I’ve been going on and on about Tuesday’s elections, I suppose. There’s one last point I’d like to make before (hopefully) shutting up about the elections and looking for some real news to comment on.
6% of seats in the House changed sides. 6%! This wasn’t a sea-change, a tsunami, or a transformation of American politics. It wasn’t a referendum on the war in Iraq or on President Bush or his administration or on the last 12 years of Republican domination of both houses of Congress. At least if it was any of those things the American people, basically, said they didn’t care about them one way or another.
Incumbents won overwhelmingly. They were collectively batting .382. Most incumbent Republicans were re-elected. And incumbent Democrats who supported the war were re-elected.
I’m not trying to let the Republicans off the hook. The national campaign was a mess. It wasn’t the war or corruption or sexual scandals. It was the war AND the corruption AND the scandals. It was the bumbling Republican leadership. It was the inarticulateness. It was the gaffes. It was the incredible incompetence of it all.
And the Democrats (as I’ve mentioned before) had a brilliant national campaign, generalled by my part-time Congressman Rahm Emmanuel who, presumably, has higher ambitions.
There’s going to be a lot of spin coming from all sides about what it all means. But, taken as a whole, the results mean that by and large either Americans are pretty satisfied with things or they’re resigned to the rascals they’ve got and voted ’em back in on a “better the devil you know†basis.
Well, taking into account the rate at which House members are typically returned to office (98-99%), I think the 29 seat swing is still impressive, comparatively speaking. Plus, the margin (+34 vs. +26) is greater than fro the Republicans after 1994, and I think we would all agree that 94 was a significant shit.
Sea change for American politics typically takes place around the margins given incumbent stasis. Of course, the 54 seat change in 1994 was greater, but I bet if we look back through the years there aren’t that many examples of large seat changes like we say this year. I would be supprised. Anyone have the data handy?
Whether 1994 was actually a significant shift in American politics is, I think, debateable but it would be a digression from the point of my post (take a look at how little of the Contract With America was actually enacted into law or followed as practice, for example).
I’d say that “sea change” and “around the margins” were contradictory terms. One or the other (unless you’re arguing some kind of butterfly effect). Our form of government is gradualist by design.
I’m not trying to take anything away from the Democrats, Bill. The campaign was waged brilliantly and the Republicans were dopes. My point is two-fold: first, the win didn’t hinge on any single issue and, second, the idea that it was a referendum on the war is at most an exaggeration. Look at how the Democratic Iraq and Afghan war vets did: of the 20 or so that ran only 4 were actually elected. If it was a referendum on the war and that was the main issue, you’d think that more would have won.
Why Conservatives Are So Angry
Debt Matters
We elect congressmen and congresswomen to represent our interests. We vote for self-described fiscal hawks who favor less government. But all we get is:
• A Congress that represents the lobbyist-money-changers in Washington
• A near $9 trillion debt
• An explosion in government spending that puts Liberal tax-and-spenders like Lyndon Johnson to shame
Integrity Matters
The moral lapses of the Clinton administration were, of course, distressing. We voted for self-described conservative representatives who claimed they would do better. But all we got was a never-ending chain of scandals ranging from sex crimes to bribe-taking to gambling promotion.
Each is driven by a combination of greed, power-lust, and arrogance. Of course, mistakes do happen. But even when individuals are caught red-handed, they refuse to take responsibility. All that results is finger pointing and excuses from congressmen hiding in rehabilitation centers. Misbehaving congressmen should be removed—period. Are we supposed to look up the definition of is again?
Immigration Matters
We are a country of laws. If you don’t like a law, change it. But a government that intentionally refuses to enforce select laws is weakening the whole “rule of law†and breaking its most sacred pledge to the governed.
Some employers are using illegal immigration to drive down wages and eliminate hard-working Americans from their payrolls. And of illegal immigrants gangs run roughshod over our communities, bringing with them:
• Violence (and the threat of violence)
• Crystal meth and other illegal drugs
• Prostitution
• And perhaps terrorists
Yet Congress and the White House repeatedly turn a blind eye in exchange for big business campaign donations and lobbying loot. The best they’ve done is pass a lame fence bill that covers no more than 10% of the problem (and they aren’t even obligated to follow through on that much). Yet many existing laws remain un-enforced.
What Should We Conservatives Do?
The Democratic Party is not the answer. It is at best beset by the same corruption as the Republican Party, and at worst completely at odds with our values. The only practical solution is to challenge Republican incumbents who fail to:
• Vote against bloated spending bills
• Demand immigration reform
• Hold their fellow members to the highest level of ethical conduct
We must stop giving money to any candidate who represents special interests over our interests.
Very well said. Calm, reasoned analysis from a higher vantage point (how did you get up there anyway?) Just what we’ve grown to expect.