Hawks are out, now what? - Instablogs
Hawks are out, now what?
Pratyush , New Delhi: Nov 23 2006
Made Popular Nov 23 2006

Hawks are out, now what?

The Pew Research Center says that it would be a mistake to think the Democratic sweep of Congress in recent midterm elections shows a major political shift in the United States. In fact, the astonishing outcome can be traced to one major change that is the shifting sentiments of independents and moderates from Republicans to Democrats.

This time it seems, young voters, women, seculars and Democratic-leaning liberals have taken the charge. Several Corruption scandals and performance failures in post Katrina situation have caused low voting for Bush. No doubt, Iraq was the central issue but it was not the sole issue. The only clear message is frustration.

In a democracy, elections are the tools of democracy, the people do have many options to vote. In the US, elections seldom consider as fundamental exercise in democracy.

The citizens in the US can choose between two different mainstream parties. The actual distinctions between those in these two parties are very narrow. Since there are no larger spectrum of viewpoints, however, the slight differences between the two different candidates from these parties is presented as substantial.

Hawks are out, now what?

As far as the control of Congress is concerned, Republicans had controlled both chambers (the House of Representatives and the Senate) since 1994. There was brief time when Democrats held the Senate after one senator defected from the Republican Party to Democratic Party.

After the recent mid-term elections, the Democratic Party has taken control of both the House of Representatives, the larger of the two houses, and the Senate. The democrats seized the Senate with a thin margin in two key races in Virginia and Montana. Joe Lieberman in Connecticut and socialist Bernie Saunders in Vermont are the two independently elected senators with the support of Democrats. However, the new 110th Congress will have to wait until January 3, 2007 to be constituted.

Hawks are out, now what?

Impact of the mid term polls

The poll results have reflected the people’s rejection of the Republican president George W Bush’s policies. Bush still has two years remaining in office with a tight situation in the US Congress. The policy over Iraq issue was not the sole cause that changed the mind of the people, series of scandals also caused public disillusionment that rocked the Republicans in Congress.

Will it change the US politics?

On several previous occasions, different parties have held the control of the Presidency and control of Congress as the Clinton administration had faced the similar situation during the 1990s. In this situation if the president and Congress are prepared to work together on a bi-partisan basis. But if the two sides disagree, the result goes often as deadlock.

The president has the power of veto to block any legislation, which can only be overturned in Congress by a two-thirds majority. However, Mr Bush has only used the veto once during his term in office.

Importance of the speaker of the house

The Speaker is the second person in the line of succession for the presidency, after the vice-president. There is a possibility that Nancy Pelosi will be elected in January as the first female speaker of the House. She will also be the leader of the Democrats in the House. She will have upper hand in the case of tie voting in the house.

Impact on Foreign policy


Bush will still have the power to set US foreign policy. However, the process to get the “advice and consent” of the Senate, who must approve treaties and appointments, such as ambassadors will make it difficult for him. The Congress can also use its supervision powers. It can hold hearings on key issues in foreign policy, and can call administrative officials to testify.

Impact on domestic policy


There are still big disagreements between the administration and the Democrats on many key areas of domestic policy, such as tax cuts. The Democrats also want a different approach to tackling health care, energy policy and domestic security.

Impact on Social agenda


The big disagreement between Bush and many Democrats has been the so-called values agenda issues such as abortion, gay marriage, and stem cell research. Voters in seven states such as Virginia, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Tennessee, South Dakota, Colorado and Idaho have rejected gay wedlock by limiting marriage to unions between men and women.

On the other hand, South Dakota voters overturned a near-total ban on abortions passed by the state legislature earlier this year.

Nothing could be said in advance that the recent midterm polls result would cause any shift of US policies in domestic affairs as well as international affairs. So, it may be called as Hawks are out now what...

Source: [1], [2], [3]

Add Images and Videos
Close X
Recommended Tags or Keywords
Search by Tags or Keywords
Selected Media ( You can Upload only Six media )
Sorry no picture found for this combination of tags. Try to search minimum number of tags at once
1 Stars
Vikas Shekhawat instablogs.com
Churu, Rajasthan, India
The fact is, it hardly matters who is in power, because in a democratic government the main role should be played by citizens rather than a single party or a leader, however, it depends how conscious the voters are and how far they are able to actually make government enforce laws that are needed. And, the current mandate has shown positive signs as far as the working of the whole governmental system in the US is concerned.
0 Stars
Ashutosh
Chandigarh, India
all i can say is this that looks like bush has a strait agenda after these election results that is to save his party from a defeat in the next elections. this shift although negligible now can become a wide gap in two years. the issues this year like katrina mis-management and Iraq situation are potential pitfalls for the republicans and bush needs to set his house strait in a way bush has started by removing Donald Rumsfeld but there is lots of time and the best statergy would be to wait and watch
1 Stars
The buccaneering style that’s so much associated with the Bush administration would surely be gone. Now he will be a President without legislative backing. He will however veto a lot (presidential veto) on bills. So, ‘inethical’ research like stem cell will have to wait along with a host of other things. The man is still mad.
2 Stars
Abraham Lincoln said the govt. is of the people, for the people and by the people - but today all has turned into the govt. of the leaders for the leaders and by the leaders ... Sleaze is the prime concern then whether the Democrats are in power or Republicans for that matter.
0 Stars
Fully agree with Vikas, it hardly matters who is in power, because in a democratic frame work the main role is always played by citizens rather than a single party or a leader. The citizens will surely play their part and will choose between two different mainstream which they feel is in best interests of the society while the actual distinctions between these two parties remains very narrow.
0 Stars
The seat of supreme authority is always important around which extremely complex functioning of a state revolves irrespective of the nature of a state. Consequently, a particular ideologue influences the policy of a state. Therefore, this far more important that which ideologue influencing the formulation and implementation of policies.

The supreme authority has the absolute and quasi absolute power to take the decision regarding policies and precisely that is why intense debate is taking place regarding Latin American nations are turning red and rightist faction in the Europe is raising its head since many existing policies may be ceased to function if these ideologues come into play.

Moreover, as so far functioning of democracy in its most ideal manner is concerned, that can function only in a nation like Switzerland where functioning is smooth just due to the fact that the population of the country is very less.

On the other hand, many policies are not being legislated, in U.S. or elsewhere, just owing to the reason that the issue is being heavily debated among citizens and among scholars, to name a few stem cell research, gay marriage, problem of migration which as far reaching societal implications. And it can happen only in a democracy.
0 Stars
American Constitution is very rigid in nature. The constitutional amendment takes a long process and pass through very critical phases. Therefore,it does not matter who rules USA, there is a less chance of change in the policies.
Add your Comment