The Democrats have, apparently, gained a majority in the Senate, too:
WASHINGTON – Democrats wrested control of the Senate from Republicans Wednesday with an upset victory in Virginia, giving the party complete domination of Capitol Hill for the first time since 1994.
The Senate had teetered at 50 Democrats, 49 Republicans for most of Wednesday, with Virginia hanging in the balance. Webb’s victory ended Republican hopes of eking out a 50-50 split, with Vice President Dick Cheney wielding tie-breaking authority.The Associated Press contacted election officials in all 134 localities where voting occurred, obtaining updated numbers Wednesday. About half the localities said they had completed their postelection canvassing and nearly all had counted outstanding absentees. Most were expected to be finished by Friday.
The new AP count showed Webb with 1,172,538 votes and Allen with 1,165,302, a difference of 7,236. Virginia has had two statewide vote recounts in modern history, but both resulted in vote changes of no more than a few hundred votes.
An adviser to Allen, speaking on condition of anonymity because his boss had not formally decided to end the campaign, said the senator wanted to wait until most of canvassing was completed before announcing his decision, possibly as early as Thursday evening.
Will we see a spate of legislation pass both houses of Congress to be struck down by the veto pen? Will more radical changes like socialized medicine or the re-institution of the draft pass one or both houses? Will a hike in the national minimum wage, and reforms of health care, energy, immigration, and spending policy pass the House to languish in the Senate where although their majority gives Democrats the ability to set the agenda the size of their majority doesn’t guarantee passage?
Gridlock may not be as fun as it sounds. Sunset provisions in Bush’s first term tax cuts will cause them to lapse automatically unless other action is taken. There are all sorts of other issues particularly reforms in Social Security and Medicare which simply won’t wait for a Congress that has the ability and the will to act decisively.
What do you mean by socialized medicine? The VA system is the only example annd according to Dr. Berwick (if you don’t know who this is don’t babble about medicine) it became one of the best systems in the country under Clinton.
Nearly 50% of expences are alrady meants by government. Over 30% go for administration, this is double what other countries pay. Single payer would standardize forms and the gluts of the private system. Remember we pay 18 cents on the dollar while other industrial countries pay less than 12 cents for the loest life expectancies, the lowest state of general health and the highest infant mortality rate in the industrial world.
There are serious problems in the administration of Medicare and Medicaid, so I hesitate to use them as models, but the system needs reform.
SS is not that big a problem, look at the numbers. It will be a problem if you priviatize it because then instead of having an insurance policy were everyone pays in for average life expectancy, people will have to pay for maximm possible life expectancy. Insurance exists for a reason, it averages risk and cost. Incidently private investment is practical in insurance. And again with insurance you averae long term market trends whil4e individual investments are subject to crashes and “secular bears.”
The Bush Medoiicre drug plan will run a much higher deficit than SS which is sound until 2040. At that point pay offs will decrease, not end. And of course in that time frame it depends on the economy. If it does well, then e can take care of the economy. If not off to the iceburg with you.
Medicare needs reform and that means reform the health care system. You don’t understand this because you are a college kid without responsibility, but if you ran a business you would know that we can’t keep affording these increases 2 or 3 times inflation, it sabatoges our ability to compete at a time of increasing competition.
So saying the system needs to be looked at and changed is not “socialism.” And Medicare can’t be solved without it.
Another big problem is the federal debt. I know you do soft stuff, but Milton Fridman would have told you that tax cuts that are not matched by spending reductions are tax delays with interests. Historicaly Republican administrations increase government spending because red states run a surplus between taxes payed and money they get back. Democratic states are capitalist and subsidize the economicaly backward regions.
Of course Republican rhetoric suggests the opposite, and colege kids believe it, but those who do business in the real world look at the books. Republicans spend more.
You’ve got to get out of faith based reality.
Uh, Anna, you probably need to read my blog a little more closely. I’ve owned my own business for thirty years and I’m probably older than you are. I’m opposed to privatization of the Social Security system.
You don’t need to preach to me about the flaws of our semi-socialized system of health care. I think that major reform in the health care system is inevitable and that those who oppose more government involvement had better darned well stop acting as though market-based reforms are politically workable.
I’ve met a payroll and paid for health care for more than a generation.
I’m a Democrat not a Republican. The only Republican I voted for in the election was Peraica because Todd Stroger was such an obvious idiot.
I opposed the tax cuts. I thought that some kind of tax cut was politically necessary but not those particular cuts and they should have been a lot more temporary than they were.
Read more closely, darn it. Sheesh.