What if Republicans win the House by a narrow margin?
In a blog post today, NY Times pundit Nate Silver makes this comment about the Democratic Party’s chances in November:
They have only about a 10 percent chance of holding onto 230 or more seats in the new Congress, according to the model, which might allow them to retain a reasonably functional working majority.
If Democrat hold the house by a narrower margin, Silver argues, it would be a “perilously” thin governing majority.
He’s right. But here’s the wrinkle:
By his forecast, even in this Republican-surge year the GOP is likely to win control of the House by an even narrower margin.
According to Silver’s latest forecast, Republicans have a good shot at winning about 225 seats — only seven more than are needed to vote in a new Speaker.
(Obviously, Silver’s predictions are only that. The GOP could win far more seats, or significantly fewer…)
Put another way, the GOP will have roughly a 2% majority. By contrast, Democrats currently enjoy an 18% majority.
What will that mean going forward? It means that even if they do win a majority, Republicans will likely need the help of some Democrats and moderates within their party to get things done.
This will be even more necessary if Democrats retain control of the US Senate. Only bipartisan bills are likely to get passed and signed by Democratic President Barack Obama.
One question that will shape this dynamic is whether the new crop of Representatives are predominately tea party conservatives.
Or will GOP politicians elected from more moderate “purple” districts emerge as centrists?
The bottom line is that it could be very difficult for hard core conservatives to find enough votes to, say, roll back healthcare reform or shut down the government or eliminate earmarks.
On the other hand, even if they hold their majority, liberal Democrats will almost certainly have a very tough time pushing some of their favored legislation, including cap-and-trade.
While this is clearly a big Republican year, it’s still not clear that a new Congress will emerge with a mandate to govern in either direction.
Tags: election10
.png)
I think it would be good for Republicans to have control of the HOuse and really struggle with the difficulty of issues we face, instead just saying “no”. As far as I can tell ideology doesn’t solve problems.. I suspect for the duration of the crisis the political pendulum will swing back and forth from one party to the other as one gets a turn and is unable to make any headway.
you’re forgetting one significant difference between dems and reps: reps are much more true to thier party than the dems are. Look at the Blue Dog faction: is there a comparable corollary to that on the GOP side? There is one New England republican congressman, IIRC.
I bet that the GOP will be able to maintain control over a smaller majority than the dems can. Interesting question, though: if there is a significant influx of tea party congresspeople, will they not be as willing to participate with the GOP leadership?
The question is will the Dems return the favor, should they be in a minority, of constructing an iron wall of complete opposition to everything the GOP supports regardless.
Maybe this is really going to be the time of the conservative Democrat?
“It means that even if they do win a majority, Republicans will likely need the help of some Democrats and moderates within their party to get things done.”
Verplank, you have it right. It will probably be easier for the Republicans to get some of these other “factions” you describe to vote with them. Those factions don’t really exist in the Republican party so for the Democrats getting Republican votes has proven to be almost impossible.
Brian,
Also, the important thing to remember about the majority is not just the votes. The majority controls what gets put up for a vote.
The Republican Party isn’t anything like as monolithic as you guys suggest. Many of the freshman Republicans elected this cycle will come from more moderate districts — including some districts that President Obama won in 2012.
It will be very difficult for those politicians to vote in favor of some of the more red meat agenda items that tea party and conservative Republican activists have been talking about. A recent example of this trend is Scott Brown in Massachusetts.
His election to the Senate was one of the kick-starts to this GOP counterrevolution, but once in office he has voted in favor of legislation that many conservatives hate.
–Brian, NCPR
Unless the Republicans actually get their heads out of their respective backsides I doubt there will be any great changes forth coming. They have no more backbone than the Dems when it comes to fiscal discipline and long range plans. The best we can hope for is a gradual turn to a slightly more conservative approach to spending, at least till the noobies figure out they can use the money to buy influence and can be bought by lobbyists.
Here’s a bet: If GOP wins, first thing House does after voting out Obamacare is vote to privatize social security. Because the GOP isn’t monolithic and is quite centrist at heart, which is juuuuussst right.
You know, if any of the Democrats or Republicans had half a brain, it wouldn’t matter which party was in a majority. This group think stuff is garbage. Are they Americans first or are they Republicans or Democrats first? Are they Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus or Atheists and Pagans first, or are they Americans first?
Oh, we could also ask, are they New Yorkers or whatever first, or are they Americans?
There was a time when we expected Congressmen/women to have a narrow view while we expected Senators to have the wide view. Now it seems almost all have narrow views and narrow minds. All seem to want to take their marbles and go home. Trouble is marbles seem to be in short supply.
Brian is right about the Republican Party not being monolithic. While its focus has narrowed nationally, traditionally there have been social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, religious conservatives, as well as “country club” and “main street” Republicans. What has changed over the past 30 years is that ideology has taken over. Also, it used to be that the losing party used to accept the mandate of the voters more or less, and something resembling governing actually took place. Not anymore.
What if Republicans win the House by a narrow margin?
The short answer is: Dems can only hope.
It looks like it will be more of a landslide, but we’ll soon see.
Someone mentioned politicians submitting to the will of the voter and governing taking place. The opinion is that it doesn’t happen anymore. I agree. We still have highly unpopular programs like the Patriot Act and our beloved gov;t just passed an unContitutional Health Care bill that forces the purchase of a commodity. Considering both Dem and Repub were in on both items, maybe a 3rd party is the answer.
If the GOP wins nothing will get done and both parties will point at each other and say its their fault. The only hope we have is a third “sanity” party. Unfortunately Brett, we’ll never see that.