How Will This 'Change' Thing Work?
- Print print this page
- Discuss 20 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
So now the Republican Party has won back control of the U.S. House but failed to win the Senate. Nancy Pelosi has lost her job as speaker, while Harry Reid, who’s almost as hated by the GOP as Pelosi, remains as Senate majority leader.
Networks and pundits are all talking about a “historic shift in power.” The only debate seems to be about whether it’s a “hurricane,” a “tsunami” or an “earthquake” for the Democrats.
I keep reading about how historic a change this is, but I keep getting the nagging feeling that I’ve heard all this before.
In 2006, we had a Republican Congress and a Republican president. The voters said, “That’s not working too well,” and presto! We had a “historic upheaval” resulting in a Republican president and a Democratic Congress.
Two years later, the voters decided, “That’s not working either,” and so we had another “historic power shift” that gave us a Democratic Congress and a Democratic president.
Now, in 2010, people look around at a sluggish economy, with high unemployment, and they’re mad that things still don’t seem to be working.
Here’s the thing: It’s easy to get tunnel vision when it comes to Democrats vs. Republicans, liberals vs. conservatives. I’m guilty of it myself. But when it comes right down to it, the vast majority of people don’t care about that. They want a country that works. And their sole criteria for that is how well they think the economy’s doing. If that’s not working, they don’t care which party’s in power. They just want that party gone.
As a couple of Senate races showed, however, there’s a limit to how far voters will let anger take them.
The defeats of tea party favorites Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O’Donnell in Delaware demonstrated that when your one and only criterion for vetting a nominee is “she’s not a professional politician,” you’re going to get some amateurs who’ll flail around and blow what should have been easy GOP pickups.
Voters took a good look at the seriously loopy O’Donnell and the far-right extremist Angle (who warned that people might resort to “Second Amendment remedies” if her side didn’t win) and said, “You know what? We’re not that angry yet.”
So what’s likely to be happening in the U.S. Congress for the next two years? My prediction: a whole lot of nothing.
The Republicans don’t really have an agenda, other than “stopping Obama.” Oh, they talk a good game about cutting spending, taxes and the deficit. But they’re always maddeningly evasive on which spending they’re going to cut. Medicare? Social Security? Defense? Those are the biggies, but good luck with that.
When anyone in the lazy media actually presses for an answer (a rare occurrence), they fall back to the same vague bogeymen they’ve been using for years: “waste” and “pork” (now known as “earmarks”).
But they don’t really get specific on those either, since what “pork” really means to a congressman is “spending money in someone else’s district.” Cut taxes without cutting spending, and up goes the deficit.
House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, in line for the majority leader position, claims that the first thing the Republicans are going to try to do is “repeal Obamacare,” but it’s going to take more than a House vote to undo the recently passed Affordable Care Act.
They don’t have the votes in the Senate — which, as we’ve seen, is the place where legislation goes to die. There certainly aren’t enough votes anywhere to override the inevitable presidential veto. And as it turns out, people actually like some of the provisions that have taken effect, such as the one that says you can’t be denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions.
Oh, and while you’re at it, Mr. Cantor, good luck on getting any compromises or bipartisanship. Not only did your party run on demonizing Democrats, but the only Democrats that the GOP could hope to sway were the ones in normally Republican districts, who might have seen some political benefit to making deals. Now they’re gone.
On your own right flank, you’ve got your newly minted tea party “allies,” some of whom have sworn to shut down the entire government rather than compromise. That’ll make you real popular when Grandma can’t get her Social Security check because you and Speaker Boehner can’t get a budget passed.
And so we head toward another “historic upheaval” in two years, when the voters decide that this isn’t working too well, either.
So how’s that “change” thing looking now?
Dusty Rhoades lives, writes and practices law in Carthage.
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
bigD 2 years, 6 months ago
I will bet you lunch the healthcare law gets ruled unconstitutional and the whole mess gets thrown out. Why? Because the government cannot force me to conduct commerce and penalize me if I do not buy health insurance. If they would have called it a healthcare tax instead of a penalty the law would have been fine. This is expected to be ruled on by mid December. If I win you buy Elliots. If you win you pick the establishment.
As for all the new benefits of the healthcare plan who is to pick up the tab for the new costs that go along with the new benefits? Will it be the consumer in the form of higher insurance premiums? Will it be the taxpayers in the form of subsidies? Will it be the insurance companies? Will it be the medical providers? My money is on consumers and taxpayers!
dustyrhoades 2 years, 6 months ago
"he government cannot force me to conduct commerce and penalize me if I do not buy health insurance."
If they find mandatory health insurance unconstitutional, I'm cancelling my car insurance the next day.
Sally244 2 years, 6 months ago
BigD, I just got my new insurance increase for next year. It's going up to a whopping $729 a month. I am a 57 year old woman with no medical issues present or past. I have never been hospitalized and have no health issues in my family history. I am self employed own a home with 30 acres and pay a mortgage much less than this insurance. If the whole country was involved in paying for an insurance plan my monthly bill would be much lower and affordable. I may come to the point where I won't be able to pay my insurance and that would put me into bankruptcy if I ever had to go to the hospital. Then I'd have to loose my home and what? Go on welfare? What don't you get about a health care plan that includes the whole country. We would all be able to afford insurance and not be on the brink of disaster every day. You're so afraid of paying insurance for your employees but the fees would be so little you wouldn't even notice and you'd be giving your employees a wonderful gift of security. I don't get your selfishness.
CC85 2 years, 6 months ago
I find it ironic that everyone cannot remember the fact "the Newt" came to power in 1994, yet Bill Clinton thrashed Bob Dole 2 years later. Sometimes you have to take a step back in order to go forward.
The Republicans are celebrating but the sobering reality is they will have to compromise with the Dems' to pass any legislation or Obama will veto any outrageous plans . They do not have a 2/3 majority in the house so they cannot override the veto. Obama will proceed full speed ahead with immigration reform which will fracture the Repubs'. Last but not least, if nothing gets done Obama and the Dems' will run against a "Do nothing Congress", since they can reel off everything that has been achieved since Jan 20, 2009.
I think that Obama has the Repubs right where he wants them. They will be responsible when 2012 rolls around. GOOD LUCK!
marathonman 2 years, 6 months ago
D.R., you are a hypocrit to say that the Reps used demonizing of Dems in their campaigning. Look at what was done to Sarah Palin, she is no threat to anyone except those in power who do not want to lose it. The TEA party did not demonize, they simply demonstrated peacefully and the press tried to demonize them because they were civil. No, the Dems take no back seat to anyone when it comes to demonizing. The fact that two candidates entered high profile races, DE and NV, suggests that our two party system is still viable and the machines can be overcome; Dems or Reps. The fact that neither won is due in large measure to the demonizing done by the media; folks like you D.R..
bigD 2 years, 6 months ago
Sally I feel your pain. Health insurance premiums are going up for everybody and nobody wants a less expensive alternative more than me. I pre-accept your apology for calling me selfish as I pay for health insurance for all of my employees (except the one that declined coverage) and I know how expensive it is. Where are all these new people that are to enroll in a health plan? In addition to competition across state lines, BCBSNC should be looked at very closely to determine if they are exercising monopoly power. If so, they should be broken up into several small companies and forced to compete with each other. Nothing like a little competition to bring down prices.
Dusty- auto insurance and health insurance are not the same thing. The government doesn't force you to drive. They just force you to buy insurance if you plan to drive on their roads. Government does not charge you a penalty for not having auto insurance. Do you accept my lunch bet?
Charge me a healthcare tax and that is ok (but then you raise taxes on millions of non-high income people) but call it a penalty and it becomes forced commerce. This is a violation of the commerce clause. Sorry.
nothingspecial 2 years, 6 months ago
We knew we'd hear at least one Democrat rationalisation about why the election turned out the way it did last week. These below are closer to the truth:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/11/08/gop_poised_to_reap_redistricting_rewards_107871.html
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/11/15/101115taco_talk_hertzberg
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11/07/takeaway-from-2010-elections-serious-conservatism-is-back/
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/380562
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/04/AR2010110406581.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/03/AR2010110303844.html
davidlambert87 2 years, 6 months ago
I find it interesting that people get bent out of shape about divided government. Personally, I could care less. Someone above mentioned that Obama could veto anything that was outrageous. Great! Divided government forces compromise. Now, It isn't that Dems and Reps are holding hands and skipping across the aisle..... it is that they are forced to work together and to consider opposing sides in order to get anything done.
It is true that less gets done in divided government, but what DOES get done, in my opinion, is better policy. It is not generally not too extreme either way because after Conference and forced compromise, outrageous ideas are usually nixed.
Sameness polarizes and diversity moderates. Dems, for example, were able to put through alot of health care reform ideas that were very liberal in nature because, well, they had unified government. They didn't have to appeal to Republicans.... they did make a few concessions but that was to win over the public and for personal reelection protection...but little more. We will see how well a very left-leaning program like this will work.... time will tell if it is left alone. Sure, many people say that it is great the way it is....but we all are a little blinded by our personal situations aren't we?
Divided government takes more time.......because, well, good policy takes more time.
I am excited to see what will happen now. Obama could claim a broken congress but the President is always seen as "the picture of the nation" to the average voter. If the country is not doing well.....the president will pay. Look at the last years of Bush. There was a Democratic controlled congress...... and who got the largest portion of the blame? Deserved or not, you decide...but if Republicans are able to hold on, maintain this sense of urgency, and successfully convey the need to change some of what was done to the public by highlighting salient issues..... they will be successful in 2012.
moonchild7 2 years, 6 months ago
A lot of Democrats and Independents did not get out to vote. I was so mad when my son, who voted for President Obama in 2008 did not vote this time. His response to me "Oh, I think everyone I want to win will win." I told him that's a bad excuse but he was right in that "luckily" those he wanted to be elected were elected. He lives in NYC. I told him that it didn't always turn out that way. So, in two years who knows what will happen but it won't be a rubberstamp for anyone, or at least shouldn't be. I can't wait for the new Congress to get here in 2011 and watch Rand Paul shut down the government, like the Republicans did with President Clinton. Rand Paul says he will not vote for ANY increases in the budget, yet it seems that sometime next year a vote will need to be taken on RAISING the debt ceiling. If he votes "Yes" another liar gets six years to take us deeper into oblivion. If he votes "No" hang on to your seats!
moonchild7 2 years, 6 months ago
ChiefHammer, you just NEVER get it do you? Everything you just stated about the past economy was based on FAKE, FALSE, BUBBLE, PIE-IN-SKY, UNREAL, NON-SUSTAINABLE, and/or CONTRIVED factors. Only those "in the mix" of the upper echelons of the RICH&WEALTHY income classes did anyone do well during those years. They are richer than at anytime in our history; While the middle and Lower classes are still being thrown out of their houses. Isn't it even more interesting that during the two FATHER/SON Bush Presidencies, the US suffered from Financial Meltdowns(Savings&Loans....Wall Street Greed). It's difficult for me to understand the continued blame game towards President Obama. Stop and Start policies have to have TIME to adjust and readjust to the current world situations. It looks like President Bush has to still take the bullet since it was his Adminstration that came up with TARP. FIASCO DELUXE since again only the Bankers and Wall Streeters seem to have been helped.
CC85 2 years, 6 months ago
Bush - 29% approval rating when he left office.
moonchild7 2 years, 6 months ago
I do not have an MBA but Bush supposedly got one of those from HARVARD no less. He was supposedly our President from 2000 to 2008. What part of that do you not understand? I've been living thru that horror just as others have. My 401k tanked years before a lot of others did, in fact in the late 90's when things really started changing I called my "Banker" and asked to change my level of risk to a lower one(Money Market). He couldn't understand why, and I had to yell at him, "Because the stock market is going down! I want to have something left." Four years later it was gone. George Bush does not have an introspective intelligence. He lives thru his "GUT" and that "GUT" served us poorly. I am not denegrating him because he is a Republican but rather because of his inability to intelligently comprehend complex problems; and we had an AVALANCHE of those during these past 10 yrs! More than anything he should have at least TRIED to understand the level of those serious problems and get answers from as many different PROFESSIONALS as he could. He didn't. WALL STREET at this point in time is more powerful than our Congress(they have bought off many of them Dems&Reps). People are still being foreclosed on! How can this help without some sort of revolutionary intervention? I just don't think President Obama has the power to challange Wall Street even though he has tried. Congress waters down a lot of legislation because of their cozy relationship with the banks. Bankers do not like Democrats but they love Republicans and that's why it seems George had a lot more power to have done something instead of falling for more of Wall Streets lies. He was there first whether you like it or not.
marathonman 2 years, 6 months ago
Where to begin, or enter..... CC, do you really think that Bob Dole was the best the Reps could put up against the juggernaut represented by Bill Clinton! No rationale can be made that it was not a done deal for Clinton and simply...as Dole himself put it at the time....'my turn' to run. That in itself should have been a wake up call for all America that the system was broken or certainly cracking. Bush's approval rating was aided by the demonizing left leaning press who, at the time - and maybe still, were awe struck by Obama and simply piled on. If you, generically speaking, can not find enough demerits for Obama at this time in his presidency to warrant demonizing, then accept it, you are partisan left leaning. And as such, you only hear and expect; "its free, I am going to give it to you and, you do not have to work". And that is exactly what the TEA Party is rallying against. No socialism system of any design has sustained any country where it was tried for very long. Free enterprise, capitalism, Constitutional Republic, Democracy, two party system with debate, works and has worked longer than any other form of governing in modern history. Of course totalitarian regimes lasted a long time in the past....is that what progressives want!?!? There are those of us who fought communism all of our adult lives, often in those regions of the world where socialism lived and we do not want to end our lives in bondage here in America.
MikeNC 2 years, 6 months ago
Dustyroades says..."If they find mandatory health insurance unconstitutional, I'm cancelling my car insurance the next day."
That doesn't make any sense as a comparison, but no problem..no one forces you to purchase car insurance. You simply do so if you want to drive a vehicle on our roads. You have the choice of hoofing it rather than driving. .....Mike
CC85 2 years, 6 months ago
@ Chuck Taylor - stop sniffing the TEA.
moonchild7 2 years, 6 months ago
According to Gallup(today), before the Mid-Term Election President Obama's approval rating was 43%. His approval rating is now at 47%. Want to explain that, those who are so negative. Polling also shows that at this time he would win Election over ANY Republican opponent. The Mid-Term elections had a Richer, Older, and more Conservative bunch of people casting ballots. The General Election will be much different.
CC85 2 years, 6 months ago
@moonchild7 - good point regarding the general election.
With all the talk from the right about President Obama being "done in 2012", I've yet to hear who is actually going to defeat him? Maybe the Palin/Beck ticket?
Wait, they're not even politicians.
Sally244 2 years, 6 months ago
Thank you bigD, I do apologize. I really like your idea of BBCNC being broken up to avoid a monopoly. Competition is everything and makes for an honest environment.
Sally244 2 years, 6 months ago
Hey DR, I love the article! Thanks
blake 2 years, 6 months ago
Moonchild, The CNN poll released Thursday that Huckabee led Obama 52-45 % and Romney led Obama 50-45%. Two years is a long way off and I suspect the Republican candidate will likely be neither of the above.
davidlambert87 2 years, 6 months ago
Moonchild makes a point "The Mid-Term elections had a Richer, Older, and more Conservative bunch of people casting ballots. The General Election will be much different."
While, I hope that Republicans do well in 2012.... Republicans will now have to put there money were their mouth is. Those who vote in midterms are different from the general election... BUT I have the faith! :)
dustyrhoades 2 years, 6 months ago
Thanks, Sally!
moonchild7 2 years, 6 months ago
It was the same Gallup Poll that came out today that showed President Obama leading any Republican candidate 44% to 42%. That is actually a dead heat. Gallup and Pew both include cell phones in their calls. Cell phone users tend to be Democrats/Independents while the landline users lean to the "right". Many of the "New" Republicans are already back-tracking on their pledges to cut wasteful government spending and programs. Let the games begin, sadly again.
hotdiggity 2 years, 6 months ago
Car insurance is to protect the other driver for one's mistakes.
dustyrhoades 2 years, 6 months ago
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
dustyrhoades 2 years, 6 months ago
Meanwhile, Sen, Jim Inhofe thinks it's the liberals who have brainwashed Americans into thinking those nasty old "earmarks" are bad:
http://politicalcorrection.org/blog/201011100009
INHOFE: The problem is the public has been brainwashed into thinking — and a lot of these are the very liberal, uh, members of Congress — into thinking that earmarks are somehow all bad. Well, if you quit saying "earmark" and say "appropriations" then I'll buy it.
Heh.
dustyrhoades 2 years, 6 months ago
And TP* favorite Rand Paul still can't name anything specific he'd cut:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/11/10/spitzer-paul/
*apparently, using the TB word is now verboten.
And a member of the Republican Study committee finally names a program he'd cut...but it already expired:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/11/09/gop-tanf-save/
Yeah, that change train is just puffin' right along....
Sally244 2 years, 6 months ago
The Tea Party doesn't have an agenda and it's starting to look like they have been used as ponzies by their own Republicans.
They were all so worked up about the Hispanic population being a drain on our economy, especially in Arizona. Tea Party groups all over the country were supporting the "pain" Arizona was going through and were allowed to think they had made a difference. In fact, they were being used by big business. The failing private prison business was looking for a way to make more money so they came up with the idea to create a prison to house illegal immigrant women and children. They preyed on the Republican's fears promoted by their private news sources and got everyone so worked up to the point of forcing the Arizona Governor to pass laws that go against common sense.
So now the private Prison corporation gets to build more prisons to house the so called criminals they created by manipulating the Tea party and the Arizona government to pass laws making leaving Arizona a criminal offense.
Good going Tea Party!
Ross 2 years, 6 months ago
hmmmmmmmm........."Dude man is a straight up doo-doo head"
Now there's an intelligent remark.....smiles