jp
This is one of the articles that appeared in one of Canada's national newspapers this morning.
The Globe and Mail, Friday, November 10, 2000
A nation divided awaits its president
ANALYSIS: As the drive for the presidency threatens to descend into a legal and political morass, ANDREW COHEN takes a look at what the new chief executive will inherit
By Andrew Cohen
As Republicans and Democrats threaten to wage an unprecedented legal and political struggle for the presidency of the United States, it is increasingly likely that the winner will assume office without a mandate, facing a divided Congress, leading a polarized people.
The one certainty of this contested election is that Americans and their elected representatives are more divided than at any time in recent memory. As one observer asked yesterday of the man who'll inherit an embattled presidency: "What has he won?"
Few observers doubt it will be a diminished prize, although far from an empty title. The president will be limited in what he can do and his legitimacy will be in question, with no licence to pursue big ideas such as the trillion-dollar tax cut promised by Texas Governor George W. Bush or the drug-prescription plan promised by Vice-President Al Gore.
In fact, the signs point to a stalemate between the president and Congress, promising more of the paralysis of the last six years that has poisoned relations between a Republican Congress and a Democratic President.
"This really shows the country is closely divided," said Steven Wayne, a political scientist at Georgetown University. "There's consensus on the problems but not the solutions."
Although Americans remain confident in their democratic process, Thomas Mann of the Brookings Institution, an independent think tank, warned that the wrangling "could intensify, accelerate and become ugly. It's easy to be pessimistic. We've had an arms race of ugliness."
If Mr. Bush takes office, he will do so having won less than 50 per cent of the popular vote. That isn't unusual; Bill Clinton twice failed to get an absolute majority. But he will also have won fewer votes than his opponent, which is unusual; it has happened only three times, all in the 19th century.
If Mr. Gore takes office, he will also be a minority president, having won with a plurality of about 200,000 votes out of about 105 million cast. That's more than John F. Kennedy's historically narrow margin of 118,000 over Richard Nixon in 1960, but given the larger number of votes this year, it is smaller in terms of percentage.
(Despite a higher-than-expected turnout, only about half the U.S. electorate voted, meaning only about a quarter of the country will have voted in favour of whoever becomes president.)
But it's not only the narrow margin of victory that will restrain the new president. It's the new Congress, which he'll need to pass his legislation. The Congress will be even more divided than last time, and possibly even more combative, with the parties hoping to enhance their chances in the midterm elections in 2002.
Without a new era of bipartisanship, there is likely to be a return to gridlock. The Senate, which confirms the president's nominees and ratifies foreign treaties, will be split down the middle, probably 51-49 in favour of the Republicans.
The newly elected House of Representatives will also be more divided. The Republicans will probably have 221 members to 212 for the Democrats, with two independents among the 435 members.
If Mr. Bush wins, it will be the first time that the Republicans have controlled the presidency and the two houses of Congress since 1954. But that might not be of much comfort to Mr. Bush; he would have little room to manoeuvre.
"Clearly, Bush has to deliver on his promises to work with Democrats," Mr. Wayne said. "Incremental government and constant compromise will be the order of the day."
It would be wrong to suggest that the presidency would become a poisoned chalice. The most powerful job in the world will remain the most powerful job in the world, with the enormous influence it has historically carried.
Many presidents have entered office with slender pluralities but built a mandate by acting boldly in foreign policy, making sound judicial and cabinet appointments, and issuing executive orders. Mr. Bush or Mr. Gore might do the same.
But the longer the recounts and legal wrangling go on, the less legitimacy and moral authority the new president will have.
Moreover, he will be leading a people deeply divided over the reach and role of their government.
Mr. Gore's support was high among women, in the big industrial states, mainly on the coasts, living in big cities. His supporters are also overwhelmingly black, Hispanic and Jewish, and members of labour unions.
Mr. Bush's support came from Texas, and the smaller states in the south, the plains and the Rocky Mountains. His support is high among Christian men who live in rural areas.
The votes of older people went narrowly to Mr. Gore, independents went narrowly to Mr. Bush. The Midwest split, with Mr. Gore taking Michigan, Minnesota, Illinois and Wisconsin, and Mr. Bush winning Ohio, Missouri, Nebraska and Kansas. |
