Would Democratic control of Congress be a good thing or a bad thing ?

The latest polls indicate that the Democrats may take control of the House and also may take control of the Senate. Not since the Republicans took control with their Contract with America have we seen such a change of power. If it occurs this will result once again in a divided Government. The question then becomes: IS THIS A GOOD THING?

MRB:

ABSOLUTE POWER?

"Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" as the saying goes and that is what we've had since the Contract with America. Some of us have felt that would have been more appropriately called Contract ON America. Look at what and where it has gotten us. Almost no significant legislation. No Child Left Behind? Sounds like someone saw that McCauley Calkin movie. Social Security reform? Dead in the water. FEMA? What? There has been some very nice tribal dances about a war on terrorism and poorly conceived planning and execution that has surpassed a level of ineptitude that I thought I'd never see again after Viet Nam.

So much for the legislature and the executive branch being from the same political party. At least they are skilled in some things. Scandals come to mind. There's been finger pointing at Bill Clinton because of his "mistakes" ten years ago that got poor "W" in this mess. "Gee, if only Bill had ..." does not sound like what I expect from leaders. Seems to me you are elected to lead and and not whine, but, hey that's my liberal bias I guess.

So, no a unibody congress and executive branch is disaterous. Will a divison help? Yes, if only to keep both sides focused on the issues. It is the best of the checks and balances concept that the founding fathers had in mind but didn't exactly envison.

My personal wish is to have a more balanced distribution. More 50/50 which gives power to the swing votes and which means the discussion must be focused and convincing precisely to convince those swing votes. It will force the Democrats to stop walking around with their hands in their pockets and actually get a plan together on the issues. Perhaps because of that a leadership will emerge that will again set us up for a presidential contender. You can't form leaders without something to lead. And it might just lead to some -- forgive me for this my liberal friends -- some bipartisan decisions being made that might actually be GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY. Now there's a new concept.

But then what do I know? I'm just a flaming liberal.

KJW:

FEAR NOT - A GOOD THING IS COMING

I believe that we would be better off if at least one house of Congress is controlled by the Democratic party after the upcoming election.

First, over the past half century, we’ve had only two periods of what could be called fiscal restraint: The last six years of the Eisenhower administration, and the last six years of the Clinton administration, both intervals in which the opposition controlled Congress. Under Clinton, the average annual increase in spending was at about 1 percent, while, under Ike, it was negative. By contrast, our unified governments have gone on fiscal benders. Harry Truman, with the help of a Democratic Congress, sent the money flying, with spending increases of as high as 10 percent a year. Lyndon Johnson was almost as profligate. And today, unfortunately, George W. Bush, with a GOP majority, is the heir to their legacies. To put this in plain numbers, government spending has increased an average of only 1.73 percent annually during periods of divided government. This number more than triples, to 5.26 percent, for periods of unified government. That’s a hefty premium to pay for a bit of unity.

Secondly, in 200 years of U.S. history, every one of our conflicts involving more than a week of ground combat has been initiated by a unified government. Each of the four major American wars during the 20th century, for example—World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War—was initiated by a Democratic president with the support of a Democratic Congress. The current war in Iraq, initiated by a Republican president and backed by a Republican Congress, is consistent with this pattern.

Today, I believe that the two most important issues facing us are the economy and the war in Iraq. If we end up with a divided government after next month's election, I believe that we will be better off with regard to both of these issues.

EJS:

NIGHTMARE SCENARIO?

Red-staters have been up late the last several months, tossing and turning because of a scary nightmare scenario being pounded into their heads repetitively by conservative pundits. That nightmare goes something like this: on a cold, gloomy, typical Washington morning in January, Nancy Pelosi and her San Francisco values take control of the United States Congress. Unending investigations, amnesty for illegals, higher taxes, and gridlock are the ugly picture being painted by some. But we must ask ourselves, as true conservatives, is this nightmare scenario really all it's cracked up to be?

So called 'conservatives' have lost their way in the proverbial woods. This administration and Congress have had six years to produce the type of results that values voters put them in office for. Yes, we have gotten tax cuts. There's no doubt about it, the tax cuts have generated more small business growth, and thus tax revenues are at an all-time high. The economy is humming along, as much as the MSM doesn't want to admit it. But what else have we gotten? A mismanaged Iraq costing us billions. A resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan, due to a lack of focus there. No Federal Marriage Amendment. No privatized accounts for social security. The border is wide open. The trade deficit, specifically with China. North Korea and Iran thumbing their noses at us. I can go on and on, but we are all familiar with the Bush administrations' shortcomings when it comes to the conservative movement.

But blame not only lies with the President, it also lies with the US Congress. Republicans have gotten comfortable being in the majority in Congress since 1994. Congressmen move seamlessly between their offices in the Cannon Office Building and jobs with lobbying firms on K Street. In fact, the last time I remember the Republicans actually being conservative was 1994 under the leadership of Newt Gingrich. It is time to take a power hose to the innards of the Republican Party. It is time to eliminate those who would rather fill their own coffers instead of doing the peoples' bidding as they should. In a party with a lame duck president and a vacuum of leadership, there could be no better prescription than receding into the minority and being forced to return to fighting for core conservative issues.

How much damage can Nancy Pelosi really do? As bad as Bush is, he's not all of a sudden going to start signing legislation authorizing gay marriage and increasing taxes. He is the conservatives' safety net. Even if the Democrats do take the House, which I believe they will, their hands will be tied to a large extent. So, for the next two years, we can look forward to endless investigations, maybe they'll try an impeachment, but for the most part, the status quo will continue for the next two years. Hopefully the Republicans can reform themselves during that interim, and also push some of the responsibility and blame to the Democrats for the current situation. This will also provide ammunition for the GOP attack machine in 2008. So conservatives need not fret, but rather stick to their core values, make sure their issues remain at the forefront of discourse, and bide their time. My prediction: Democrats take the House, Republicans retain a slight majority in the Senate.