TruthNews

Is Democratic Control of Congress the End of the World?

TruthNews Commentary, November 10, 2006

So the Democrats have won control of both houses of Congress. To many conservative commentators, this represents the end of the world, or at least of western civilization. But is it? Let's examine the facts.

Here are the things that won’t get done because of the Democratic control of Congress:

Social Security reform

Immigration reform

Oil Well Drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Reserve

Conservative judges appointed to the courts

No, wait! Those are things that didn’t get done because of Republican control of Congress. The Republicans never even tried the first two and threw in the towel on the other two because of Democratic opposition.

Well, let’s look at the flip side. Here are the things the Democrats will do that the Republicans wouldn’t have done.

The white space above is intentional. Congress under Democratic leadership won’t do anything significant. The Republicans can block legislation just as the Democrats did, and the President can veto anything he doesn’t like. In addition, the Democrats are just as fractured as the Republicans are. So only legislation that has bipartisan support, like defense appropriations and authorization of soap box derby races on the Capitol grounds, will get passed.

Of course, this inability to get anything done is not necessarily a bad thing. As Mark Twain said, "No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session." Now that Congress is in session almost perpetually, our liberties would not be safe, except for the Congress’s bureaucratic inability to get anything done.

The one thing that will change in the new Congress is that the level of whining about the war in Iraq will be cranked up a notch because the Democrats will control the committees and hold hearings. However, the Democrats’ inability to come up with any strategy other than unilateral surrender may cause them to mute their complaints somewhat. In addition, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, has resigned, depriving them of their chief target.

So what is the Democrats’ mandate, anyway? Let’s look at a few pertinent facts:

In Connecticut, Senator Joe Lieberman, running as an independent in support of the Iraq war, defeated the anti-war Democratic candidate Ned Lamont. Lieberman, Al Gore’s running mate, was defeated by Lamont in the Democratic primary but decided to run as an independent. Lieberman plans to continue to caucus with the Democrats, thereby giving them control of the Senate.
In the Pennsylvania Senate race, anti-abortion Democrat Bob Casey, Jr., defeated Republican incumbent Rick Santorum
In Tennessee, Democrat Harold Ford, Jr. was elected to the Senate. Ford opposes gun control and gay marriage.
Two October scandals also hurt the Republicans. A gay Republican congressman that no one had ever heard of was outed when he was caught sending suggestive e-mails to Congressional pages. And a gay preacher that no one had ever heard of was outed when he admitted to getting a massage from a male prostitute. So it appears that people voted against the Republicans for allowing gays to permeate their midst. (The preacher, being that he’s a "televangelist," is automatically assumed to be a Republican.)

So what can we assume about the Democrats’ mandate from the above? Well, it’s simple. The Democrats are pro-war, anti-abortion, pro-gun, and anti-gay marriage. And to top it all off, incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has promised "fiscal restraint." If that’s not Republican enough, Democratic Senator-elect James Webb of Virginia is an actual Republican. His claim to fame is that he served as Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of the Navy. His campaign ads actually showed archive footage of Reagan praising Webb.

We all know that the Democrats haven’t really embraced conservative values. But they can’t claim to have much of a mandate when the winners of some of the key races embraced such a diversity of opinion. The Democrats benefited primarily from three factors: the Republicans’ failure to deliver, Congressionial corruption, and perceived lack of progress in Iraq. But once the Democrats control Congress, what will they change? The answer (see above) is, not much. Congress will continue to live up to it's reputation as the place where much is said and little is done.

The one thing the Democrats can do by doing nothing is to raise taxes. Under current law, many of the tax cuts passed by the Republican Congress must be renewed by Congress or they'll expire. In other words, if Congress fails to act, taxes will automatically go up. Of course, this is the result of Republican incompetence (in the face of Democratic opposition) when the tax cuts were passed. But if the Democrats do let the tax cuts expire, it would provide good election ammo for the Republicans, who could then accuse the Democrats of raising taxes. Of course, given the Republican incompetence, it's quite likely they would have let the tax cuts expire if they'd remained in power. So maybe now that Congress has Democratic leadership, Nancy Pelosi & Co. will renew the tax cuts in order to avoid being seen as the flaming liberal party of tax and spend that many of us suspect them to be.