2014 midterm elections
November 4, the main opponent of President Barack Obama - the Republican Party - won the majority of seats in the Senate in the midterm elections in the US Congress; moreover, it is not only maintained but also reinforced majority in the House of Representatives. Thus, the newly elected Congress, which will begin work in January, next year, will be fully controlled by Republicans.
The upper chamber of Congress - the Senate - the first time since the beginning of the Obama presidency fell into the hands of the Republicans. Out of a hundred seats they will control 54. The number of Democrats in the House of Representatives reduced, while the Republicans increased their representation from 233 to 246, considering that for the majority 218 deputies are needed.
As shown by polls of voters, the Republican candidates won an important victory in the states of Arkansas, West Virginia, South Dakota, Montana, Colorado, Iowa and North Carolina, which were previously presented in the Senate by Democrats. In Kentucky, the Republican minority leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell took over its rival from the Democratic Party. In January, he will be the leader of the majority in the Senate. This means that they will lead all the committees in both houses and determine the legislative agenda. Such a perspective does not promise Barack Obama nothing but a serious internal political difficulties in the last two years in the White House.
Republican victory is due to several reasons, some of which are not directly related to the will of the voters on Election Day. Firstly, it is jerrymandering that is an establishment of electoral districts. In 2010, Republicans won the elections in most parts of the states' senates. And it allowed them in 2011, to "cut" districts for elections to the lower house of the US Congress, based on their interests. "Cutting" is done for 10 years, and now the Democrats have already developed its own "Strategy 2020", suggesting a victory in most of the state legislatures. This will allow the "donkeys" in 2021 to reestablish districts in its favor.
Also mid-term elections in the United States always have a lower turnout than presidential elections. For such elections mostly come wealthy and educated people. To a lesser extent in the vote in the midterm elections are involved young people and minorities - those groups that in recent years support the Democratic Party. These factors determined the reduction result Democrats in the last election.
The most important feature of the mid-term elections in the United States is that the party which is at the helm of the executive and controlling the White House loses its representation in both houses of Congress (Abramowitz, Cover, Norpoth, 562). Particularly telling example of this trend was 2010 midterm elections, in which Democrats, before confidently controlled both houses of Congress, lost their majority in the House of Representatives, losing 63 places and significantly reduced their representation in the Senate, losing six seats. It was the biggest loss of votes for the ruling party after the mid-term elections in 1938, when the Democrats led by Franklin Roosevelt lost 72 seats in the House of Representatives.
The outcome of the November election was influenced not only by state of the US economy, but also by the syndrome of "fatigue" of voters from Obama which, as a rule, is particularly acute in the sixth year of the office of US presidents, elected for a second term (Sabato). Except for the "lucky" Bill Clinton in 1998, this syndrome in the period after World War II fully was experienced by Dwight Eisenhower in 1958 (loss of 13 seats in the Senate and 48 in the House of Representatives), Ronald Reagan in 1986 of (loss of 8 seats in the Senate and 5 in the House of Representatives) and George W. Bush in 2006 (loss of 6 seats in the Senate and 30 in the House of Representatives). A leading American expert on election campaigns Charlie Cook said: "The novelty of the energy and charisma of the newly elected president tend to almost complete disappearance during his second term. As a rule, voters no longer see new ideas, and by this time tiredness of the president begins to define the relationship between the president and the electorate" (Cook).
In such circumstances, the ordinary Americans exponent approval of Barack Obama activities became the main factor for the outcome of the midterm elections. Victory of the first in the US history Afro-American candidate for the White House formed the very high expectations of Obama's presidency, which, unfortunately, has not materialized. The economic situation in the country is getting better, but there is no effect for the standard of living of the population. Since the beginning of 2014 public approval rate of Obama's activities as head of the White House was stable at around 44% disapproval, according to daily measurements of Gallup, at the level of 50-51%.
Current issues of domestic and foreign policy, too, could not positively affect the popularity of Obama. Events in Ukraine and around the sharp deterioration of US-Russian relations also did not contribute to the growth of public support for President Barack Obama. In particular, after the annexation of Crimea to Russia in mid-March 2014, opinion polls showed that Americans in general disapprove the administration approach to resolve the Ukrainian crisis. Thus, according to a poll of the newspaper "Washington Post" and television "ABC News", held in late April 2014, the ratio of negative and positive evaluations was respectively 46% and 34%.
The success of the Republicans in the midterm elections was provided by irreconcilable opposition to health care reform, which was launched in March of 2010 with the adoption of the law on access to health care and protection of patients. In addition to the enormous budgetary resources, which requires the implementation of reforms, including the gradual introduction in the US system of universal health insurance (Republicans believe that its abolition would save in the next 10 years, about $ 2.1 trillion), the political opposition of Republicans stems from the idea that reform can lead to tectonic shifts in the American political system. This was never concealed by Democrats, according to calculations that coverage of this system for dozens of millions of Americans and their families will allow the Democratic Party to dramatically expand its mass political base and provide it with a steady dominance in electoral processes in almost all levels, but especially at the federal level (Thompson, S4).
So, if the increase in the number of people receiving access to health insurance, will go the planned pace, the realization of the provisions of the reform will have a direct impact on the outcome of the presidential election in 2016. Speaking April 1, 2014 with a nationally televised address, Obama said, that since the beginning of the operation of electronic exchanges to sell health insurance, 7.1 million people were their participants. High cost plus political importance of health care reform was the reason that the Republicans decided to the last and decisive battle against hated reform, realizing that perhaps, after two years of the process of implementation of its provisions, it would be virtually irreversible.
They built their strategy on the slogan of the complete abolition of the law on access to health care in the case of establishing control of the Senate and the preservation of the rule of the House of Representatives. During the election campaign in 2014 around the reform of the American health care turned extremely ideologized struggle for public opinion. If the discontent of Americans health care reform would continue until November, Republicans decided, then on this wave they would be able to increase their representation in the Senate and in the House of Representatives- as well as mid-term elections in 2010. "Obamacare" directly connected with the name of the president, by many Americans today is perceived not only as a system of medical services, but as a system of large costly state intrudes into the private life of every American. The election results showed that while Republicans may rely on public discontent of "Obamacare" as one of the factors of their success in the midterm elections in 2014. The negative attitude of a large part of the Americans to reform of the health care system was constantly fixed by services for public opinion research at the outset of the second term of Obama. However, in the spring of 2014 the situation began to change into more favorable to the president through the actions of the administration, which expanded the number of affordable participants of the health insurance program. It is significant that 90% of Democrats unanimously support the efforts of the Obama administration to reform the American health care system, while the official position of the leadership of the Republican Party in Congress is supported only by about 60% of Republicans, while 30% are in positions of Democrats.
The fight of the GOP against reform of American health care is an "endless war" that could destabilize the American political system. This struggle reflects the "growing polarization of political forces in Congress and an increase in ethnic, generational and geographical differences in mass political base of each of the warring parties. This ongoing conflict creates for each batch unpredictable political risks and deprives the country of productive debate about the inevitable shortcomings and failures adopted in 2010 legislation".
Almost the most sharp field of the election campaign debates was the fate of immigration reform proposed by Obama at the beginning of his second term. The main content of the reform, in terms of electoral processes, is the legalization of 13.3 million immigrants currently living in the United States.
This problem is at the heart of all political battles going around today proposed reform of US immigration system. The process of transformation of illegal immigrants who have received a residence permit into full immigrants can take from 5 to 10 years, but the long-term consequences of this transformation, taking into account the factor of change in marital status, amnesty of illegal immigrants will produce a truly revolutionary change in the American political system.
According to American analysts, after the immigration reform, in 2036 in the United States will be more than 32 million of new potential voters, with 5 million new voters by 2024, another 10 million - by 2028, and an additional 17 million new voters will be able to take part in the elections - including, of course, the presidential in 2036.
Illegal immigration is mainly represented immigrants from Latin America, including Mexico and the countries of Asia and Africa. According to US experts, in 2010 from 11.2 million illegal immigrants, 58%, or 6.5 million people, accounted as immigrants from Mexico. 23% or 2.6 million people is the share of immigrants from other countries Latin America, 11% or 1.2 million people is the share of immigrants from Asia, 4% or 0.5 million people are representatives of the countries of Africa, and only 3% or about 0.3 million people is the share of immigrants from European countries and Canada.
Particular attention is drawn to the fact that all the presidential elections of the XXI century, since 2000, have been solved by just 4.5 million votes; while the average in the elections participated is 122 million people. Thus, prospects of almost unprecedented situation in which the outcome of the presidential election can be the deciding vote not just immigrants, but the "color" of immigrants, mostly from countries south of the Rio Grande loom in American political life. During the election campaign, immigration reform was under strong political pressure from the Republican Party. Republicans actively involved the media, in all keys playing with the fact that in 2013 the police left in the United States about 70 thousands of Illegal immigrants accused of committing criminal offenses. In a letter of 22 Republican senators to the President, Barack Obama and his administration were directly accused of implementing the tactics of immigration reform with a direct violation "of the Constitution, the rule of law, the rights of American citizens and legal immigrants." And it should be noted that this rhetoric had political effect. In particular, in the public opinion poll conducted in March 2014 by "CBS", the question of how Americans are satisfied with Obama's approach to the problem of immigration, only 35% of respondents gave a positive response, while 56% were dissatisfied. It is significant that since the beginning of 2013, when the administration has put forward the issue of immigration reform as one of the main priorities of its activities during the second term, the number of positively biased towards this initiative Obama steadily decreased, while the percentage of people who perceive it negatively steadily increased. The fundamental reason for the sabotage of immigration reform by Republicans in the midterm elections in 2014 is that the Republican Party is increasingly becoming the party of the white majority, while the Democrats are progressively transformed into the party of ethnic minorities.
In this regard, the meaning and significance of mid-term elections in 2014 for the Republicans is not to delineate and identify new ways of development of American society in their own understanding, but to draw a bright line under the presidency of Barack Obama.
Sources
Sabato, Larry J. "Republicans Really Could Win It All This Year." POLITICO Magazine. 6 Jan. 2014. Web. <http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/01/midterm-elections-republicans-really-could-win-2014-101802.html#ixzz31y1yCKt5>.
Cook, Charlie. "Six-Year Itch Plagues Presidents in Midterms." Www.nationaljournal.com. 6 Jan. 2014. Web. <http://www.nationaljournal.com/off-to-the-races/six-year-itch-plagues-presidents-in-midterms-20140106>.
Obama, Barack. "Remarks by the President on the Affordable Care Act." The White House. The White House, 1 Apr. 2014. Web. <http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/01/remarks-president-affordable-care-act>.
"Calling the Affordable Care Act "Obamacare" Just Exacerbates Public Confusion, So Stop Doing It." Calling the Affordable Care Act "Obamacare" Just Exacerbates Public Confusion, So Stop Doing It. 19 Sept. 2013. Web. <http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/19/1239651/-Calling-the-Affordable-Care-Act-Obamacare-Just-Exacerbates-Public-Confusion-So-Stop-Doing-It>.
North, David. "Could We Have 13,276,000 Legalization Applicants?" Center for Immigration Studies. 21 Mar. 2014. Web. <http://www.cis.org/north/could-we-have-13276000-legalization-applicants>.
Flanigan, William H., and Nancy H. Zingale. Political Behavior in Midterm Elections. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2000. Print.
Campbell, James E. "Explaining Presidential Losses in Midterm Congressional Elections." The Journal of Politics 47.4 (1985): 1140-157. Print.
Abramowitz, Alan I., Albert D. Cover, and Helmut Norpoth. "The President's Party in Midterm Elections: Going from Bad to Worse." American Journal of Political Science 30.3 (1986): 562. Print.
Thompson, Frank J. "Health Reform, Polarization, and Public Administration." Public Administration Review 73 (2013): S3-S12. Print.
