Congressional Republicans Look to Real Possibility of Gains
This article appeared in yesterday's Post Bulletin editorial section (I am sure several of you have already read it). Since we are now headfirst into a study of Congress, now is a great time to start thinking about the upcoming midterm election. Read the article and offer your classmates a 2-3 sentence gem about the upcoming Congressional elections: Democrats vs Republicans (sorry 3rd party members). Should be blogged by Monday the 26th.
Mr. Thompson
posted by erdecker @ 9:54 PM
27 comments
27 Comments:
Although I will not mention which party I favor (and I do favor one) I think the Republicans gainging seats in the senate is a good thing. If there is an overwhelming amount of one party in either house, it becomes too easy for them to pass legislation. If the senate is somewhat divided (equally) among parties, then each party will have to work and negotiate with the other and as a result only the best laws will be able to pass through the senate.
Well first of all, I think it would be great if parties other than the big 2 won a good chunk of congressional seats, but I guess I can't talk about that...
I mostly agree with mysterious Mikail. However, the best laws are not always bipartisan. In my somewhat biased opinion, I would say that it would be better if the percentages of democrats and republicans seated in congress remain at the same ratio.
This article made it pretty clear that the Republicans have a pretty good shot at knocking the Democrats down to 59 or less senate seats. I see the benefit in this; as we do not want one party completely taking over, at the same time I would like to know a bit more about the Democratic candidates. I feel this article really only gives one side of the story and I feel it would be important to know who these Republicans are running against.
From what I know about Congress, partisanship has taken over completely, and one party will block another party's bill simply because it belongs to the other party. I would love if parties completely disappeared and every representative/senator was able to represent his/her constituents and not vote along party lines.
With the possibility of Republicans gaining seats comes the return of gridlock, when no legislation will be passed because no party has a majority. As much as I hate to admit it, having a vast majority of one party is expedient, and having equal party representation invites gridlock, filibustering and competition.
I really think that no bill today can be truly "bipartisan" because of the competition on Capitol Hill between Repbulicans and Democrates. As long as one party has a majority and a sitting president, stuff gets done. I don't really care which party it is as long as good legislation gets passed.
I agree with Rosie, the article never talks about the Democratic candidates, it just hints that the Seattle Times is guessing that the Repulicans will make a gain in the next elections. This would result in the Democrates losing their precious 60 reps., returning the Senate to it usual state of bickering and inefficiency. (Side note, I thinks it's comical how many polititians say they will be bipartisan, but when they're elected, they go back to business as usual. The worst part is there are people who buy it every time.)
I think it would be great if the Republicans would have the majority in the next senate. It would ensure a lot more oversight of President Obama and keep him in check. When one party dominates it is much too easy for them to pass everything they want, even if it is not in the best interest of the people. But when it is split they have to work together and come up with something that is agreed upon which is beneficial to the people.
I agree with Josh that stuff only gets done when one party has a majority of votes in Congress and the president! I think that if neither Democrats nor Republicans have a majority of votes, nothing will ever be passed. There will be unending filibusters and disagreement that will lead to no legislation. Though I'm biased, Republicans should not end the Democrat's majority because one sided legislation is better than no legislation.
I think that its good that the republicans are gaining more seats.
Although less legeslation gets passed that way, its legeslation that's not incredibly biased towards one party. We need to have a balanced government and in my opinion, the ideal way to achieve this is to have a president of one party, with a congress of the other. With a democratic president, i believe it is better for our country to have a republican-dominated Congress in order to better represent the interests of the people.
Everyone has said something that i agree with in one way or another. i think it will be good to have republicans get more seats (agreeing with hannah) it nicely balances Obama being democrat and having more seats be republican. it would be good to have a nicely divided party to offer both views and not have one dominate over the other.
I agree with Josh's remark that as long as there is a majority of a party in congress more stuff will get passed through legislation. The best scenario would be having the president be the same party as the majority party of congress, which is the state which we are currently in today. If the Republicans gain more seats and the senate becomes balanced out there will be more conflicts, fillibusters, and there will be less things passed through congress. During these troubled times of our country we need a congress that can agree with each other and get stuff done quickly and efficiently because we cannot afford to let time pass by as our country's issues and problems get worst. I firmly believe that Obama would be more successful if the Democrats maintain being the majority in both the senate and the house. Obama would be able to make the changes he plans for the U.S. such as the health care reform if the majority of the legislative branch were the Democratic party.
Ramon Banzon
I think that a balanced senate is the best. Even if it may take longer to get things done. If one party has too much of a majority and passes all their laws the point of the senate is lost: to represent everyone fairly. With a balance between republicans and democrats most of America's citizens will be equally represented.
Also with an even ratio it won't allow the President to get away with anything. By that I mean that there will be an even amount of Oversight done to the President, democrat or republican. I think it will be good for the senate to balance out in the upcoming election so that Obama can't completely over turn America, and so that all constituents are represented, republicans and democrats.
--Steph
It seems most people are agreeing on the same thing. I to believe that the parties should be equal so that the president doesnt have to much control or no control at all. If the parties weren't equal one party would have complete control and could pass any laws the like. I also agree with Jake that some party groups could get their say because what Republicans and Democrats want is always what Americans want.
Like the last couple blogs, I agree that in the end the congress should be equal. But seeing that I'm biased I would perfer that Republicans come out top because we already have so much Demicratic influence with the president. But then again I do agree with Rosie and would like to know more about the Democrats and what is going on with their side.
If one party has majority in Congress: legislation is passed, but a sizable fraction of the constituents remains unhappy.
If both parties are equal in size: there is a stalemate, nothing gets done, and a sizable fraction of the constituents remains unhappy.
If majority keeps switching back and forth: each party tries to undo everything the previous party had just set into motion, and a sizable fraction of the constituents remains unhappy.
As for myself, I try not to form opinions on politicians based solely on their party affiliations, but I find certain conservative ideals utterly ridiculous, so that usually doesn't work out. I like the ratio of Democrats to Republicans in Congress right now.
But I'm just one person, right?
I believe that it is best if both parties are some what balanced. With a balance, neither party can come knowing that their bill will be passed. A closely balanced Congress will ensure debates over bills, which will in turn make true bipartisan legislation.
I believe the same the logic or our fore fathers, George Washington to be exact. I think that parties are bad, they corrupt politicians and turn people (who as I see it are trying to work together) against each other. As George Washington said in his Farewell Address to the people of the United States, Sep. 17, 1796,
-"There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the Administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the Spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true--and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favour, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged."
But This only talks about not having parties, and we now do have parties, so i must therefore decide on my own that I would rather have my party win more seats then the other party. Until a better day shines on our government.
Obviously we're all pretty biased here, so I'll skip the "I'm biased."
Although it would be so much more agreeable to have equal representation of parties NOTHING WOULD EVER GET DONE. I also agree with Sam; too many people are caught up in what party is the one making the legislation and whether or not they think it agrees with their party's opinions. Stay open minded! :)
Abir got to the bare bones of this argument, and Sam has made a great point about the parties. Though I personally believe that an increase in the number of republicans is good; the numbers in congress should best represent the people. Clearly if the blogs before me are read, the problem is the Parties and whether they fight for what is best for the people or simply follow their parties. But there is no way to work without them and there isn’t yet a way to fix them (if even possible), we can only hope that congress will do what’s best for the people.
Equally represented or not.
As the Republicans work their way to creep in, oversight of the president would be high. Since the majority of the people vote for the "party of their choice" we can only wait to see who wins. But whether it is the party you favor or not it is necessary to have the congress be the same throughout. The only way to get things done is to work together, and it is obvious now and throughout the past that we must have the same party throughout to achieve anything.
Well i guess many of us agree that if we have one party dominate it will be the only way to get things done; the only problem is their laws would be biased. But if they represent the majority, then the majority of the people will agree to their laws right? There's just no way we can please everyone
P.S. Sam, way to go for remembering American Studies
Marina Mossaad
If there was a group for political absurdists, that'd be me. so, in this next election, either the democrats keep their lead, or they don't. They'll get stuff done or they won't. But I don't see how it could possibly affect us in a big way.
I know I'm a little late on the post, but do agree strongly with Abir about how the legislation won't get passed with equal an equal democrat-republican ratio. I think that the leading party should represent the majority of the people, and that is the democrats. I also agree with all of the people that thought this was a little biased towards republicans.
Why is it that which party gets elected to be the majority is so dependent on whether Obama does a good job or not? The article implies that Obama is being especially careful not to upset anyone, yet party affiliation has nothing to do with a quality of a candidate, but rather their political stances. The fact that Obama is so worried seems to indicate that people are now voting not by party (and to extend that, political stances) but by the perceived effectiveness of a candidate. Therefore, if a Republican congress is seen by the public to be beneficial, then it will probably become reality. The same could be said about a Democratic congress, if it is seemed to smooth things along.
I predict creative political ads in the future.
- Thomas D.
Abir does make a good point, but I also do agree with Kayla. Nowadays, the two major parties are working towards opposite ends of the stick instead of just beliefs. When one president takes over, he/she is working differentiating from the previous administriation instead of fixing todays problems.
I do realize doing things without major political parties would be extremely difficult. I believe that the democrats are blaming the republicans for today's mess, and the republicans are blaming the democrats for the way they lead.
longchamp outlet, louboutin shoes, ray ban sunglasses, kate spade outlet, longchamp, louboutin pas cher, longchamp pas cher, tiffany and co, gucci outlet, nike air max, nike air max, nike free, uggs on sale, air jordan pas cher, louis vuitton outlet, ray ban sunglasses, tiffany jewelry, louboutin outlet, oakley sunglasses, chanel handbags, louis vuitton outlet, prada handbags, ugg boots, nike roshe run, polo ralph lauren outlet, oakley sunglasses, oakley sunglasses, air max, nike free, burberry, louboutin, ralph lauren pas cher, ray ban sunglasses, ugg boots, christian louboutin outlet, replica watches, louis vuitton, tory burch outlet, prada outlet, replica watches, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton, michael kors, cheap oakley sunglasses, oakley sunglasses, longchamp outlet, jordan shoes, louis vuitton, sac longchamp, nike outlet
kate spade handbags, coach outlet, ugg boots, michael kors, michael kors outlet, north face, tn pas cher, replica handbags, true religion jeans, lululemon, vanessa bruno, new balance pas cher, hermes, air force, nike air max, hogan, converse pas cher, true religion outlet, michael kors outlet, michael kors, vans pas cher, true religion jeans, true religion jeans, ralph lauren uk, michael kors outlet, lacoste pas cher, hollister, nike blazer, coach purses, nike roshe, nike air max, coach outlet, oakley pas cher, north face, sac guess, ugg boots, mulberry, hollister pas cher, ray ban uk, michael kors outlet, ray ban pas cher, nike free run uk, burberry outlet online, abercrombie and fitch, michael kors, michael kors, nike air max, michael kors outlet, burberry, timberland
hollister, chi flat iron, nike air max, reebok shoes, mont blanc, ghd, converse, soccer jerseys, nfl jerseys, abercrombie and fitch, wedding dresses, asics running shoes, insanity workout, longchamp, nike huarache, mcm handbags, timberland boots, p90x workout, north face outlet, hollister, nike air max, baseball bats, converse outlet, lululemon, ralph lauren, vans shoes, instyler, gucci, bottega veneta, mac cosmetics, beats by dre, new balance, babyliss, nike roshe, jimmy choo shoes, north face outlet, herve leger, vans, hollister, louboutin, iphone cases, ray ban, celine handbags, giuseppe zanotti, valentino shoes, birkin bag, soccer shoes, ferragamo shoes, oakley, nike trainers
Post a Comment
<< Home