Headlines
Davis Op-Ed

other interesting info

week of:
Sept. 27th
Oct. 4th
Oct. 11th
Oct. 18th
Oct. 25th
Nov. 1st
Nov. 8th
Nov. 15th
 

Readings and Op-Ed piece

for the week of Oct. 18th

How Does Gore Prepare for the Final Debate?
With the momentum of the campaign now with Governor Bush, Vice President Gore's strategists are said to be divided over how their candidate should prepare for Wednesday's crucial final presidential debate in St. Louis. This package of articles from The Washington Post portrays the mood inside the Gore campaign, and explains how the Bush organization has shifted the dynamic of the race since the first debate.
article 2
article 3

Source: The Washington Post


Gore campaign chairman William Daley ordered the vice president's team of top-dollar consultants to campaign headquarters in Nashville following Wednesday's presidential debate. (Hillery Smith Garrison - AP)


Paul Hosefros/ The New York Times Vice President Al Gore had an enthusiastic greeting for Carl and John Conyers, the sons of Representative John Conyers Jr., at right, at a campaign rally Saturday at Wayne State University in Detroit.

How Will the Middle East Crisis Affect the Presidential Campaign?
Are both Vice President Gore and Governor Bush attempting to gain political mileage from the Middle East crisis, while avoiding saying anything that would be seen to undercut the diplomatic efforts now under way to reduce tensions in the region?

Source: The New York Times

Al Gore's Stories: Exaggerations and Embellishments?
Since the first Presidential debate, the news media and the Bush campaign have focused on Al Gore's tendency to exaggerate and embellish his stories. An extensive analysis of this subject, along with the Vice President's side of the story, appeared in Sunday's New York Times.

source:
The New York Times


Photographs by The Associated Press

Richard Morin and Claudia Deane
Explaining the Swings in the Polls
During the first week of October, the widely-watched CNN/Gallup tracking poll showed huge swings in the presidential race - Gore up by 11 points one day, and Bush up by 7 points just two days later. Washington Post polling directors Richard Morin and Claudia Deane attempt to explain these perturbations in the polls.

Source: The Washington Post

The First Brother-in-Law?
One of Al Gore's closest advisers, and a man who may play an important role in a Gore Administration, is the Vice President's brother-in-law, Frank Hunger. Hunger is almost unknown to those outside the campaign's inner circle. Kevin Sack of The New York Times profiles him in this article.


source: The New York Times


Al Gore and Frank W. Hunger, his brother-in-law, go back a long way.

Senator Joseph I. Lieberman learned of conditions at "colonias" in El Flaco, Tex., Friday from residents including Isidra Tovar, right.
Lieberman Visits "Colonias" in South Texas
In recent weeks, the Democratic candidates have stepped up their attacks on George W. BushÕs record as Governor of Texas. Sen. Joseph Lieberman attempted to focus on one aspect of life in Texas by visiting "colonias" - shantytowns in the Rio Grande Valley in South Texas. How much should Bush be held responsible for conditions in these places?

Source: The New York Times

Orange County: Former GOP Stronghold, Now Closely Divided
When Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan were presidential candidates, the core of their support could be identified as Orange County, California, south of Los Angeles. This year, Orange County voters are closely divided in their preferences, as is the country as a whole. Can George Bush win California, and the nation, without Orange County?

Source: The New York Times


"I think either way we're going to have a good president, but I think I'd feel better if it were Bush," says Dick Hartman of Santa Ana, Calif. His wife, Mary, worries about Vice President Al Gore's 'exaggerations."
Liza Allen, left, supports George W. Bush and her friend Cindy Beckman backs Al Gore. Both teach at Conway (Ark.) High School.

Bush Gains Ground in Arkansas
Independent polls show Bush and Gore neck-and-neck in Arkansas, traditionally a Democratic state in presidential elections. Gov. Bush would like nothing better than to win the 6 electoral votes from President Clinton's home state on his way to the White House.

Source: The New York Times

Nader Rally Packs Madison Square Garden
15,000 people packed Madison Square Garden Friday night to see Green Party candidate Ralph Nader. But can Nader translate the enthusiasm of activists into votes at the polls on November 7?

Source: The New York Times

Ralph Nader with celebrity supporters at a rally at Madison Square Garden in New York on Friday night. At right is Michael Moore, the filmmaker, and from the left, the actors Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon.

The Democrat, Gov. Thomas R. Carper, left, and William V. Roth Jr., the Republican, at the Pulaski Day Parade in Wilmington, Del. The two are competing for the Senate seat that Mr. Roth has held for 30 years.

Youth vs. Age in the Delaware Senate Race
One of the races that will determine control of the Senate is the Delaware contest between proven vote-getter Republican Sen. William Roth, seeking his sixth term in the Senate, and Gov. Tom Carper, a popular Democrat who is barred by his stateÕs constitution from seeking another term as governor.

Source: The New York Times

Overview of Key Senate Races
Veteran Washington correspondent Elizabeth Drew offers this analysis of the key Senate races for The Washington Post.


Source: The Washington Post

Are the Candidates Being Too Careful?
Boston Globe political columnist David Shribman argues that both Bush and Gore have not stepped up to the challenge of providing the American public a clear sense of where they would lead the country over the next four years.

source: The Boston Globe

Op-Ed piece for the week of Oct. 18th

 

Election Analysis and Commentary

Sunday, October 15, 2000

Eric L. Davis

Divided government - one party in control of the White House, the other party in control of one or both houses of Congress - has characterized 34 of the 56 years since the end of World War II. Does divided government hinder the federal government's ability to respond to important national problems, or is it another manifestation of the Founders' wisdom in establishing a complex political system in 1787?

Let's take a look at the record of party control at the two ends of Pennsylvania Avenue since the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt in April 1945.

Truman (D) - Single party control for 6 years, divided government for 2 years (Republicans controlled both House and Senate in 1947 and 1948)

Eisenhower (R) - Single party control for 2 years, divided government for 6 years (Democrats controlled both House and Senate from 1955 through 1960)

Kennedy/Johnson (D) - Single party control for 8 years

Nixon/Ford (R) - Divided government for 8 years (Democrats controlled both House and Senate from 1969 through 1976)

Carter (D) - Single party control for 4 years

Reagan (R) - Divided government for 8 years (Democrats controlled House from 1981 through 1988 and Senate in 1987 and 1988)

Bush (R) - Divided government for 4 years (Democrats controlled both House and Senate from 1989 through 1992)

Clinton (D) - Single party control for 2 years, divided government for 6 years (Republicans controlled both House and Senate from 1995 through 2000)

In the last two decades, there were only two years - 1993 and 1994 - in which the same party controlled the Presidency, the House, and the Senate. Common party control did allow President Clinton to push his budget-balancing measures through Congress in his first two years in office. Some analysts credit this package, which included large tax increases, with setting the federal budget on the path from deficit to surplus. Yet common party control did not help the President, and Hillary Rodham Clinton, see enactment of the health care reform package they proposed in 1993. Indeed, public reaction against the budget and health care measures of Clinton's first two years set the stage for the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994, the first midterm election of the Clinton presidency.

Single-party government has helped some presidents enact major legislative programs. The best example in the modern era is Lyndon Johnson's Great Society of 1964 through 1966. Johnson, who had spent his entire career on Capitol Hill before becoming first Vice President and then President, used his extensive knowledge of, and personal relations with, the House and Senate to see passage of initiatives in civil rights, education, health care, transportation, and urban policy that set federal policy in a new direction for nearly a generation. Johnson's directing and cajoling legislative action from the White House during the first half of his presidency is probably the closest thing the United States has seen in the modern era to a parliamentary-style government, with Johnson as prime minister and chief whip.

Other presidents have been able to overcome divided government and push measures through a Congress controlled by the other party. The best recent example is Ronald Reagan_s economic program of 1981, including substantial tax cuts and reductions in government spending. This program was passed by a House of Representatives in which the Democrats had a majority. Reagan overcame the Democrats' majority by appealing over the heads of members of the House directly to their constituents. Reagan used his skills as the "Great Communicator" to persuade enough Democratic House members that the Reagan program was popular back home that they broke party ranks and voted for the tax and spending cuts.

A more negative approach to divided government has been seen in Bill Clinton's second term. Clinton has used the veto, or the threat of a veto, very effectively to get his way with a Republican Congress, especially on appropriations and budget issues. While Clinton does not have the political strength, either in Washington or in the country, to enact a wide-ranging legislative program, he does have the veto pen. Sometimes even the threat of a presidential veto late in the legislative session, when members want to get home to campaign, has been enough to force the Republicans to drop desired programs from their budget bills, in order to avoid getting drawn into a confrontation with the president.

Some analysts - such as University of California political scientist Gary Jacobson - have argued that in an era when there is a high level of mistrust of government, voters might actually prefer divided government to single-party control. Under this reasoning, voters want to avoid a situation in which one party would have too much power. By electing members of different parties to the Congress and to the White House, voters guarantee that the checks and balances system will work effectively.

Mistrust of government leading voters to choose divided government would be appealing to many of the Framers, were they still with us today. For many of the Founders, preventing the government from acting dangerously was more desirable than energizing government so that it could act positively. Dividing political control between the two ends of Pennsylvania Avenue is another way of checking factions and potentially tyrannical majorities.

One problem with the argument that voters deliberately choose divided government is that it assumes that voters behave very strategically. Because presidential and congressional elections are held on the same day, voters cannot be sure of the outcome on any given election day. Thus, it may be reading too much into a pattern of vote choices to say that the electorate deliberately decided to put control of the White House and of Congress in different political parties. Divided government as an electoral outcome may simply reflect the personal appeal, or the political skill, of a certain party's set of candidates, rather than a deliberate choice by the voters.

Divided government is definitely a possibility following the 2000 elections. If Vice President Gore is elected President, it is likely that the Republicans will still control at least one of the houses of Congress. And if Governor Bush is elected President, it is possible that the Democrats will gain control of the House on the same day. As for the single-party scenarios, an all-Republican government, with the GOP holding on to the House and Senate by the narrowest of margins (perhaps even one or two seats in each chamber) is more likely than an all-Democratic government. One would then have to wait until the 2002 midterm elections to see whether the voters would reward the party in power with more seats in the House and Senate, or whether divided government would return, with power again split between a Congress and a Presidency of opposite parties.