If It Limps Like A Duck
It's a month out from what is predicted to be a an earthquake that will rock the political landscape. Polls and reports of polls point to a massive Republican win. All predict a GOP victory which will give them control of the House of Representatives. The margins call for a pickup of between 40 and 80 seats, which will give them a majority, but not enough to over-ride a Presidential veto. The more right leaning polls see GOP control of the Senate as well, though only a handful see the possibility of getting that magical 60 seats to insure a filibuster proof majority. The most reliable polls show a gain of 6 to 9 Senate seats.
We at TPP are not convinced of a major crushing defeat of the Democrats. TPP sees excitement and energy among the conservative base of the Republican party for the fresh faces coming up through the Tea Party movement. We see many of those candidates moving on to victory. We see only tepid support for what is termed the "establishment" Republicans.
Much of the difference in support comes down to the type of campaign being run. The Tea Party types speak their mind and treat their supporters with respect. They show passion for the country and passion for service. They stand for some controversial ideas and speak on them. The establishment candidates are attempting to run "safe" campaigns where their true positions are masked beneath layers of spin. They are not inspiring people. They are trying to hide behind vague platitudes and pseudo-issues. Of those candidates who retain their seats, many will be voted for with the electorate holding it's collective nose.
For our purposes today let's go with the scenario that the Republicans do capture the majority. That does provide a change in dynamic. The House of Representatives controls the checkbook. That would be a game changer for President Obama who could see a denial of funding for his pet projects. A majority in the Senate will be less helpful since the filibuster will be the tool of choice for the Democrats.
So how does President Obama proceed with his ambitious agenda? Well, come January, he doesn't. By delivering a Republican majority to DC, the American public will have sent a clear message that they side with the guys saying "no" to his proposals. It is no longer his claimed mandate for change that he invoked at his inauguration. Continuing on in opposition to the stated will of the governed would be hazardous to his political future.
We have examined that President Obama has brought his personal "resolve" to levels that are probably off the charts on the Bush scale. He is prone only to tactical retreats, not changing plans or goals. This has been borne out in revelations coming from the newest Bob Woodward book, detailing the fractious White House staff, and the President insisting on his solution over the advice of those paid to know their field of expertise.
President Obama has indicated that he would rather be a transformational one term President than a mediocre two-term President. We are not sure if that was a swipe at just George W. Bush, or if he was taking a swipe at Bill Clinton as well. Much of what Obama has been attempting is either trying to deliver on Clinton's unfulfilled promises, or dismantling Clinton's actual accomplishments. In any case, we can take President Obama at his word. TPP believes that President Obama would rather pass his agenda than get a second term.
That being said, what's the game plan? There have been clues in the issues raised and then walked away from, in the staffing changes, and in the eerie quiet surrounding some of Obama's most famous campaign promises - immigration reform, cap and trade, gays in the military, card check, revenue enhancement, climate change, etc. Assuming that the Democrats lose as predicted on November 2 there is one weapon left in the Obama arsenal that would get him his desired results, but would sacrifice his second term.
The new Congress does not take office until January 2011. Until then, the current Congress remains. They are the lame ducks - office holders running out the clock on their terms. Normally, it is a totally unproductive time with departing legislators trying to score a new gig on K Street or with a top law firm. But the committed trinity of Obama (still in office), Harry Reid (who probably will be appointed to one of the many empty posts in the administration), and Nancy Pelosi (bitter over losing the Speakership) can create a perfect storm in a last great act of defiance to the American public.
An active lame duck session can be called to act on all of the issues too toxic to touch with an election in the balance. It will be easy for Pelosi and Reid to corral support among the legislators voted out of office. Convincing others who were reelected will be a bit more difficult. Posing the threat that these historic issues will be buried by the Republican majority and never to be acted on will be Mom Pelosi doling out the sense of duty to the rank and file. There will be the horse trading made famous by Harry Reid during the healthcare "debate" to strong arm and buy off members. And hey, it's 2 years to the next election - people will forget all of this by then. Maybe Obama can call Rahm Emanuel back to threaten holdouts that they "will never work in this town again".
Is this scenario a stretch? It depends on how committed the Big 3 are to the program. President Obama is a true believer in his vision for America. He believes himself to be right, and that is more important to him than being President. Reid is a political hack who painted himself into a corner to the point that he is dependent on Obama's good graces to continue a career in government. Pelosi represents San Francisco - which speaks volumes, and is probably to the left of Obama. TPP senses commitment in vast quantities.
The counter argument is that the Republicans can just repeal all of this in January. That is not as easily done as said. Any repeal would need to be signed by President Obama. There is slim to no chance of that happening. There is almost no chance of being able to over-ride a Presidential veto.
There is the possibility of defunding any programs passed into law. Or is there? TPP has found an interesting twist in the creation of the Consumer Protection Agency at the Federal Reserve. This is part of the financial reform bill recently passed and signed into law. A provision in the law provides that the agency specifically cannot be defunded by an act of Congress. Now there's a new wrinkle that can be used over and over on any number of issues rammed through on a simple party line vote.. There is probably a Supreme Court challenge coming up on this, but this did slide by the 2 Republican senators who voted yes. So much for due diligence and reading the bill.
Common Sense Dictates
Elections have consequences. President Obama has cited this himself. They do every two years on a national level. In 2006, the voters decided that they had enough of the Republican shenanigans and gave the Democrats a try. In 2008 they bought the Democrat argument that there was little that the Congress could do with a Republican in the White House (especially a Republican as erratic as John McCain). Obama talked a good game of post-partisanship and post-racial divisions and he was sent to DC, with his Democrat majority in both houses.
Obama is in charge, and the country is about to examine the consequences of 2 years of total Democrat control. No excuses are being accepted on either the left or the right. No one is really going to know how this is going to shake out until the votes are counted, and anything can happen in a month's time. We think the Republicans are painting too rosy a picture, but the tone-deafness of the Democrat leadership isn't helping elect any Ds this time around.
That's the way politics works. It is a testament to the American voter that in this election more than any other citizens are educating themselves and choosing representatives based on who they feel best represents them. We have seen this in both Republican and Democrat primaries and it is commendable. In this election the opinion of the party bosses means little.
Regardless of the outcome of the election, we hope that President Obama heeds the voice of the American people, respecting that elections do have consequences. This election has turned into a referendum of the Obama agenda. Should that agenda be embraced, his direction is validated. Should it be rejected, he will need to be conciliatory if he wants to accomplish anything of legitimate value. Doing an end run around the will of the American people by empowering a lame duck session of Congress to crank out laws is possible, but it's also cheating. It may be your right to do it, but just because you can doesn't mean that you should.
RLB
Categories: Partisan Politics
Tags: political leadership
In the last sentence of this writing, you used the word " my" instead of "may". You may actually want to take the time to read what you write, credibility is established partly by correct word usage. And I'm just a house painter in the Phelan/Pinon Hills/Wrightwood area. Ron
Reply to this
It's what we get for depending on spell check. Correction noted and accomplished. Thank you for keeping us honest.
Reply to this
I'm glad that you think President Obama has all of that conviction to get the job done, but isn't this a little too conspiracy theory? It buys into the idea of some evil force trying to undo America. Can't you just give him credit for trying to do what people elected him to do?
Reply to this
I can buy the whole lame duck scenario. Look at how Obama got healthcare rammed through. It's not like he had no feedback that it wasn't popular. I see this as a real issue. There was even a bill introduced to prohibit a lame duck session from doing this very thing, and it was laughed out of the room. We need to watch out for this.
Reply to this
I believe that if the President feels a moral obligation to improve the lives of people, then he should do just that. It doesn't matter if half the country doesn't want it done. Half the country didn't want slavery abolished either. That doesn't make Lincoln's decision any less right.
Reply to this
No offense, but this isn't freeing slaves, it is the government taking more and more control over everyday aspects of our lives. I don't need help in selecting my health care or what kind of light bulb to use. Let the feds stick to running the military, not my life.
Reply to this
You could make the argument that imposing more government controls on individual lives is creating a sort of slavery. Th more we are dependent on government, the less we are free to make choices in our lives.
Reply to this
Really? Just shoving through programs? Where are we, communist Russia? This one goes too far.
Reply to this
Not yet, but Obama is working on it. This country was founded on the idea of as little federal government as possible. Most of the things Washington takes on now are supposed to be handled by local and state governments. That's why the constitution reads as it does. Local government always was supposed to be the government of first resort, state second, feds last.
Reply to this
I don't know who is benefiting from all of these programs, but it isn't me. I just get to pay for them. If he tries to do the rest of the agenda during the lame duck session, he is gonna be a one trick pony.
Reply to this
I'm going to agree that I don't see any massive win for the GOP. They will pick up a few seats, but nothing out of the ordinary. They aren't coming with any bold, new ideas, just the same old stuff. They aren't even repackaging it. It's a yawner. The Democratic Party retains control.
Reply to this
I give the Republicans some credit for the Pledge. It outlines a statement of intent, some specific proposals, and it does it in a way that is easy to read. That being said, there is NO excitement with the base for any of the incumbents. I think that the places that have the tea party candndates will do well because those voters will turn out. I think that if it's congressman Joe Schmo running for his 12th term and doesn't have any real conservative cred, there's no reason for the base to get excited. If you had a new face running as a Blue Dog democrat, I get the feeling that the Blue Dog wins. I see this election imposing term limits via the ballot box.
Reply to this
I agree on the anti-incumbency, but I also see at least a fiscal conservative trend. In all but the most insane districts, I think fiscally liberal democrats are in big trouble. Sure Pelosi will get back in, but in most districts, a republican of any stripe is going to seem better than a free-spending liberal. It's a more complicated equation, but it's also more accurate.
Reply to this
The numbers are part of the problem. If the GOP gets a slim majority, nothing is going to happen because some of those RINOs will survive and vote with the Dems - especially in the Senate. In the House, the GOP needs 288 votes to override a Presidential veto. Idon't know of anypollster predicting that kind of a win. The Republicans can throw on the brakes, but it will depend on how fast Obama is going when they try to slow him down. There's no miracle coming in November.
Reply to this
Still, it's important to remember that even a majority in the House will slow down Obama's runaway train of debt and spending. It's time we stopped to look at where we are instead of just throwing money at everything with no sense of the consequences.
Reply to this
I ran the numbers. There are currently 178 Republicans in the House. That means, assuming they keep all current seats it would take picking up 90 seats to get an over ride majority. That also assumes that all Republicans (RINOs included), will go along with an over ride. The Republicans understand this which is why they aren't promising more thanthey will be able to deliver. At least they are being honest.
Reply to this
There is another way to look at this. Let's say that the Republicans get a good majority but still don't have the votes to over ride a Presidential veto. If enough of those conservative Democrats are elected the Republicans can reach across the aisle, at least on fiscal matters. If I remember right there were about 30 Democrats that didn't vote for the health care plan. It's a real possibility.
Reply to this
I have voted Democrat for years, but I'm done this time. I just hope enough other people feel the same way. My husband is out of work. My job is getting nearly impossible as we prepare for the new health care changes. Our son had to drop out of college because we can't afford the tuition, and since I'm working we can't get financial aid. This is not the change that I signed on for. It's nearly 2 years and things are just getting worse. When election day comes, I'll be on the side of sanity.
Reply to this
I have to admit that I'm disappointed with Obama as well. The poor people are covered, and the rich people don't need help, but there's no relief for people trying to earn a living. No programs to aid with mortgages,no propping up my 401k, just 99 weeks of unemployment if my job gets cut. Oh, furlough days - I almost forgot. Any way you slice it, it's a pay cut. It's not just Obama. Congress left town with no budget enacted, and with the tax increases still on the table for January. I'm just voting for whoever is not in office. I don't even care what party they are. If they are incumbents, they will not get my vote.
Reply to this
It is sort of hard to support anyone when this sort of irresponsibility is rampant on both sides of the aisle.
Reply to this
Well, the Dems are the screw-ups at this point. I might be holding my nose, but the Republicans get my vote.
Reply to this
Not a bad plan, Nan. There's not a lot of Democrats asking Obama to campign for them. I'm just not sure we could trust them if they get elected. Esecially those 6 year senate terms. Still, it can't hurt to ask.
Reply to this
We as voters have the power to change those seats and elect people who reflect our beliefs. We all need to pull together and make our votes count. We need to show up at the polls and vote for the change we're looking for.
Reply to this
I think that you're right about Obama being more dedicated to his ideals than to the Presidency. I'm not sure that he could pull off a lame duck coup (for lack of a better word). The democrats running now are for the most part running away from Obama. Sure, the losers will be on board, but not the survivors. They are not going to want to risk their jobs next time around. I think that they are more likely to join the republicans in blocking that sort of thing from happening. Survival instinct trumps politics inmost politicians - more genius from the Founders.
Reply to this
President Obama is sounding a whole lot more conciliatory than the Republicans. Even though they say that they aren't, McConnell and Boehner sure look like they are taking a victory lap. The country can't afford two more years of NO.
Reply to this
It's not a victory lap, it's making sure that we move away from bigger, more intrusive government. Compromise is not the surrender of principle. If someone has a gun to your head and is threatening to shoot, it's stupid to haggle over where he shoots you. You get him to put down the gun, and then come up with a better solution.
Reply to this
America was founded on individual liberty and a "can do" attitude. This collectivist, make do with less philosophy of the left is the opposite of who we are as a people. It's okay to take care of people who need help. It's not right to institutionalize dependence. We want jobs, not a handout. We want to be left to ourselves, not to be micromanaged. It doesn't even work in Europe anymore. They are trying to become more like we were. If they try to solidify this attitude as a lame duck session, it will be the end for the Democrats. Americans aren't having it. The election proved that.
Reply to this
Pelosi has the stones, and the suicide mindset. It will be up to Obama to reign her in. Reid has become a sad shell of a man.
Reply to this
Today starts Pelosi's final tour as someone who matters. The Lame Duck has been called. Let's see if she still has the fire for her liberal agenda. My bet is yes. Boehner will have to stomp her.
Reply to this