The View From Here . . .
By Bob Morgan, Jr.

Now that the Democrats will be in control of Congress starting January 3, the question naturally arises concerning what, if any, domestic legislation, will be passed and signed into law by President Bush during the next session.

At least at present, beyond a few relatively uncontroversial initiatives (for example, enhanced ethics rules for Congress) and issues where the GOP has decided not to fight (for example, an increase in the national minimum wage and perhaps a lowering of interest rates on student loans), the Democrats would seem to be up against it in initiating and enacting major legislation not supported, or at least acquiesced in, by the White House. The Democratic majorities (232-203 in the House and 51-49 in the Senate) are fairly narrow in themselves and very unlikely (even with some Republican support) to be able to override a presidential veto.

Certainly, the Democrats' signature issue when they last controlled Congress, national health care, would not seem to be a viable starter in the new Congress. Beyond serving as a reminder of Hillary Clinton's failed role as architect of the complicated system formulated during her husband's tenure, any national health care proposal probably lacks the necessary votes, just as it did when the Democrats last attempted to pass such legislation in 1993 and 1994.

On the tax front, Democrats likely will be able to block permanent extensions of many of the tax cuts previously enacted by the Bush Administration, but would seem unable to pass any significant measures of their own. Most likely, both parties will agree on a temporary fix of the alternative minimum tax, which was enacted in 1969 to prevent extremely wealthy individuals from avoiding tax entirely but now affects increasing numbers of middle income taxpayers. Beyond that, the outlook for major changes on the tax front looks doubtful, or at least would involve very substantial horse trading. The relatively conservative Blue Dog Democrats, principally from Southern and rural areas, would play a key role in any compromise legislation that does emerge.

The Democrats likely will have an influence on trade issues, but only in a negative way. In light of increased protectionist sentiment in Congress, principally among Democrats but including some Republicans, any new trade initiatives proposed by the Bush Administration are likely to face rough sledding.

It is something of a longshot, but one possible ray of bipartisan cooperation might be in the establishment of government matched personal accounts for workers. According to a recent article in the Boston Globe, Democratic leaders are floating a proposal called AmeriSave that provides a direct federal match of up to $1,000 to 401(k) and IRA accounts established by low and middle income workers, partly funded by reducing a current tax credit. There are obviously a number of issues to be worked out, such as any income limits and whether this government-paid match amount would discourage employer matches. Nevertheless, this proposal might relieve some of the pressure on the Social Security system through establishment of investment accounts, as desired by the Bush Administration, without expressly "privatizing" the system, something strongly opposed by the Democrats.

Still, despite the possibility of small compromises like the one on retirement accounts, this promises to be a very contentious two years in Washington, with few concrete legislative accomplishments.