Elections Change Office Holders, But Rarely Change Anything Else

Every few years, the public, generally as a result of disappointment or opposition to either the incumbent, the political process, the economy, or certain policies, decides to do the equivalent of a political purge, or "vote the bums out." Unfortunately, in most cases, all this has done is replace one set of dysfunctional office holders with another set of less experienced ones.

In the first congressional elections of President Clinton's first term, in 1994, many of the new members of Congress, who were "swept" into office when President Clinton was elected in 1992, were defeated, and the Congress switched from a Democratic majority to a Republican one. The ever versatile Clinton read the "political waters or tea bags," and "moved to the center," and became one of our more productive Presidents, trying to work with the opposition party to get things done. What often occurs after a new President is elected is that individual embarks on certain major changes, which, it seems, invariably have a certain number of detractors. President Obama, after a similar devastating mid-term election, which saw a large Democratic majority turn to a Republican majority in the House of Representatives, and a much smaller Democratic majority in the Senate. One must objectively wonder if there was so much stalling and failure to get things done productively with one party in control, will there be any hope of conciliatory behavior now? Will the two parties, and the two factions, continuing playing politics, or will they work together, and compromise on their extremes, in order to benefit the American public.

President Obama may have a more difficult go of it than President Clinton did, however. Firstly, Clinton's own political views were somewhat more centrist than those of Obama. Secondly, Clinton by nature, was a savvy politician, who was a master at the political art of compromise. How will President Obama do with an approximately 65 seat turnover as a result of these mid-year elections? The other complication is that some of the new faces in Congress were elected as a result of Tea Party efforts, endorsements, affiliations, or beliefs, and how will these new members of Congress adapt to the "crazy" political system within the District of Columbia?

In the 2008 Presidential elections, Obama campaigned on "Change you can believe in." Many of the candidates elected during these mid- year elections campaigned in opposition to this change, and the real question one must ask is whether these election results were because of agreement with a more conservative agenda, a backlash against the President and his programs and proposals, merely anti-incumbent, anger regarding joblessness, the result of the lackluster economy and low consumer confidence, a backlash or opposition to a particular issue such as health care, the huge deficits, or something else?

These 2010 mid-year elections certainly changed the face of our elected officials. However, we do not yet know if these changes will merely be cosmetic, or will they accomplish anything constructive. Let's wait and see!