It’s a nice sentiment, anyway. Yet many rank-and-file members are far less optimistic that either George W. Bush or Al Gore will have the political pull inside the Capitol to bring a suspicious, divided Congress together. The postelection wrestling match between the presidential candidates has only intensified the bitterness on the Hill, further dividing the two sides. “There will be no lion lying down with the lamb,” says Rep. Jim Moran, a Virginia Democrat. “What we have here are lions and tigers.”
No matter who wins the White House, the post-election mood is foul enough that some lawmakers doubt the new president will have the usual “honeymoon” period, when pols of both parties cut the new guy a little slack to see what he can do. Keeping Congress under control is a tough job for any president. But after such a narrow, meager victory, it will be even harder for Bush or Gore. Neither will be able to claim a mandate from the people–the most powerful weapon a president has against belligerent lawmakers.
Already some Democrats are hinting about digging in against Bush if he doesn’t live up to their expectations. “If Bush started moving in what I felt was the wrong direction, I would do everything I could to say no to it, to debate it, to get Democrats to fight it,” says Sen. Paul Wellstone, a Minnesota Democrat. Bush will face especially fierce opposition from House Democrats, led by Gephardt–a skilled politician who has spent years honing his skills of obstruction.
It’s not just Democrats who could give Bush headaches. Republicans in the Capitol are now split into warring camps, with right-wing conservatives and moderates openly competing for votes and influence. Bush will have to persuade members of his own party to stand with him. “There’s going to be an initial euphoria,” says a top House Republican aide. “But if he all of a sudden isn’t everything they dream he is, he’s going to have a real challenge.” The party’s right wing, already irritated by Bush’s proposed spending on education and health care, is “looking at him warily,” says the staffer. “Some members are going to be saying, ‘This is a Republican?’ "
Gore can expect even less hospitality. Republican leaders have made it clear they don’t have much personal fondness for their former colleague–and even less for his plans. And the near-even Democratic-Republican split leaves him little wiggle room in his own party. On virtually every issue, Gore will have to plead with various factions to stick with him against the GOP. He’ll spend even more time trying to exploit the divisions in the Republican ranks, doing his best to cut deals with moderates and liberals on the other side in exchange for their support on key votes. “We will all sink or swim together with this thin majority,” says Sen. Russ Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat. “It makes it impossible for one party to run roughshod over the other.”
That doesn’t mean they won’t try. Republicans control the all-important committees and calendar, enabling them to steer Bush’s agenda through the Hill–or suffocate Gore’s before it ever comes to a vote. But Democrats are hardly powerless. The GOP majority is far too small to keep Democrats from blocking Republican maneuvers with filibusters and procedural tricks.
All of which, of course, means that the big, thorny problems Bush and Gore talked about so much during the campaign–prescription drugs, Social Security–likely won’t be fixed soon. “These big national issues will stay unresolved because it is in the benefit of each party to keep them unresolved,” says Moran. Instead, congressional leaders may turn to less contentious issues–raising education standards, reducing marriage taxes–to show the people they can at least get something done while they wait, and plot, for 2002.
