This election was, as Jack Cafferty put it, about “Americans choosing what kind of bad government they want to have: one-party rule that will rubber stamp President Bush’s agenda, or a Congress with Democrats in charge, and nothing but gridlock and frustration for the next two years.”
Well, Americans chose door number two, and it won’t be long before we see if we have won a new car or a croquet set. We must realize that Democrats won back Congress last week in the same way the Tortoise beat the Hare: statistically, but not in their own right. Most of the Democrats’ campaign strategy comprised of shrinking quietly into the corner while Republicans floundered about in a perfect storm of political scandals and corruption. This election was very much like the elections of the Palestinian Authority last January: Fatah was corrupt and ineffective, and Hamas happened to be the only other option, so by default, they won.
I am not thrilled about the idea of a Democratic Congress, it just isn’t very inspiring. As this campaign was mostly a reflection of the implosion of Bush and the Republicans, Democrats did not have to present a cohesive set of policies. That may be a good thing for them, because if asked, they probably couldn’t have done it.
What changes will the Democrats make—what exactly do they stand for? CNN’s election exit polls tells us that the issues on voters’ minds were corruption, terrorism, the economy, and
Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi has laid out a laundry list of to-dos for the first 100 hours of the next Congress, calling it the “New Direction for
Pelosi’s “New Direction”, according to HouseDemocrats.gov, includes an overhaul of ethics rules, which would, miraculously, “make this the most honest and open Congress in history.” Also on the list are raising the federal minimum wage, adopting the recommendations of the 9/11 commission, passing a stem-cell bill, cutting interest rates for college loans in half, giving the government power to negotiate for lower drug prices, eliminating tax loopholes that outsource jobs, rescinding subsidies for Big Oil, putting money towards alternative energy sources, and adopting rules for a “pay-as-you-go”
Got all that?
If anybody happened to be wondering, 100 hours ago (if today is Thursday) was Sunday. Apparently, Nancy Pelosi is going to drink seven cups of expresso on Monday morning, lock the doors of the House chamber and not let anyone leave the floor until all this stuff gets done. If she can pull this off in one workweek, we can only imagine how much she will be able to accomplish in two years.
Now, I realize this is mostly political grandstanding. Pelosi is trying to shoot the moon, and if she falls short, so what, she has the rest of her term to work with. In my mind, if she can get two or three of these things accomplished in her first week, it would be a success. But is how she expects things to work? That she can throw some pixie dust in the air and effortlessly pass a bill? I sincerely hope that Pelosi is not as naïve as this list of 100 hours’ work suggests.
Mrs. Pelosi, take note—it’s not as easy as Schoolhouse Rock. Republicans had majorities in the House and Senate and Bush in the White House this past term and got nothing done. The Democrats’ majorities are smaller, and they will have to get through President Bush to pass anything, as they certainly will not be able to override his veto. The Republicans—still a very formidable minority, will make every effort to block the Democrats’ agenda, just as Democrats did to Republicans for the past two years.
It will be interesting to see if the Democrats can garner enough support to apply their agenda, however ambiguous it may be. For six years their job has been to stand in the way to slow down the charge of Bush and Company. Have their offensive muscles atrophied, or can Democrats present a political philosophy that connects with the concerns of the American people?
One thing that troubles me about the New Direction is that there is nothing regarding terrorism or
3 comments:
And this is why I sometime love democrats... because those positions rock socks. Like seriously, cutting college loan interest rates = yeah, we need that. 9/11 commission recommendations = great, fewer loopholes = great. I think those are all really great positions.
I think the problem is that they don't got no pizzaaaaaazzzz. The democrats don't have style, they don't sell well. I mean if you look at individual policies, all of the in-house stuff is great, they really do have a cohesive plan I feel, and that’s to focus on stopping outsourcing, helping education and trying to help the middle class in assorted ways (taxing uber-rich and such). But those positions aren’t that interesting, they’re booorrrinnnggg. It doesn’t sell, so I don’t think we see it, so I don’t think we feel that they actually do have a plan. I think the real problem the dems are gonna run into is like you said, Iraq. I don’t feel that terrorism is gonna be a problem, I actually think the dems might be able to do a smarter, if not better, job than the reps. I think Iraq is going to be the major, major problem there, and hopefully come 2008 (when I think we’ll still have a large ground presence there) the people will remember that it was a rep-controlled congress that started it all, the dems just got handed the mess.
And I think Bush might have to start using crazy vetos. I think he’ll turn later-stage Clinton and just veto everything that comes to his table, and you’re right, we’ve got a deadlock. But if Bush is doing all the vetoing at least it’ll be visible that it’s BUSH that’s keeping us in a gridlock, not the dems. Hopefully.
yah, they're definately going to have to be "bipartisan." of course, bipartisanship has no real meaning anymore, but whatever the hell it is, Democrats have to do it. If it comes to be 08 and nothing has changed, i think the Democrats have the blood on their hands, even if it is Bush's veto that prevents change. It's been accepted that Bush is a lame duck, so if he doesn't get anything accomplished (which he won't), it's no sweat off his back - or the Republicans'. The Democrat Congress is now the object of the America's hope, and the political pressure rests on them.
sounds nice, but heavy on vaugaries. i was quoting HouseDemocrats.gov (i would give you the direct link to the page, but the server's actually down). it was a list, not a list of principles, so we're looking at different things. i realize that pelosi won't drop everything when 100 hours are up, i just think it's an arbitrary and misguided stunt to have a "100 hours" list in the first place, and to publicize it so, when the Democrats' agenda was so fuzzy for the entire campaign. i just want to know where they are. i hope that Democrats can make headway on those two issues, and not just with emergency preparedness via FEMA and the national gaurd.those are vitally important, but they can't leave an opening for Republicans to exploit, to point at and say, "we made this huge change, but the Democrats didnt' do anythign."
Post a Comment