A House (and Senate) divided: Would Romney be more likely to get legislative ball rolling?

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. / EMMANUEL DUNAND/AFP/Getty Images

President Obama recently conceded that his 2008 vow to "get us out of his polarizing debate... and actually get things done" may have been a bit "naive" considering the current level of gridlock caging Congress. But that hasn't stopped Mitt Romney from resurrecting the promise as his own this cycle - after all, the GOP nominee said during Tuesday's debate: He's done it before, he'll do it again.

"What we have right now in Washington is a place that's gridlocked," Romney said during the second presidential debate at Hoftra University in Hempstead, N.Y. "We haven't had the leadership in Washington to work on a bipartisan basis. ...I was able to do that in my state, and bring these two together."

According to at least some experts, he may be right. Romney would face a rude awakening if he took on the office of the presidency with the mindset of a Massachusetts governor, University of Virginia political analyst Larry Sabato believes, but former longtime Republican congressional staffer Mike Lofgren argued the circumstances that would likely accompany a Romney victory in November would be more prone to fuel a workable Congress than would an Obama second term.

"I think Romney was being a little coy" with the suggestion that his leadership would be enough to dissolve the Hill's current partisan firewalls, said Lofgren, who, out of frustration at the "do-nothing" status of Congress, last year famously left his job as a senior analyst on the House and Senate Budget Committees after 28 years on Capitol Hill and authored, "The Party is Over: How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted." On the stump, Romney time and time again has assured he'll do "everything in my power" to "reach across the aisle and find good Democrats in the House and the Senate that care deeply about America, just as I do."

The argument that a Romney first term would stand a better chance than an Obama second term at jumpstarting Congress has everything to do with presumed logistics, Lofgren explained: "If for whatever reason momentum changes to the point that Romney gets elected, most likely he's going to have retained a Republican House, and it's significantly more likely under those circumstances that he'll have picked up a Republican Senate, too." Furthermore, he continued, "The dynamics of a first-term president always tend to be more activist. With second-term presidents, there's a lot of legacy sniffing."

• Bill Clinton: Romney "thinks we're dumb"
• Poll: Romney lead grows in daily tracking poll
• Obama willing to fight on "fiscal cliff"

It's a difficult thing to predict, Sabato cautioned, particularly given the fluidity of House and Senate races. "Right now both candidates are whistling past the graveyard," he said. Romney's argument - seized on by his supporters, including Democrat-turned-Republican former Rep. Artur Davis - that working with Democrats in Massachusetts has prepared him to do the same as president - "We've heard that for years from presidents. 'Oh, as governor of Arkansas...' and 'When I was governor of Texas...' It's irrelevant. It's always under completely different circumstances, and certainly not as polarized.

"But you look at Obama," Sabato continued. "He and Republicans in Congress have just not been able to work together. We've had two empty years legislatively, and I don't see that changing just because he gets 51, 52 percent of the vote, which is all we're talking about."

Should the president be reelected and if control of the House and Senate remain the same, the last four years will have been a harbinger of the next, both experts agreed.

• no previous page
• next

1/2

[ssnbbr]

Romney's election means the right wing social agenda would become law. Women have surpassed men in earning bachelors and advanced college degrees. More than 55% of college enrollments are now women. Women comprise 46% of the workforce, and the labor-market participation rate for women 25 to 44 years of age is more than 75 percent.

Here's a question:

Does anyone really think any of this would be possible without women's access to the full range of family planning options that have been available since anti-contraception laws were overturned in the 1960s and Roe v. Wade was decided in the 1970s?

Many, many women and men have fought long and hard to acquire & improve these economic opportunities for women...our daughters, granddaughters, wives, sisters and nieces. When Romney says women are mainly interested in economic issues he ignores this fact: for women, family planning/reproductive health is at the core of their economic opportunities and decisions. All that is on the line now, so to both women and men -- think carefully before you pull the lever.

[drmirabilis]

So, what you're saying is, "Unless you elect Romney, the Tea Party Republicans will continue to obstruct Obama, threatening to paralyze and destroy the country unless they get exactly what they want, regardless of whether what they demand reflects the overall will of the electorate." Perhaps, instead, if the public votes in Obama and votes out as many Republicans, of all stripes, as possible, some of those Republicans who are left will get a clue.

[Romneyobamalite]

What we all need to do is face reality. Both the Republicans and Democrats have got us into this huge mess we now face. Who gets the office makes no difference. We are going over the cliff period and when we go it will be devastating if we have Obama or Romney in office. The fuse has been lit and there is no way to put it out. After we go through a period of living in rags then we the American people will wake up and finally fix this mess. But first we have to suffer. Takes a lot to get our attention. People in this country have become stupid. A growling gut and rags will cure stupid every time.

[vet97]

I need to know which Romney you are referring to so I know which Romney I should be casting my ballot.

[Deedragirl]

We know Obama can't so Give Romney a try.

[vet97]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that once Senator McConnell (KY) stated that it was his number one priority to make Obama "a one term president" that obstuctionism would be "the order of the day". The republican tea baggers in Congress pushed that agenda. To blame Obama for the grid lock Draggirl is absurb...question: which Romney are you referring to?

[A_Moderate]

Would Romney be more likely to get legislative ball rolling? YES - in the wrong direction - backwards!! With the help of the religious right, Romney will be able to pass all kinds of Family Values laws and take America back to he 1950s. I hope everyone likes only G rated films, believes in creationism. Don't believe me look at what Tennessee Republicans passed this year. Tennessee bill defines holding hands, kissing as "gateway sexual activity" and the anti-evolution law called the Monkey Bill.

[chocolatehaze]

Romney, and indeed almost anyone, could do a better job of getting the ball rolling than Obama, who is too much of a narcissist to accept anything less than exactly what he wants. Besides, he has no idea how to relate to people in a way that makes them desire to work with him. It is his way or the highway, and he becomes nasty and snarky and derisive when he doesn't get what he wants when he wants it. Romney, having had to actually work in the business world where compromise is needed and where relating to people in a pleasant way is also necessary, is much more likely to get the ball rolling.

[vet97]

you are in a haze...no doubt about that...let us know when you come out of it!

[mitchellvii77]

WHY LIBERALS SHOULD VOTE FOR ROMNEY:

Liberals will never believe that their message was wrong, only that they had the wrong messenger.

Think about this. If Obama wins he is inheriting an economy about to go over the fiscal cliff. The Middle East is on fire. World War III could easily start on his watch. The credit card is maxed out. He has a hostile Congress. There is every indication that his next 4 years will be difficult if not a complete disaster.

And if Obama goes down, he will take Liberalism and Keynesian Economics with him. Hillary will have NO CHANCE in 2016.

So Liberals, if you truly believe Romney will fail, VOTE FOR HIM! Leave him with this mess. After 4 years of complete disaster Hillary will easily win in 2016 and you will take the House and Senate too.

Liberals, sacrifice the Obama Presidency to save you message!

[A_Moderate]

Your argument is not even plausible. You forget the public has a very short attention span. People have already forgotten where America was in 2008 when Obama took over from Bush. Then people expected Obama to completely fix the train wreck left by the Republicans in only four (4) years????

I am a moderate and I don't want ANYONE to fail. If Romney is elected, I hope he can continue to grow the economy back from where it was in 2008. The problem with modern politics is some sore losers will want the other party to fail even if it takes the country down. That's not right.

[vet97]

Mitch....go take a seat somewhere and leave us alone so we can get some work done!

[paul_1149]

Romney is a born uniter. If you can't see that you have been listening to "mainstream" media, the PR arm of the Democrat Party, too much. Our divisions are deep, but our problems are great. Someone like Romney can come in and unite us in practical solutions to those problems, as we put rigid ideology aside.

Obama's pretensions to unity were always false, right from his 2004 convention speech. Axelrod very adeptly sold the American people a mirage, again with the help of the media, but mirages cannot govern, as we have seen. Why else does obama hide his college records and the truth about his past associations so completely? He is the greatest fraud perpetrated on this nation in all its history.

[vet97]

Paul...ask your doctor to change your meds...they're out of wack!

[Duh_humbug]

Romney should be very successful working with Democrats and Republicans. He's not out to fundamentally change the United States and hope the Americans in it don't mind.
CBS and other mainstream media gauge success of the government in how much legislation is passed. Romney understands that the best antidote for our economy right now is for the government to get smaller and get out of the way.

[vet97]

Duh_Humbug...the government did get out the way when stupid was in the whitehouse...that's how we got in to this major mess to begin with...we're finally seeing some day light and you want to go back to December of 2008....I think you might need a new "hard drive" buddy!