Orville_third
Banned
Of course, everyone forgets that Cap and Trade (for Sulfur Dioxide) was signed into law by Bush. George H. W. Bush.
Decision Points: The Presidency of Al Gore
- Thread starter hcallega
- Start date
IndeedNot really; we just admire silently.
I just have no idea about what would McCain do, so i don't even have opinions to offer.
Me too. Kinda wish hcallega had Bush run for reelection in 2002, only to be defeated by a Democrat due to scandal. That prevents Texas's unfortunate mid-decade redistricting fiasco and the resulting Supreme Court decision which basically said that gerrymandering was okay. Wonder what the Jack Abramoff scandal will be like ITTL? Like I said, since Abramoff helped destroy McCain's campaign in South Carolina in 2000, karma's gonna come back with a vengeance and bite Jack in the ass. Ouch. Your thoughts?
Another thing, I think Senator Harkin should've been reelected, like IOTL, since I believe that Wellstone's survival and reelection can be balanced out by John Thune's defeat of Tim Johnson in South Dakota, just like how Max Cleland's reelection ITTL is balanced out by Mary Landrieu's defeat in Louisiana. If that can be changed, then the Senate balance, as of 2005, should be 51-48-1.
Update on the timeline:
First off, I want to thank everyone who's been a reader or fan of this timeline. I'm sure that many of you disagree with some of its twists and turns, but it's that kind of critical feedback that's made this project what it is today. This timeline wouldn't be active today if not for you.
If it sounds like this is the obituary of Decision Points, don't fear. I'm not done with this project, not at all. But I've always been fan of being frank and open with my readers. You're just as big a part of the creative process as I am. So here's the deal: right now I'm in the midst of a 50-page thesis for school, interning in Congress, and trying to enjoy being a young person in one of America's great cities. What does that mean for this timeline?: Well, it means updates won't be as frequent and probably won't be quite as detailed. Also, I don't plan on taking Decision Points past the 2012 elections. That's a logical end-note a timeline whose purpose has always been about a different 2000s.
What do I ask of you, the readers?: Patience. This project isn't dead, but it's not quite as alive as it once was. Expect erratic posting schedules: some weeks may have one or two posts, others might have none. If you see me posting on other threads, don't think that I'm ignoring you. I'll do what I can, when I can. And I hope that it's up to snuff!
So once again, thank you all for your continued interest in this project.
First off, I want to thank everyone who's been a reader or fan of this timeline. I'm sure that many of you disagree with some of its twists and turns, but it's that kind of critical feedback that's made this project what it is today. This timeline wouldn't be active today if not for you.
If it sounds like this is the obituary of Decision Points, don't fear. I'm not done with this project, not at all. But I've always been fan of being frank and open with my readers. You're just as big a part of the creative process as I am. So here's the deal: right now I'm in the midst of a 50-page thesis for school, interning in Congress, and trying to enjoy being a young person in one of America's great cities. What does that mean for this timeline?: Well, it means updates won't be as frequent and probably won't be quite as detailed. Also, I don't plan on taking Decision Points past the 2012 elections. That's a logical end-note a timeline whose purpose has always been about a different 2000s.
What do I ask of you, the readers?: Patience. This project isn't dead, but it's not quite as alive as it once was. Expect erratic posting schedules: some weeks may have one or two posts, others might have none. If you see me posting on other threads, don't think that I'm ignoring you. I'll do what I can, when I can. And I hope that it's up to snuff!
So once again, thank you all for your continued interest in this project.
I believe that 2012 is a logical end date for this TL. After all, to quote a famous prime minister, "Nothing lasts forever; even the longest, the most glittering reign must come to an end someday." Anything I can do to help you out with this TL, please let me know.
Last edited:
Hey, I'm not crazy. I've got a life outside this forum and I can be patient. Speaking of events coming in 2005, perhaps NYC gets the 2012 Olympics ITTL, like in "Reporting for Duty." If it does, I have a great idea involving the construction of a new Madison Square Garden east of the Farley Post Office in New York for the Olympics, allowing for the demolition of the existing Garden and station (Save for the tracks. This will allow for the construction of a New Pennsylvania Station in conjunction with the renovation of the Farley Post Office into Moynihan Station, which will be opened by July 2012 ITTL. Citi Field is built and designed to expand into a temporary Olympic Stadium ITTL, instead of building West Side Stadium.
Last edited:
Hello all. So I've decided to move formats towards year-by-year summaries instead of narrative chapters. This means more information all at once, though a little less storytelling. I hope you enjoy it!
On January 20, 2005, John S. McCain III was officially sworn in as President of the United States. As the first Republican President since George H.W. Bush left office in 1993, McCain was inundated with calls from the right for decisive, conservative, action. But the bipartisan pragmatist sitting in the Oval Office was in no mood to push for a radical agenda. Instead, he sought to forge ahead with his unique brand of Republicanism at home, and renewed focus on strength abroad. Despite conservative disappointment that John McCain was not the second coming of Ronald Reagan, there was still a unique optimism in the air as 2005 began. The global economy was strong, technological innovations continued to be developed at a breakneck pace, and no superpower conflicts loomed on the horizon.
The first focus of the new Administration and of the Republican Congress was to pass a long awaited tax cut package. Trouble started brewing from the very beginning. Candidate McCain had largely endorsed the Republican proposal to cut tax rates for all Americans, especially the wealthiest, and to extend a bevy of tax incentives. However, he did not lay out specific revenue or rate targets. Privately, McCain was far more reluctant to embrace such large cuts. He was an old-school budget hawk in the mold of Bob Dole and President Bush, not a supply-sider like Grover Norquist. Unfortunately for the President, most members of the Republican caucus subscribed to the theory that the lower the rates, the better. But short of threatening to veto the tax cut, there was little the President could do. A trillion dollar package of cuts passed the House in March, but passage in the Senate was far less certain. Minority Leader Tom Daschle threatened to filibuster the Republican plan, putting forward a $500 billion tax cut as an alternative. Republicans flatly rejected that plan and pushed through their version via the reconciliation process, limiting the cuts to ten years. The President signed the tax-cut into law in June without reluctance. While he did not support the scope of the reductions in personal tax rates, McCain strongly supported the extension of tax credits for research, child care, and other areas.
While the majority of the President’s economic agenda passed Congress in the winter and spring, several big issues still remained on the backburner. One of those was energy policy. Gas prices had steadily climbed in previous years, and McCain had campaigned heavily for an “all-of-the above” energy strategy in 2004. His proposal included expanding nuclear power, granting more leases for oil and natural gas, and creating a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions. These proposals were popular with the American people and many Democrats, but ran head-first into Republican opposition to over-regulation. After heated internal debate with Congressional leadership, the President agreed to support a more modest proposal. This plan would subsidize all forms of energy development, grant more leases for fossil fuel production, and open up the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. The plan passed the House with largely bipartisan support, while a scaled back version passed the Senate without the controversial ANWR provision. The President, despite frustration with Congress, signed the legislation into law in October.
Evaluating John McCain’s first year in office from a legislative standpoint is complicated. While he was able to get most of his agenda passed by Congress, the President was repeatedly forced to compromise on major elements of bills. More importantly, the power dynamic with Congress was troublesome for the former Senator. The House Republican leadership effectively took control of the party’s agenda, often forcing the White House to comply with their demands. This was never more apparent than with the appropriations bills that were crammed with pork barrel spending. Several years of continuing resolutions that locked in spending had frustrated GOP legislators. Now they were free to support their local projects. Once again, McCain was forced to differ to his erstwhile allies on the Hill, lest he lose political capital on far more important projects.
One of those important issues was filling two Supreme Court vacancies that opened in 2005. The first was the unforeseen retirement of Justice Sandra Day O’Conner. Her role as the first female Supreme Court justice made finding a replacement difficult. Many on the right urged the choice or a staunch conservative, while those on the left never missed an opportunity to remind the public that the choice of a woman was necessary to preserve the gender balance on the bench. Ultimately, the President fulfilled both criteria in his selection of Court of Appeals Judge Edith Jones. A Reagan appointee, Jones drew tough criticism from Democrats for her opposition to Roe v. Wade and tougher gun laws. But Republicans in Congress rallied behind their President’s nominee, and were able to push her through after a tough confirmation process. A more unfortunate opening occurred in September with the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist. This time, McCain choice a more moderate nominee to become the next head of the High Court. Emilio Garza, a Bush Appointee, was nominated shortly after Rehnquist’s death and was confirmed with much more bipartisan support than Jones. He became the first Hispanic Chief Justice, an honor that he referred to as “affirmation that the American Dream is still alive.” The role of the courts was particularly important in 2005 when the issue of judicial restraint came into play in Florida. Teri Schiavo, a brain damaged woman, had been kept alive by feeding tube for 15 years. Her husband sought legal action to remove the tube and let her die, while her parents fought against him. The case deeply polarized the country, and after a Florida Court ruled that her husband was in the right, Congress acted to pass legislation federalizing the case. However, federal courts refused to the petition from Schiavo’s parents, the tube was removed, and she passed away at the end of March.
There were two turning points in 2005 that ended President John McCain’s already tenuous honeymoon with the American people and Congress. The first was a disaster few saw coming, but had been waiting to happen for years. On Monday, August 29, Hurricane Katrina slammed into South Louisiana and Mississippi. Two days earlier, Governors Bobby Jindal and Haley Barbour declared States of Emergency and began making preparations for what appeared to be a horrifically powerful storm. In New Orleans, Mayor Ray Nagin hesitated to initiate a mandatory evacuation until the day before the Katrina made landfall. That hesitation arguably cost the lives of many residents of the Crescent City. The Administration’s reaction was initially reserved. The President deferred authority to the state governors, choosing a more reactive than proactive role. Nevertheless, McCain declared a Louisiana and Mississippi disaster areas before the storm hit and promised to give “all we’ve got” to the states in the aftermath. The next few days were hellish for the residents of the Gulf Coast. Within hours of landfall, the levees in New Orleans and St. Bernard Parrish were breeched. Millions of gallons of water flowed into the area, destroying houses, businesses, and roads. Investigations would later show a degree of complacency on the part of the Army Corps of Engineers and the Orleans Levee Board. Both organizations failed to properly design and maintain the levees, especially those protecting residential areas.
President McCain acted swiftly in the follow-up to the storm. David Paulison, the head of FEMA, was given command of the cleanup and recovery efforts. He reached Louisiana within 24 hours of the storm making landfall and began coordinating operations with Governor Jindal and Mayor Nagin. Federal troops began arriving in New Orleans several days after the storm, significantly curbing the looting and violence that was taking place throughout the city. General Russell Honore gained significant praise for his actions in establishing order in the city. A second crisis was developing in the Louisiana Super Dome, where thousands of residents had taken cover during the storm. They lacked proper sanitation, food, and medical assistance for several days before the Red Cross was permitted to enter New Orleans. Helping improve relief services was the President’s decision to deputize many state and local forces so as to streamline chain-of-command. McCain arrived in New Orleans on Thursday, September 1, to oversee the recovery efforts in the area. He toured several damaged areas before leaving to visit Biloxi, Mississippi. That town was arguably the hardest hit of any in the area. The President met with local government leaders and held a press conference in the town stating “What we’re witnessing is a tragedy of epic proportions. But I promise you all this: the federal government will do everything in its power to help recover and rebuild.”
Public reaction to the federal government’s response to Katrina was mixed, but generally positive. FEMA Director David Paulison was given particular credit for his rapid response and forward planning once it became clear that the storm was heading towards New Orleans. Also receiving credit was General Honore for taking control of the situation on the ground in an effective and timely manner. The President, while having little to do with the on-the-ground operations, was seen as effectively delegating authority to competent individuals and providing them with the necessary support to carry out their actions. Praise for local officials was less unanimous. Mayor Nagin bore the brunt of the criticism for failing to provide adequate time to evacuate New Orleans, and for holding a bevy of press conferences and interviews in the immediate aftermath of the hurricane. Governor Jindal received greater support, though his lack of communication with the Mayor, due in large part to personal clashes during their shared tenures, was seen as slowing down rescue and relief efforts. Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi was generally seen as effectively responding to the storm in his state. Finally, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Orleans Parish Levee Board were both seen as responsible for faulty levees that were neither properly built nor maintained.
The long-term impacts of Hurricane Katrina were not fully felt in 2005, but they effectively defined the President’s first year in office. A more politically jarring event happened later in the fall. At the end of September, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was indicted by a Texas Grand Jury for conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws and money laundering. These charges stemmed from DeLay’s use of corporate funds, donated to his political action committee, in state legislative races. This practice was banned under Texas law and was punishable by jail time. DeLay had previously been reprimanded by the House Ethics Committee for overstepping the boundaries of his office and actively engaging in questionable fundraising and lobbying activities. The combination of these past missteps and the current charges forced the Majority Leader to resign. His decision was applauded by the White House, though President McCain was still quick to chide DeLay for “abusing the power of his office for personal political gain.” As a strong anti-corruption voice, the President was affected little by DeLay’s resignation, though the Republican Party in Congress lost considerable support. Roy Blunt, formerly the Majority Whip, was elected Majority Leader in early 2006. Congress John Shadegg of Arizona took over as Whip. Further corruption scandals would harm the Republican Party in 2005. Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham was forced to resign in November after admitting to receiving several million dollars in bribes for government contracts. Cunningham personified the corruption in Washington between lobbyists and their allies in Congress. But it was the final scandal that truly shook Congress to the core. Jack Abramoff, a prominent lobbyist for Native American tribes, had been under investigation for over a year on charges of corruption and bribery. Abramoff, working with Tom DeLay and Christian Right leader Ralph Reed, effectively manipulated the tribes into paying immense sums of money to lobby on their behalf. The corruption ran deep, as Abramoff’s ‘pay-to-play’ tactics included funding everything from overseas trips with DeLay’s family to bankrolling anti-gambling campaigns to limit competition with the tribal casinos. Investigations into Abramoff began in 2004, initiated by then-Senator McCain. In the fall of 2005, Abramoff was indicted on charges and it soon became clear that his ties to DeLay and Congressman Bob Ney ran particularly deep. Ney, a rising star in Congress, resigned in December under disgrace. With his party reeling under the brunt of these scandals, McCain proposed sweeping lobbying reforms in early 2006.
While domestic policy consumed much of 2005, arguably the biggest focus of the new President was on foreign policy. The central theme to John McCain’s campaign was that America needed a tougher approach to fighting terrorism, including challenging countries that supported terrorism. On the top of that list was Iraq. Saddam Hussein had been a thorn in the side of the United States for years. His invasion of Kuwait and the ensuing Gulf War had greatly weakened Iraq and the Ba’athist regime, but it had not toppled even after years of tough sanctions and occasional air strikes. McCain was deeply critical of the Gore Administration’s lack of aggressive action against Iraq, but unlike some of his neoconservative allies, was not committed to regime change for the sake of ideological goals. Instead, he was deeply concerned that Hussein was supporting al-Qaeda and developing weapons of mass destruction. Some of the President’s first meetings with his cabinet were devoted to discussing the threat Iraq posed to the west, and whether or not military action should be taken against the country. The consensus of the intelligence community was that Hussein could pose a threat to the stability of the Middle East, but that there was no evidence he was pursuing WMD or supporting al-Qaeda. Secretary of State Colin Powell was adamant that toppling Hussein’s regime without a clear casus belli would erode America’s diplomatic standing in the world, while also offsetting the balance between Iraq and Iran and shifting resources away from the war on terror. With the facts on the table, President McCain decided against any military action against Iraq for the time being.
The frontline of America’s foreign policy reorientation was Afghanistan. The President was determined to change the course of the seemingly endless and objectiveless conflict. American forces successfully aided the Northern Alliance and other various warlords in defeating the Taliban and pushing al-Qaeda out of the country. But after that initial victory, the international mission became somewhat listless. Soldiers were put to work building bridges and schools, training Afghan soldiers, and patrolling the streets of cities and towns with difficult to pronounce names. There was no obvious end goal, no clear point at which America could declare victory. Making matters worse, the Taliban had regrouped in the mountains of Pakistan and began to launch an insurgency across the border. Bombings and drive-byes had become increasingly frequent, and the Afghan military proved to be an unreliable amalgamation of various tribes and ethnic groups, many of whom had little sympathy for their American advisors. McCain was determined to right the ship in Afghanistan and firmly secure that country as a bastion of hope in the Muslim world. His first step was announcing a major surge of 30,000 additional soldiers. The President announced this decision during his first address to Congress, claiming that it was necessary to defeat the Taliban and properly stabilize the country. Despite opposition from many liberals, the surge went into effect in a timely manner and was supported by the majority of both parties in Congress. The second step in the McCain plan was to change the focus of the American mission from nation-building to waging war. While GIs still helped develop infrastructure and train the Afghan military, their focus was now on counter-insurgency missions. Finally, the role of Special Forces and the CIA was stepped up, especially in conjunction with the many Afghan militias who proved to be much more effective than the standing army. Though this policy only began to take effect in the summer of 2005, the effects were noticeable. Positive changes included greater stability in many provinces, but on the downside, there was increasing number of casualties and a growing resentment of the American mission by many Pashtuns, who were already skeptical of the government and President Massoud. 2006 would prove to be the year in which the shift in Afghanistan’s success would be determined.
Elsewhere in the world, terrorism and conflict continued to grow. In Lebanon, the death of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri sparked a popular revolution against Syrian occupation of the country. Anti-Syrian protestors, supported by Israel and the United States, generated enough power to force the pro-Syrian government to step down. Meanwhile, international pressure forced Syria to slowly redeploy and leave Lebanon after a 29 year occupation. An anti-Syrian government was elected in the summer, and an investigation into Hariri’s assassination presented convincing evidence that the Syrian intelligence agency was responsible for his death. To the South, in Israel, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon announced the unilateral withdrawal of settlers from the Gaza Strip in August. This decision represented a major improvement in the quality of life for Palestinians living in the region, but coincided with a renewed effort by Israel to settle the West Bank. Sharon’s decision was praised by President McCain, who developed a strong relationship with his fellow veteran. The withdrawal also had major political implications in Israel, as Sharon broke with the Likud Party to found the more moderate Kadima Party. The Labour Party nominated the veteran Shimon Peres to lead it in the 2006 elections, while Likud chose the hawkish Binyamin Netanyahu. Sharon was expected to head Kadima, but suffered a debilitating stroke in January of 2006. Ehud Olmert was chosen to replace him.
The United Kingdom was the sight of significant news in 2005. The May parliamentary elections pitted popular Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair against Conservative Party leader Michael Howard and Charles Kennedy, leader of the Liberal Democrats. The election was largely a reflection of New Labour’s policies to reform British government and grow the economy. Blair and his party were quite popular with the majority of voters, though many traditional Tory supporters in South England began to drift back towards their old home. Michael Howard, leader of the Conservatives, succeeded the more moderate Kenneth Clarke, who was defeated after publically endorsing the European Constitution and supporting greater continental integration. Howard attempted to straddle the two poles of the Conservative Party: ‘One-Nation’ Tories and Thatcherites. After the defeats of 1997 and 2001, the ‘One-Nation’ branch that had once led the party was beginning to gain support among the party base. However, Howard still had to appease the sworn supporters of limited government and British nationalism. He was somewhat successful, leading his party to a 19-seat gain in the elections. Labour lost a dozen seats, nowhere near enough to lose control over the government. The Liberal Democrats were the real losers in the election, as they lost seven MPs. The Lib Dem message was Labour-lite on the economy, and very pro-civil liberties. However, they failed to appeal to enough voters outside of their base, and lost their seats primarily to the more effectively anti-Blair Conservatives. Labour’s victory ensured another five years for Tony Blair and his party, which at least maintained the status quo for foreign relations with the United States. President McCain had a very different background than Blair, and the two had little in common. Nonetheless, there was a mutual understanding that a strong, united front, was necessary to prevail in the war on terror.
On July 7th, that war came to home for Great Britain. Three suicide bombings occurred that day, one on the underground and two on double-decker busses in the center of London. These bombings coincided with President McCain’s trip to Afghanistan and elicited a strong reaction. Flying to London, McCain held a joint press conference with his British counterpart. Together they reiterated their strong support for tough action to stop terrorism and a shared commitment to each other’s security. President McCain emotionally recounted the British response to 9/11, saying “Now I was in the United States Senate when our nation was attacked by evildoers, terrorists. I can remember the truly incredible support we received from the United Kingdom and Mr. Blair. And I promise to offer that same support to the people and government of this great nation.”
2005 was a turbulent year at home and abroad. In President McCain’s first year in office, he accomplished a great deal. A new era of Republicanism infused Washington, but it was not a return of the Contract with America or Ronald Reagan. The new President was a practical and pragmatic leader, more interested with accomplishing straightforward goals than embarking on an ideological crusade. Internationally, McCain doubled down in Afghanistan and recommitted to the war on terror. His victories in that regard had yet to be proven. The fall of 2005 brought with it new challenges. Hurricane Katrina and the exposure of significant corruption among Republicans in Congress threatened to ruin the President, but his responses to these crises told a great deal about his character. John McCain was not going to run from problems. He would take them head on. The next three years of his presidency would test how long he could do it.
2005
The first focus of the new Administration and of the Republican Congress was to pass a long awaited tax cut package. Trouble started brewing from the very beginning. Candidate McCain had largely endorsed the Republican proposal to cut tax rates for all Americans, especially the wealthiest, and to extend a bevy of tax incentives. However, he did not lay out specific revenue or rate targets. Privately, McCain was far more reluctant to embrace such large cuts. He was an old-school budget hawk in the mold of Bob Dole and President Bush, not a supply-sider like Grover Norquist. Unfortunately for the President, most members of the Republican caucus subscribed to the theory that the lower the rates, the better. But short of threatening to veto the tax cut, there was little the President could do. A trillion dollar package of cuts passed the House in March, but passage in the Senate was far less certain. Minority Leader Tom Daschle threatened to filibuster the Republican plan, putting forward a $500 billion tax cut as an alternative. Republicans flatly rejected that plan and pushed through their version via the reconciliation process, limiting the cuts to ten years. The President signed the tax-cut into law in June without reluctance. While he did not support the scope of the reductions in personal tax rates, McCain strongly supported the extension of tax credits for research, child care, and other areas.
While the majority of the President’s economic agenda passed Congress in the winter and spring, several big issues still remained on the backburner. One of those was energy policy. Gas prices had steadily climbed in previous years, and McCain had campaigned heavily for an “all-of-the above” energy strategy in 2004. His proposal included expanding nuclear power, granting more leases for oil and natural gas, and creating a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions. These proposals were popular with the American people and many Democrats, but ran head-first into Republican opposition to over-regulation. After heated internal debate with Congressional leadership, the President agreed to support a more modest proposal. This plan would subsidize all forms of energy development, grant more leases for fossil fuel production, and open up the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. The plan passed the House with largely bipartisan support, while a scaled back version passed the Senate without the controversial ANWR provision. The President, despite frustration with Congress, signed the legislation into law in October.
Evaluating John McCain’s first year in office from a legislative standpoint is complicated. While he was able to get most of his agenda passed by Congress, the President was repeatedly forced to compromise on major elements of bills. More importantly, the power dynamic with Congress was troublesome for the former Senator. The House Republican leadership effectively took control of the party’s agenda, often forcing the White House to comply with their demands. This was never more apparent than with the appropriations bills that were crammed with pork barrel spending. Several years of continuing resolutions that locked in spending had frustrated GOP legislators. Now they were free to support their local projects. Once again, McCain was forced to differ to his erstwhile allies on the Hill, lest he lose political capital on far more important projects.
One of those important issues was filling two Supreme Court vacancies that opened in 2005. The first was the unforeseen retirement of Justice Sandra Day O’Conner. Her role as the first female Supreme Court justice made finding a replacement difficult. Many on the right urged the choice or a staunch conservative, while those on the left never missed an opportunity to remind the public that the choice of a woman was necessary to preserve the gender balance on the bench. Ultimately, the President fulfilled both criteria in his selection of Court of Appeals Judge Edith Jones. A Reagan appointee, Jones drew tough criticism from Democrats for her opposition to Roe v. Wade and tougher gun laws. But Republicans in Congress rallied behind their President’s nominee, and were able to push her through after a tough confirmation process. A more unfortunate opening occurred in September with the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist. This time, McCain choice a more moderate nominee to become the next head of the High Court. Emilio Garza, a Bush Appointee, was nominated shortly after Rehnquist’s death and was confirmed with much more bipartisan support than Jones. He became the first Hispanic Chief Justice, an honor that he referred to as “affirmation that the American Dream is still alive.” The role of the courts was particularly important in 2005 when the issue of judicial restraint came into play in Florida. Teri Schiavo, a brain damaged woman, had been kept alive by feeding tube for 15 years. Her husband sought legal action to remove the tube and let her die, while her parents fought against him. The case deeply polarized the country, and after a Florida Court ruled that her husband was in the right, Congress acted to pass legislation federalizing the case. However, federal courts refused to the petition from Schiavo’s parents, the tube was removed, and she passed away at the end of March.
There were two turning points in 2005 that ended President John McCain’s already tenuous honeymoon with the American people and Congress. The first was a disaster few saw coming, but had been waiting to happen for years. On Monday, August 29, Hurricane Katrina slammed into South Louisiana and Mississippi. Two days earlier, Governors Bobby Jindal and Haley Barbour declared States of Emergency and began making preparations for what appeared to be a horrifically powerful storm. In New Orleans, Mayor Ray Nagin hesitated to initiate a mandatory evacuation until the day before the Katrina made landfall. That hesitation arguably cost the lives of many residents of the Crescent City. The Administration’s reaction was initially reserved. The President deferred authority to the state governors, choosing a more reactive than proactive role. Nevertheless, McCain declared a Louisiana and Mississippi disaster areas before the storm hit and promised to give “all we’ve got” to the states in the aftermath. The next few days were hellish for the residents of the Gulf Coast. Within hours of landfall, the levees in New Orleans and St. Bernard Parrish were breeched. Millions of gallons of water flowed into the area, destroying houses, businesses, and roads. Investigations would later show a degree of complacency on the part of the Army Corps of Engineers and the Orleans Levee Board. Both organizations failed to properly design and maintain the levees, especially those protecting residential areas.
President McCain acted swiftly in the follow-up to the storm. David Paulison, the head of FEMA, was given command of the cleanup and recovery efforts. He reached Louisiana within 24 hours of the storm making landfall and began coordinating operations with Governor Jindal and Mayor Nagin. Federal troops began arriving in New Orleans several days after the storm, significantly curbing the looting and violence that was taking place throughout the city. General Russell Honore gained significant praise for his actions in establishing order in the city. A second crisis was developing in the Louisiana Super Dome, where thousands of residents had taken cover during the storm. They lacked proper sanitation, food, and medical assistance for several days before the Red Cross was permitted to enter New Orleans. Helping improve relief services was the President’s decision to deputize many state and local forces so as to streamline chain-of-command. McCain arrived in New Orleans on Thursday, September 1, to oversee the recovery efforts in the area. He toured several damaged areas before leaving to visit Biloxi, Mississippi. That town was arguably the hardest hit of any in the area. The President met with local government leaders and held a press conference in the town stating “What we’re witnessing is a tragedy of epic proportions. But I promise you all this: the federal government will do everything in its power to help recover and rebuild.”
Public reaction to the federal government’s response to Katrina was mixed, but generally positive. FEMA Director David Paulison was given particular credit for his rapid response and forward planning once it became clear that the storm was heading towards New Orleans. Also receiving credit was General Honore for taking control of the situation on the ground in an effective and timely manner. The President, while having little to do with the on-the-ground operations, was seen as effectively delegating authority to competent individuals and providing them with the necessary support to carry out their actions. Praise for local officials was less unanimous. Mayor Nagin bore the brunt of the criticism for failing to provide adequate time to evacuate New Orleans, and for holding a bevy of press conferences and interviews in the immediate aftermath of the hurricane. Governor Jindal received greater support, though his lack of communication with the Mayor, due in large part to personal clashes during their shared tenures, was seen as slowing down rescue and relief efforts. Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi was generally seen as effectively responding to the storm in his state. Finally, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Orleans Parish Levee Board were both seen as responsible for faulty levees that were neither properly built nor maintained.
The long-term impacts of Hurricane Katrina were not fully felt in 2005, but they effectively defined the President’s first year in office. A more politically jarring event happened later in the fall. At the end of September, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was indicted by a Texas Grand Jury for conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws and money laundering. These charges stemmed from DeLay’s use of corporate funds, donated to his political action committee, in state legislative races. This practice was banned under Texas law and was punishable by jail time. DeLay had previously been reprimanded by the House Ethics Committee for overstepping the boundaries of his office and actively engaging in questionable fundraising and lobbying activities. The combination of these past missteps and the current charges forced the Majority Leader to resign. His decision was applauded by the White House, though President McCain was still quick to chide DeLay for “abusing the power of his office for personal political gain.” As a strong anti-corruption voice, the President was affected little by DeLay’s resignation, though the Republican Party in Congress lost considerable support. Roy Blunt, formerly the Majority Whip, was elected Majority Leader in early 2006. Congress John Shadegg of Arizona took over as Whip. Further corruption scandals would harm the Republican Party in 2005. Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham was forced to resign in November after admitting to receiving several million dollars in bribes for government contracts. Cunningham personified the corruption in Washington between lobbyists and their allies in Congress. But it was the final scandal that truly shook Congress to the core. Jack Abramoff, a prominent lobbyist for Native American tribes, had been under investigation for over a year on charges of corruption and bribery. Abramoff, working with Tom DeLay and Christian Right leader Ralph Reed, effectively manipulated the tribes into paying immense sums of money to lobby on their behalf. The corruption ran deep, as Abramoff’s ‘pay-to-play’ tactics included funding everything from overseas trips with DeLay’s family to bankrolling anti-gambling campaigns to limit competition with the tribal casinos. Investigations into Abramoff began in 2004, initiated by then-Senator McCain. In the fall of 2005, Abramoff was indicted on charges and it soon became clear that his ties to DeLay and Congressman Bob Ney ran particularly deep. Ney, a rising star in Congress, resigned in December under disgrace. With his party reeling under the brunt of these scandals, McCain proposed sweeping lobbying reforms in early 2006.
While domestic policy consumed much of 2005, arguably the biggest focus of the new President was on foreign policy. The central theme to John McCain’s campaign was that America needed a tougher approach to fighting terrorism, including challenging countries that supported terrorism. On the top of that list was Iraq. Saddam Hussein had been a thorn in the side of the United States for years. His invasion of Kuwait and the ensuing Gulf War had greatly weakened Iraq and the Ba’athist regime, but it had not toppled even after years of tough sanctions and occasional air strikes. McCain was deeply critical of the Gore Administration’s lack of aggressive action against Iraq, but unlike some of his neoconservative allies, was not committed to regime change for the sake of ideological goals. Instead, he was deeply concerned that Hussein was supporting al-Qaeda and developing weapons of mass destruction. Some of the President’s first meetings with his cabinet were devoted to discussing the threat Iraq posed to the west, and whether or not military action should be taken against the country. The consensus of the intelligence community was that Hussein could pose a threat to the stability of the Middle East, but that there was no evidence he was pursuing WMD or supporting al-Qaeda. Secretary of State Colin Powell was adamant that toppling Hussein’s regime without a clear casus belli would erode America’s diplomatic standing in the world, while also offsetting the balance between Iraq and Iran and shifting resources away from the war on terror. With the facts on the table, President McCain decided against any military action against Iraq for the time being.
The frontline of America’s foreign policy reorientation was Afghanistan. The President was determined to change the course of the seemingly endless and objectiveless conflict. American forces successfully aided the Northern Alliance and other various warlords in defeating the Taliban and pushing al-Qaeda out of the country. But after that initial victory, the international mission became somewhat listless. Soldiers were put to work building bridges and schools, training Afghan soldiers, and patrolling the streets of cities and towns with difficult to pronounce names. There was no obvious end goal, no clear point at which America could declare victory. Making matters worse, the Taliban had regrouped in the mountains of Pakistan and began to launch an insurgency across the border. Bombings and drive-byes had become increasingly frequent, and the Afghan military proved to be an unreliable amalgamation of various tribes and ethnic groups, many of whom had little sympathy for their American advisors. McCain was determined to right the ship in Afghanistan and firmly secure that country as a bastion of hope in the Muslim world. His first step was announcing a major surge of 30,000 additional soldiers. The President announced this decision during his first address to Congress, claiming that it was necessary to defeat the Taliban and properly stabilize the country. Despite opposition from many liberals, the surge went into effect in a timely manner and was supported by the majority of both parties in Congress. The second step in the McCain plan was to change the focus of the American mission from nation-building to waging war. While GIs still helped develop infrastructure and train the Afghan military, their focus was now on counter-insurgency missions. Finally, the role of Special Forces and the CIA was stepped up, especially in conjunction with the many Afghan militias who proved to be much more effective than the standing army. Though this policy only began to take effect in the summer of 2005, the effects were noticeable. Positive changes included greater stability in many provinces, but on the downside, there was increasing number of casualties and a growing resentment of the American mission by many Pashtuns, who were already skeptical of the government and President Massoud. 2006 would prove to be the year in which the shift in Afghanistan’s success would be determined.
Elsewhere in the world, terrorism and conflict continued to grow. In Lebanon, the death of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri sparked a popular revolution against Syrian occupation of the country. Anti-Syrian protestors, supported by Israel and the United States, generated enough power to force the pro-Syrian government to step down. Meanwhile, international pressure forced Syria to slowly redeploy and leave Lebanon after a 29 year occupation. An anti-Syrian government was elected in the summer, and an investigation into Hariri’s assassination presented convincing evidence that the Syrian intelligence agency was responsible for his death. To the South, in Israel, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon announced the unilateral withdrawal of settlers from the Gaza Strip in August. This decision represented a major improvement in the quality of life for Palestinians living in the region, but coincided with a renewed effort by Israel to settle the West Bank. Sharon’s decision was praised by President McCain, who developed a strong relationship with his fellow veteran. The withdrawal also had major political implications in Israel, as Sharon broke with the Likud Party to found the more moderate Kadima Party. The Labour Party nominated the veteran Shimon Peres to lead it in the 2006 elections, while Likud chose the hawkish Binyamin Netanyahu. Sharon was expected to head Kadima, but suffered a debilitating stroke in January of 2006. Ehud Olmert was chosen to replace him.
The United Kingdom was the sight of significant news in 2005. The May parliamentary elections pitted popular Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair against Conservative Party leader Michael Howard and Charles Kennedy, leader of the Liberal Democrats. The election was largely a reflection of New Labour’s policies to reform British government and grow the economy. Blair and his party were quite popular with the majority of voters, though many traditional Tory supporters in South England began to drift back towards their old home. Michael Howard, leader of the Conservatives, succeeded the more moderate Kenneth Clarke, who was defeated after publically endorsing the European Constitution and supporting greater continental integration. Howard attempted to straddle the two poles of the Conservative Party: ‘One-Nation’ Tories and Thatcherites. After the defeats of 1997 and 2001, the ‘One-Nation’ branch that had once led the party was beginning to gain support among the party base. However, Howard still had to appease the sworn supporters of limited government and British nationalism. He was somewhat successful, leading his party to a 19-seat gain in the elections. Labour lost a dozen seats, nowhere near enough to lose control over the government. The Liberal Democrats were the real losers in the election, as they lost seven MPs. The Lib Dem message was Labour-lite on the economy, and very pro-civil liberties. However, they failed to appeal to enough voters outside of their base, and lost their seats primarily to the more effectively anti-Blair Conservatives. Labour’s victory ensured another five years for Tony Blair and his party, which at least maintained the status quo for foreign relations with the United States. President McCain had a very different background than Blair, and the two had little in common. Nonetheless, there was a mutual understanding that a strong, united front, was necessary to prevail in the war on terror.
On July 7th, that war came to home for Great Britain. Three suicide bombings occurred that day, one on the underground and two on double-decker busses in the center of London. These bombings coincided with President McCain’s trip to Afghanistan and elicited a strong reaction. Flying to London, McCain held a joint press conference with his British counterpart. Together they reiterated their strong support for tough action to stop terrorism and a shared commitment to each other’s security. President McCain emotionally recounted the British response to 9/11, saying “Now I was in the United States Senate when our nation was attacked by evildoers, terrorists. I can remember the truly incredible support we received from the United Kingdom and Mr. Blair. And I promise to offer that same support to the people and government of this great nation.”
2005 was a turbulent year at home and abroad. In President McCain’s first year in office, he accomplished a great deal. A new era of Republicanism infused Washington, but it was not a return of the Contract with America or Ronald Reagan. The new President was a practical and pragmatic leader, more interested with accomplishing straightforward goals than embarking on an ideological crusade. Internationally, McCain doubled down in Afghanistan and recommitted to the war on terror. His victories in that regard had yet to be proven. The fall of 2005 brought with it new challenges. Hurricane Katrina and the exposure of significant corruption among Republicans in Congress threatened to ruin the President, but his responses to these crises told a great deal about his character. John McCain was not going to run from problems. He would take them head on. The next three years of his presidency would test how long he could do it.
Nice idea. God to see Mccain's group is smarter then Bush's cabinet members were OTL.
If we were doing the old format, I think the title for the this chapter would've been appropriately named House of Cards, due to the scandals in Congress. It does seem a bit jarring to immediately go to a summary post. Perhaps the last chapter of 2005 could've been done in the old format before switching over to 2006 and the new format (Which was notably used in "Hamlet on the Hudson"). Still, something tells me that the Democrats will win control in '06.
Last edited:
John Farson
Banned
Obviously Blair's position is stronger without the Iraq War as a millstone around his neck. Interesting to see if he sticks around until 2010.
He promised during the campaign IOTL to stay for a full term. Iraq short-circuited that. Expect him to make it till 2010.
By then, he'll have served 13 years and 9 days as PM. Tony Blair will be remembered for breaking Margaret Thatcher's record of the longest-serving post-World War 2 Prime Minister, as well as being ranked as the 5th longest serving U.K. Prime Minister of all time. Sorry F.U..