Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ColtonGang who wrote (54267)	10/29/2000 8:16:54 PM
From: puborectalis	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 769670

Democrats favored to take House By Rex Nutting, CBS.MarketWatch.com Last Update: 12:46 PM ET Oct 19, 2000 NewsWatch Latest headlines WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- For the first time this year, the Democrats are now projected to win enough seats to take back control of the House of Representatives. But it will be close, so close that just a few votes here and there could decide which party will run the House. Congressional Quarterly and Roll Call, two respected news organizations that track every hiccup on Capitol Hill, both project that the Democrats will gain seven seats on Nov. 7, exactly the number they'd need to gain control. The predictions are based on a careful, district-by-district analysis. Both publications project that the Republicans will maintain control of the Senate. The result could be just what the public apparently wants: gridlock. Regardless of which party controls the White House, the Congress would be split between a Democratic House and a Republican Senate, and that means getting anything done could be almost impossible. Even if George W. Bush is elected president and the Republicans control the House, the Democrats in the House and Senate would be powerful enough to slow down or block some of the Republicans' agenda. "It's barely governable for [Speaker Dennis] Hastert now," said Sarah Binder, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and an assistant professor at George Washington University. "It'd be even more ungovernable." Currently in the House, the Republicans have 222 members and the Democrats have 209. There are two independents and two vacancies (one from each party). If the Democrats gain the seven seats now projected, they'd have 217 to the Republicans' 216, with one independent likely to side with each party. It'd be the closest margin of control ever in the House. With just one vote separating the parties, each member of the House would, in effect, have a veto over the leadership. The majority party elects the speaker and the other leadership of the House, including committee chairmanships. Already maverick Rep. James Traficant, D-Ohio, has said he'd vote for Republican Dennis Hastert for speaker. Other members could promise their votes in exchange for plum committee assignments or pork-barrel spending. But once the leadership is chosen, it would be very difficult to change it, according to Binder, who said that a new vote on the leadership would require a bit of dicey procedural maneuvering. Because the House has 435 members, a tie is impossible unless someone abstains. Not so in the Senate, where a 50-50 split is at least theoretically possible. Currently, the Republicans have a 54-46 advantage in the Senate. Congressional Quarterly predicts the Democrats will gain one seat. If the Democrats do manage a tie, it could set up some very strange scenarios that would give everyone an instant education in constitutional law. In the case of a tie, Vice President Al Gore would cast the tie-breaking vote for the Democrats, if the leadership vote were taken before Jan. 20. The vote is typically held on Jan. 3, the first day of the session. If the Republicans were able to delay the leadership vote until Jan. 20, they'd be able to elect the leadership, no matter who the new vice president is. If Dick Cheney were elected vice president, he'd cast the tie-breaking vote for the Republicans. If Joe Lieberman were elected vice president, he'd have to resign from the Senate before he could cast his tie-breaking vote, in which case it wouldn't be needed because the Republicans would have a 50-49 advantage.