Politics

John Edwards: I Did Not Break the Law

Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
June 3, 2011, 11:28 a.m.

MN Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) said 10/8 dur­ing an ap­pear­ance in Sioux City, IA that it’s “still to early to make a de­cision” on run­ning for WH ‘12. Pawlenty: “Ob­vi­ously people ask a lot about 2012 and that’s something that I’m go­ing to de­cide early next year.”

Pawlenty was the “fea­tured speak­er at a pro-fam­ily re­cep­tion and fun­draiser” in sup­port of the IA Faith and Free­dom Co­ali­tion.

In re­fer­ring to the De­clar­a­tion of In­de­pend­ence, Pawlenty said “it doesn’t say we’re en­dowed by our state le­gis­lat­or, it doesn’t say we’re en­dowed by our mem­ber of Con­gress, it says we are en­dowed by our cre­at­or with cer­tain un­ali­en­able rights … and so we know that these are bless­ings, these are grants from not Con­gress or from the gov­ern­ment, but from our cre­at­or.”

Pawlenty’s speech took aim at the policies of the cur­rent Con­gress and ad­min., while out­lining his vis­ion for the dir­ec­tion of the coun­try. Pawlenty: “We need to do all that we can to at the state level and the na­tion­al level to get this back on track and we’re go­ing to do it not by grow­ing the gov­ern­ment. … Un­for­tu­nately we have a pres­id­ent and a Con­gress that sees it the oth­er way and you can’t be pro-job and anti-en­tre­pren­eur.”

Pawlenty’s stop in Sioux City was part of a two day vis­it to IA which in­cludes stops in Coun­cil Bluffs, Sioux Cen­ter, Hamilton County and Ames (Yo­der, “Iowa Polit­ics,” 10.10).

COR­REC­TION: An earli­er ver­sion of the column mis­stated the ma­jor­ity’s per­cent­age in the Sen­ate. Re­pub­lic­ans have a 56 per­cent ma­jor­ity in the House.

With the elec­tion less than sev­en months away one out­come is likely: whichever party ends up con­trolling the House will have a smal­ler ma­jor­ity than the 242-193 one Re­pub­lic­ans en­joy now (just un­der 56 per­cent); and the Sen­ate’s will be closer than Demo­crats’ 53-47.

In the House, it looks highly doubt­ful that Demo­crats will score the 25-seat net gain ne­ces­sary to cap­ture a ma­jor­ity. But a net gain of some seats is very likely. One party will not score a net gain of 63 seats in one elec­tion as Re­pub­lic­ans did in 2010 — the largest gain for either party since 1948 and the largest midterm-elec­tion gain since 1938 — without giv­ing up some of those seats. The re­dis­trict­ing pro­cess may have some fairly ex­plos­ive res­ults in in­di­vidu­al states and real con­sequences to spe­cif­ic mem­bers. At this point, Cook Polit­ic­al Re­port House Ed­it­or Dav­id Wasser­man es­tim­ates, Re­pub­lic­ans are likely to score a na­tion­wide net gain of one seat through re­dis­trict­ing. If the Flor­ida map is thrown out in the courts, though, that could change. Two states, Kan­sas and New Hamp­shire, have yet to com­plete their maps. They are not, however, ex­pec­ted to fea­ture dra­mat­ic changes. While a 25-seat net gain is not an enorm­ous num­ber of seats, Wasser­man es­tim­ates that 80 per­cent of in­cum­bents who gained par­tis­an ad­vant­age were Re­pub­lic­ans. The re­dis­trict­ing pro­cess prob­ably saved them 10-15 seats over­all. Wasser­man puts the chances of Re­pub­lic­ans los­ing seats at about 90 per­cent. Mod­est losses for Re­pub­lic­ans are ex­pec­ted, but the chances of those ap­proach­ing 25 are very slim.

In the Sen­ate, ba­sic arith­met­ic makes at least some Demo­crat­ic losses in­ev­it­able. Demo­crats have 23 seats at risk. Re­pub­lic­ans have just 10. If you knew noth­ing else, since one party has al­most two-and-a-half times more seats ex­posed than the oth­er party, this provides a very strong hint of the out­come. Open seats are usu­ally harder to hold onto than those with in­cum­bents. Demo­crats have sev­en open seats com­pared with only three for the GOP. This of­fers an even big­ger hint. Clearly, the an­nounce­ment of the re­cent re­tire­ment by Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, re­mained im­port­ant. The open-seat dis­par­ity had been 7-to-2, even worse for Demo­crats. Fi­nally, look­ing at spe­cif­ic races, Demo­crats have eight seats that are rated by the Cook Polit­ic­al Re­port as Toss Up. Or, in the case of Neb­raska, they are worse (Likely Re­pub­lic­an). Re­pub­lic­ans only have three Toss Ups and none that are worse. Demo­crats have three oth­er seats that are com­pet­it­ive. There are also four more po­ten­tially com­pet­it­ive seats. Re­pub­lic­ans have no oth­er com­pet­it­ive seats but have two po­ten­tially com­pet­it­ive ones.

With the cur­rent Demo­crat­ic Sen­ate ma­jor­ity, Re­pub­lic­ans need a three-seat net gain if they win the pres­id­ency (and the power to break a Sen­ate tie); they need four seats if they don’t. The odds of Re­pub­lic­ans re­tak­ing con­trol were bet­ter be­fore Snowe’s re­tire­ment. Today, though, it looks pretty much 50-50. Their gains look most likely to end up as small as two seats or as high as five. There could be an out­come ran­ging from a Demo­crat­ic ma­jor­ity of 51-49 to a GOP ad­vant­age of 52 to 48. Note the fail­ure to use the term “con­trol” in re­la­tion­ship to the Sen­ate. As we know from re­cent ex­per­i­ence, a party doesn’t be­gin to have con­trol of the Sen­ate with any­thing less than 60 seats.

With the odds that the 113th Con­gress will be even more closely di­vided than the cur­rent one, it puts an ad­di­tion­al twist to this fall and a po­ten­tial lame duck ses­sion of Con­gress. Keep­ing in mind that all of the Bush tax cuts ex­pire at the end of the year and budget se­quest­ra­tion kicks in on Jan. 2, could the parties in the ma­jor­ity want to step in and move be­fore they lose clout? Or will they choose to de­fer re­spons­ib­il­ity, to kick the can down the side­walk to the next Con­gress?

His­tor­ic­ally, Amer­ic­ans have liked di­vided gov­ern­ment: They fun­da­ment­ally didn’t com­pletely trust either party. They saw split con­trol as a form of checks and bal­ances. And his­tor­ic­ally, di­vided gov­ern­ment res­ul­ted in com­prom­ise: split­ting the dif­fer­ence and ton­ing down the ex­cesses from each side. But in today’s more-po­lar­ized set­ting, di­vided gov­ern­ment more of­ten res­ults in para­lys­is and dys­func­tion; each party is in­creas­ingly in­flu­enced, if not dom­in­ated, by their most-ideo­lo­gic­al and less-prag­mat­ic fac­tions.

The ques­tion is wheth­er the con­fig­ur­a­tion of the 113th Con­gress will res­ult in even worse para­lys­is, or force com­prom­ise. One po­ten­tially in­triguing as­pect is if in­de­pend­ent An­gus King wins in Maine. While he has not in­dic­ated which party he will caucus with if he wins (and he is heav­ily favored to win), it is very likely that wheth­er he ends ups up don­ning a blue Demo­crat­ic jer­sey — as most ex­pect un­less Re­pub­lic­ans have a ma­jor­ity locked up — or a red GOP jer­sey, he will be even more of an in­de­pend­ent vote than Snowe was. There is even spec­u­la­tion that King is so com­mit­ted to shak­ing up the Sen­ate that if the cham­ber is di­vided 50-49 on Elec­tion Day, he might opt to tie it at 50-50 to force power shar­ing.

With in­creas­ing talk of a fisc­al cliff com­ing late this year, what hap­pens after the Nov. 6 elec­tion may be just as in­ter­est­ing as what hap­pens be­fore then.

 

What We're Following See More »
SANS PROOF
NRA Chief: Leftist Protesters Are Paid
21 hours ago
UPDATE
NEW TRAVEL BAN COMING SOON
Trump Still on Campaign Rhetoric
23 hours ago
UPDATE
“WE’RE CHANGING IT”
Trump Rails On Obamacare
1 days ago
UPDATE

After spending a few minutes re-litigating the Democratic primary, Donald Trump turned his focus to Obamacare. “I inherited a mess, believe me. We also inherited a failed healthcare law that threatens our medical system with absolute and total catastrophe” he said. “I’ve been watching and nobody says it, but Obamacare doesn’t work.” He finished, "so we're going to repeal and replace Obamacare."

FAKE NEWS
Trump Goes After The Media
1 days ago
UPDATE

Donald Trump lobbed his first attack at the “dishonest media” about a minute into his speech, saying that the media would not appropriately cover the standing ovation that he received. “We are fighting the fake news,” he said, before doubling down on his previous claim that the press is “the enemy of the people." However, he made a distinction, saying that he doesn't think all media is the enemy, just the "fake news."

FBI TURNED DOWN REQUEST
Report: Trump Asked FBI to Deny Russia Stories
1 days ago
THE LATEST

"The FBI rejected a recent White House request to publicly knock down media reports about communications between Donald Trump's associates and Russians known to US intelligence during the 2016 presidential campaign, multiple US officials briefed on the matter tell CNN. But a White House official said late Thursday that the request was only made after the FBI indicated to the White House it did not believe the reporting to be accurate."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login