|
Kandel looks forward
|
 |
December 15, 2000: 6:24 a.m. ET
What the end of the presidential election means for U.S. markets
By CNNfn Financial Editor Myron Kandel
|
NEW YORK (CNNfn) - I may be whistling in the dark, but I think the incredible circumstances leading to the election of George W. Bush, plus the split in Congress, may actually lead to more -- rather than less – progress in Washington the next four years.
I think those people who say the Democrats will concentrate on sharpening their knives for the next elections -- meaning the voting for Congress in less than two years and the presidential contest two years later -- overlook the fact that the essential nature of politics is the art of compromise.
And both sides must realize that a hard-line approach won't work. Once the animosity over the counting -- or non-counting -- of the votes in Florida dissipates and the new president takes office, I think a spirit of pragmatism will prevail.
 Both the Bush and Gore campaigns emphasized education, Social Security, health care and tax relief, and the two parties will now look for areas of agreement on those issues, once the partisan rhetoric is over. This will be a time of compromise between Congress and the White House, and that could mean real progress on a number of those key issues.
The new president obviously has no mandate from the country but his party will control both houses, albeit very narrowly. The Democratic leaders in those houses, with an eye on the 2002 elections, won't want to appear to be obstructionist. And a Bush White House will be more likely to get cooperation from the previously hard-line Republican Congressional leaders than would a Gore White House. That's my own speculation, of course, but I think it makes sense.
Wall Street generally likes the idea of gridlock in Washington, meaning no major new initiatives involving such things as spending or sweeping tax cuts. Of course, less regulation and a more sympathetic view of business, rather than labor – widely expected from a Bush administration -- is welcome as well. But Wall Street isn't America, and Main Street and suburbia do have strong feelings about what they want done.
And they do have votes, as every member of the House of Representatives and the one-third of the Senate up for re-election in less than two years well understand. And if the economy does slow to a stall -- as a small, but growing minority of economists expect -- the demand for cooperation will become more insistent.
The political junkies around the country won't soon forget the events of the last five weeks and recriminations will continue, but the rest of the nation will look more to the future than the past. And that's why I think there's hope for real progress in the next few years. (If the Democrats capture control of Congress in 2002, it will be a new ballgame, but their leaders will be cognizant of how they will be perceived in 2004.)
My view does depend largely on the approach adopted by the new administration and its allies in Congress. Will they be conciliatory or confrontational? Will George W. Bush be able to fulfill his pledge to be a healer, rather than a divider? And will the Democrats be willing to cooperate? We don't know yet. But I'm hopeful. 
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
