelosi’s "100-hour plan" — a spin-off of former
President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “100-day plan” — looks
especially promising, albeit quite ambitious. The plan, outlined in
an often-cited Associated Press article, calls for ethics reforms
(e.g. lobbying restrictions), implementation of the
recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission (which the US
government is still getting failing grades from), and an easier way
for people to pay for college (e.g. interest rate cuts for student
loans, educational initiatives). On Pelosi’s 100-hour to do list is
also the passing of federally-funded stem cell research
legislation, a raise of the minimum wage (from $5.15 to $7.25),
the creation of a path to lower drug prices (which 85% of
Americans back) [for those using Medicare], and other positive
and progressive goals.

The ethics reforms are planned for the first day, in order to "break
the link between lobbyists and legislation,” says Pelosi. During
this entire plan, Pelosi has told AP she does not wish to further
raise the national deficit that has ballooned under this president
and this Congress; she says she is to institute a “pay-as-you-go”
plan after her first 100 hours. The ultimate goal of this so-called
100-hour plan: "drain the swamp" of Republican rule the past 12
years in Congress, says Pelosi.

Political climate
The political winds have changed with the elections resulting in a
Congressional majority for the Democrats, but it may be too
insignificant, too late. Speaking of changes in the political winds,
President Bush seems to want to be everyone's bipartisan friend
again; a "united, not a divider", I doubt it. Much of the White
House's political strategy depends on polarizing and dividing a
nation, which is easy to do with (1) lack of government
transparency and accountability more than ever (2) fear
mongering in the "war on terrorism" (3) splitting a two-party
nation so most vote for the GOP, using (1) and (2) as vote-
gainers. This is all along with ideological and economic class
partitioning, e.g. evangelicals/religious right, neoconservatives,
'safety moms', 'Wall Street types', and [other] special interests.

One ongoing question is whether the GOP can keep these

conservatives and evangelicals on their side and can get them
out to the polls, while staying congruent with respective
ideologies of their various right-wing bases. This is where a two-
party system with lax campaign finance regulation gets America:
extreme polarized partisanship, elevated positions for special
interest groups, and very limited choices for already-disgruntled
constituents.

Representatives Pelosi (D-CA) and Boxer (D-CA) are two of the

few quite liberal House members; Senators Feingold (D-WI),
Feinstein (D-CA), and Kennedy (D-MA) are some of the few quite
liberal Senate members (all are Democrats).

Dem options; in conclusion

The Democratic win in Congress is symbolic at best. There are,
however, a handful of things that may be of good use to the
Democrats and the nation. One of the best things that can come
out of this exchange of power in Congress is that the rules former
Majority Leader Tom "The Hammer" DeLay set up making the
House majority party so much more powerful could be used to
the Democrat's advantage — and possibly the advantage of the
nation. DeLay is now indicted on a slew of well-deserved charges,
including those relating to campaign finance, and is being
investigated for his roll in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandals.

It ultimately comes down to this question: can the Democrats

make a significant difference with their new majority in the US
political scene? Unless the Democrats can rally support for the
required two-thirds vote for a presidential veto override, I remain
pessimistic. The Democrats may be or may not be lucky enough
to get some of the forward-looking reforms passed by a majority
of Congress anyway.

I am not too optimistic that the Dems will take full advantage of
the majority power and the ability to investigate the White House
by using Executive subpoena, but not to the extent that
Executive-Legislature relations are harmed [too much]. One can
only hope that the Dems will take this chance, grab it by its
horns, and make the best of their around 30-seat advantage in
the 435-seat House of Representatives. No matter what, there
will be gridlock.

Meanwhile, the race for 2008 is already well underway. That’s

politics.

The above is an essay outlining the Democratic victory and the

issues surrounding it in this past midterm election in the United
States. Some of the writing is extracted from previous posts I
wrote on my blog.

Clearthought is a blogger and student. His blog can be found at

http://cafzal.blogspot.com/.