Tuesday’s election was a disaster ““ not only for
Democrats, but for all Americans. Voters went to the polls, in
record numbers in some districts, and somehow decided a unified
Republican government is in our country’s best interests.
Many groups should share the blame. It should be placed on the
Democratic Party’s message, or rather, its lack thereof, as
well as the party’s lack of exciting candidates. Bush’s
inflated approval ratings, mostly as a result of Sept. 11, 2001,
are also responsible for creating coattails that pulled even the
most unlikely Republicans into office.
Partisanship aside (for a moment), the concept of unified
government is a bad idea. A one-party government allows the ruling
party unchecked power to influence the country’s direction.
The legislative branch is there to limit the president’s
power and make it difficult for him to enact sweeping legislation.
But how can the Senate do its job if its soon-to-be leader will be
at the president’s beck and call?
The Democrats failed. In the middle of a recession, they let the
Republicans control the debate. They did not present a cohesive or
unified front against the aspects of Bush’s policies they
should have challenged, like tax cuts or the war with Iraq. The
Democrats thought the weak economy was an advantage for them. Well,
it would have benefitted their party if they had only said
something about it. Lack of party unity, exacerbated by the absence
of any real party leader, propelled them to the worst losses
suffered by an out-of-power party in years.
The imminent Republican takeover of the Senate has far-reaching
implications, most importantly ““ judicial appointments. Until
now, the Senate Judiciary Committee has managed to stop some of
Bush’s most conservative and controversial nominees from
making it to the Senate floor for a vote. Now, with the Senate
changing hands, Democrats will no longer be able to ensure the
quality of the nation’s judges.
Worst of all, there is talk of one or more Supreme Court
justices retiring during Bush’s term. This means that the
Republicans will have an easier time getting a conservative justice
on the bench, tilting the court’s delicate balance, and
leading to potentially devastating rulings. The lines between
church and state could be erased. The rights of the disabled could
be severely limited ““ and the list goes on. The effects of
appointing extremely conservative judges would be far-reaching and
will last for the next quarter century.
Just because Bush managed to hold onto high approval ratings,
and people liked how he handled the war in Afghanistan, it does not
mean that the same people support the rest of his agenda. Many
voters have trouble separating emotions from intellectual
decisions, thus Bush should be careful with how he uses his
newfound power. When he first came into office, Bush acted like he
had a mandate when he had nothing of the sort. It is scary to think
what he’ll do with the support he got in this election.
As for now, we say goodbye to the moderation the Senate provided
in the midst of a Republican-controlled Washington. And now we say
hello to conservative-packed courts, threats to a woman’s
right to choose, unprovoked war with Iraq, permanent tax cuts, an
ineffective prescription drug bill, and much more.
Good luck, Americans.