LaborNET

  Ask Neale

  Tool of the Week

Politics

Election 2000: The Winner is Gridlock

In the last in his series on the US Federal Election Campaign, Michael Gadiel, our roving reporter, gladly signs off.

Flying back across the Pacific, grateful to be returning from my American sojourn, but with no result, I couldn't help feeling swindled. I'm not sure that I feel any different now. Either way the Americans have finally found the perfect way to piss off political insiders, tie the vote and deny both sides the legitimacy and mandate of a clear win.

Safely back home, I watched the America's cranky old systems fumble the Florida result, from County Electoral Commissioners, to State Legislature, local courts, State Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court, backwards and forwards, we see a set of structures that are hopelessly partisan and ill equipped to deal with the situation.

It really did seem quite simple - in a western democracy, when there is a close vote, the outcome is determined by re-examining the votes and establishing a uniform and consistent set of principles for discerning the actual intention of the voters - not really rocket science. But it is something that the world's greatest democracy clearly can't manage.

Instead, like a weird repeat of the OJ trial, Bush's lawyers have played with words constructing arrays of specious arguments - you almost expected them to shout, "look at the silly monkey" in the middle of the trial. In the end it got too boring - even for a political junkie like me.

The conclusion came when US Supreme Court handed down what is potentially the most blatantly partisan decision in political history - admitting that there were irregularities and inconsistencies but bemoaning that there was no more time available. It is difficult to reconcile this argument, when in the same judgment; the court acknowledged that they had the power to freely adjust the timelines.

In fact, the re-count could have just been completed by the December 12 deadline if the court hadn't granted an injunction stopping the re-count the previous Saturday. Seems just a bit too convenient. But for Gore, what do you do when the umpire is hopelessly biased - with pressure mounting for a resolution, his only option was to go gracefully.

But lets not shed too many tears for Gore, the reality is that the proliferation of polling and focus groups have meant a blanding down of politics and ideology. Both candidates have raced to the middle. And the US centre is way to the right by Australian standards. Undoubtedly Gore's convictions are more to the left than his actual policies, as are Bush's convictions more to the right, but both men will follow the polls and position themselves firmly in the mainstream.

Will this trend mean that, in the future, as public opinion measuring techniques become more accurate, that candidates on either side will be even more closely matched? Can we expect many more tied votes? If so, then the US electoral authorities better get their act together.

The Republicans have the Presidency and the casting vote in the Senate - but the President has, at best, a weak mandate and the Senate requires a vote of 60% of the members to close the debate for a vote. Although a simple majority may win a vote, 41% of the floor may effectively block a motion. The Republicans have a slim majority in the House of Representatives, which, because their members are not bound to vote the party line, will not be enough to ensure their command of the chamber.

Race to the centre aside, maybe there could be something even really insidious going on. What if the American population actually want the parties balancing each other off? What if the average person has been following the polls and has changed their vote to achieve a tie? A nation that fundamentally distrusts government and politicians, has perhaps found a way to balance each other off and make them work together.

Indeed, gridlock has been the true winner of this election. Even if it was pure co-incidence it couldn't have worked out better for your average politician hater. The finely balanced outcome puts the two parties in the position where neither can achieve anything without the cooperation of the other.

Americans are 'can do' - they like action, not partisan bickering. The parties have to recognise their common interests, work together and make each other look good. The alternative is to continue fighting and go down, in the public opinion - together. With the acrimony of the Presidential election and the inevitable rancour arising from the Supreme Court decision, it doesn't look like things have gotten off to a very promising start.

  View entire issue - print all of the articles!

  Issue 82 contents

»	Mad Monk's Secret Union Past
»	New Life for Trades Hall
»	Top Cop is Our Organiser of the Year
»	All We Want for Christmas
»	Summer for Social Justice
»	Unions Return to Mosh Pit
»	Unions Head West
»	Big Bastard Censors Dissidents
»	South Coast Labor President Steps Down
»	As a Died in the Wool Westie Steps Up
»	Dying Workers' Asbestos Plea
»	Workers at Centre of Turn Of the Century
»	Truth about S11 Starting to Come Out

»	The Soapbox
»	The Locker Room
»	Trades Hall
»	Tool Shed

»	The Greatest Team Ever?
»	ABC Online Did Strike
»	Why Nader Vote was not Wasted
»	John Scrooge's Christmas Gift

Notice Board
- Check out the latest events

Latest Issue

View entire latest issue
- print all of the articles!

Previous Issues

Subject index

Search all issues

© 1999-2000 Labor Council of NSW

LaborNET is a resource for the labour movement provided by the Labor Council of NSW

[ Privacy Statement | Disclaimer | Credits ]

LaborNET is proudly created, designed and programmed by Social Change Online for the Labor Council of NSW