An Anti-Government Election

Polls show the country in a real funk as we head into this midterm election season. The electorate is angry and anti-government feelings are viewed as an anti-incumbency that threatens the Democratic control of the House of Representatives and, therefore, President Obama's agenda.

All the analysis starts with the elections of 1994 and 2006 and how many seats the incumbents lost then and how many the Democrats may lose this time. But the anti-government feelings of today are not the same as the anti-incumbency of those prior times. Plus that, the political conditions during those prior elections do not apply today. So what is happening?

The pervasive funk is reality-based. The government is still broken with the politicians more concerned about money for their next election than about the troubled economy. The people recognize this and the percentage who believe the country is going in the wrong direction is now at 60 percent, almost as high as the 80 percent at the end of the Bush Administration. The disapproval rating for Congress is now 75 percent which is higher than the 62 percent at the time of the 2006 election, when control of Congress did change hands.

The economy is on a life-support system consistingof a stimulus package, trillions in money-supply injection and more trillions in financial guarantees for Goldman Sachs and the other bankers. The voters recognize all of this as a short-term fix with real prospects for a long-term failure. No one feels economically secure and they don't feel it's their fault.

Now, as we head into the 2010 midterm elections, the people are going to be heard. In the Pennsylvania primary election in May the voters will tell us what is happening within the electorate. The midterm in November will be more of a money-laden slugfest between the surviving politicians. No one is sure where the people or the respective political parties are going to end up after all this.

To paraphrase, the Democrats lack all intensity while the Republicans are full of passionate conviction. The Democrats are in trouble because they are on the wrong side of the “enthusiasm gap.” The Republicans are in trouble because their convictions are alienating their base. Both political parties feel threatened and for good reason: they no longer represent the people who elected them.

The Democratic base does not believe that President Obama has delivered on his promise of change. The packages that Obama offered in regard to an economic stimulus, energy efficiency, the financial system and health-care reform, are judged to be watered-down excuses for the change people voted for. The Democratic faithful are more likely to stay home than to work to get out the vote. After the election, we will know if the Democratic voters Obama brought to the polls are still in the game. At this point it doesn't look like it.

The Republicans in Congress may think they are standing by their convictions but their conservative constituency thinks otherwise. It is leaving the GOP and splintering into 1000 small groups. It isn't just the Tea Partiers and Libertarians but many others like the Sons of Liberty, the Oath Takers, We Are Change, Campaign for Liberty, the 9/12 Project and many, many others. So far, they have shown no inclination to unite.

These people may be angry with the Democrats and, if my mail is any reflection, even hate Pres. Obama. They are, however, just as angry over what they see as betrayal of conservative principles by the Republican Party. They particularly resent attempts by the Republicans to co-opt their efforts to revive the “real” conservative faith.

So, what does this dual alienation mean for the 2010 election? In the midterm elections following the inauguration of a new president, the majority party normally loses an average of 23 seats. In this election cycle, the Democrats hold a 255-178 advantage in the House so more of them are incumbents and vulnerable. Many people think that in the present political climate, 40 seats could easily switch and give control of the House to the Republicans. This is the historical anti-incumbency argument.

It's not so simple. Elections are normally held in our two-party system to choose between alternatives. The Republicans were an alternative with ideas in 1994, as were the Democrats in 2006. In this election, the disaffected conservatives are unlikely to turn out to support Republicans despite the intensity of their feelings. Similarly, the Democrats are likely to demonstrate their lack of enthusiasm for watered-down hopes. This is the newer anti-government argument and it is compelling.

When you make the distinction between anti-government and anti-incumbency, there is clearly a misreading of history by the pundits.This is something new so it is hard to say how the election will come out. Will the passionate conviction of the conservatives drive the results or will the electorate just throw all the rascals out – and may be start something new?