From: Chris Burford <cburford at gn.apc.org>
>If Bush wins the presidency it is still possible that Republicans may not
>dominate Congress, and Congress could be arkward about several issues.
Why would you assume this? If Bush has minor coattails, he should bring a couple more senators, and a couple dozen Reps into Congress with him.
Right now, the Senate is (IIRC) 57 R to 43 D. To end a fillibuster, the Republicans only need to persuade 3 out of 43 Democrats. This is doable from either ideology (conservative Democrats) or money (go along with the dominant party and get a nice thick slice of pork).
In the House, where a simple majority vote rules, the Republicans are currently ahead by 5 seats out of 455. The only problem that they've had is that there are a dozen or so *really* right-wing Republicans who were demanding that their agenda be passed now. Given a Republican president, who could probably get them enough raw meat to pacify them for a while, they'd go a along. And if they didn't, then the GOP could still win simply by persuading/bribing a dozen Democratic Representatives, out over 200 (i.e., 5%).
And the above is true even if Bush has absolutely no coattails. Throw in 3 more Republican senators and 30 more Republican Reps, and the GOP has no problem passing most of what they want.
Things which might be unpopular can still get through, by burying them in the middle of 1,000 page bills, calling them by deceptive names, and large amounts of propaganda.
It's important to remember that our last 8 years of politics have been based on having a (nominally) Democratic president. Before that, we had 12 years of a Republican president, with a Democratic House (and sometimes Senate).
If Bush wins, and the rest of the election goes as can be expected (i.e., not assuming a miracle), then we'd see the GOP controlling all all three. And they d*mn well have plans for making the most of that.
Barry