Decision Points: The Presidency of Al Gore

[THE OBSERVER]

For the 2006 Midterms, think the Democrats might make gain control of the House and Senate, with the Senate being more likely since the Republican majority there is smaller than OTL (52-47-1 ITTL vs. 55-44-1 IOTL). For the Senate race in Pennsylvania, who do you think will run since Bob Casey Jr. is Governor? Or, does Casey resign his seat and run for Senate, while another Democrat (Ed Rendell?) enters the race for Governor? And what of the other Senate Races, which went to the Democrats or were close IOTL (MO, MT, OH, RI, TN, VA)? After all, it seems that when one party holds the White House, the opposition party tends to make gains in the House and Senate in the mid-terms after a Presidential Election.

 

[hcallega]

2006: Is Mac Back?​

A President’s second year in office is often more challenging than his first. The early optimism of a ‘new era of leadership’ is gone, replaced in the best cases by a steely pragmatism, and in the worst tenures by a failed struggle to regain what was lost but cannot be found. The honeymoon period is over, and a successful President must be able to shift to the new reality facing him. Al Gore struggled with that reality, and was unable to pass much of his relatively modest agenda. John McCain was on the frontlines of many legislative battles with that administration, and as President was determined to avoid such failures. His first year in office was defined by compromise; on taxes, spending, and energy. Foreign policy had brought greater clarity. McCain followed through on his campaign promise to shift American foreign policy towards a more aggressive posture. No more ‘pounding sand’ or nation-building. Now the focus was on destroying al-Qaeda and its allies wherever they hid. No nation that harbored terrorists would be safe. The troop surge in Afghanistan reflected the most public policy shift from the Gore to McCain foreign policies. But many more secretive changes were made. There was greater support for covert action by the CIA and other black-ops forces, more reliance on Special Forces operations in Pakistan and other regions, and a renewed focus on confronting terror cells outside of the Middle East. 2006 would force the President to keep up the fight against terror, and face the facts that mountings casualties and costs were a part of the picture. At home, the New Year would bring new challenges. Already strained relations with Congress grew worse, and the upcoming midterm elections forced an independent-minded President to take a more partisan tone. It was a challenging year, and it truly tested the still young Administration.

The conflict in Afghanistan took front-and-center stage in 2006. President McCain’s troop surge began to take effect, as more and more American troops entered the war-torn country. Michael DeLong, commander of the international military operation, began to fully initiate the new objectives of the war. No longer would NATO forces be on the defensive. Now they were going on the attack. Operation Mount Thrust, beginning in the spring, was the first in a series of large-scale offensives in southern Afghanistan against the renewed Taliban insurgency. Operating out of the mountainous Afghan-Pakistani border, Mullah Omar and his fighters had regrouped and rearmed after the 2002-American led invasion that ousted the Taliban. The previous presidency’s focus on rebuilding Afghanistan gave the Taliban a chance to launch a campaign of guerilla warfare, initially targeting Afghans that supported the new government, but eventually working their way up to American and coalition forces. They were aided by the continued suspicions of the Pashtun majority towards the Afghan government. While a power-sharing agreement installed former Northern Alliance Commander Ahmad Shah Massoud as President and Pashtun leader Hamid Karzai and Prime Minister, there was a great deal of tension towards the new regime. This was due in large part to fear that the northern militias remained under the control of Massoud and could be turned against the Pashtun at any time. The most flamboyant Northern commander, General Dostum, did little to assuage those fears. He governed largely independently of Kabul, but was still considered a strong ally of Massoud. These concerns helped fuel Taliban recruitment efforts in the country, providing them the necessary manpower to wage an effective guerilla war.

While American casualties remained relatively low in 2006, the new offensives increased the number of dead and wounded compared to previous years. As the spring turned to summer, there were a growing number of Congressmen and activists who saw the President’s strategy as a mistake. Chief among the critics were Congressmen Jim McGovern (D-MA) and Ron Paul (R-TX). Together they introduced legislation in the fall calling on President McCain to set a timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan. However, there plan gained little traction outside of the most fervently anti-war Democrats in the House, and was not introduced in the Senate. Regardless, the public mood was turning against the war as more and more American soldiers did not return home. This had an impact politically, as voters supported a growing number of critics of the Administration’s policies. Even more hawkish members, like Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY), had harsh words for the President’s offensive: “While it’s clear that we must finish the mission in Afghanistan, President McCain’s strategy has failed to address the underlying ethnic and political divisions in that country. We can no longer pretend that this war will be won only through combat.” A major setback for this mission came in October, when Pakistani President Pervez Musharaff made an agreement with Taliban leaders in his country allowing them govern the border region as long as they promised not to make any more incursions into Afghanistan. This was perceived as appeasement and wishful thinking by many Americans, including President McCain, but there was little that could be done. The Taliban insurgency remained a serious threat throughout 2006, and the mission in Afghanistan appeared years away from completion.

2006 brought renewed tensions with potentially enemies of America. Saddam Hussein's regime remained in power with an iron-grip, despite ongoing lobbying efforts from the Free Iraq movement in the United States. His power was predicated on military strength and ethnic divisions within Iraq that prevented unity among the numerous opposition grouop. Neo-conservatives within the United States continued to pressure the President to take aggressive action to overthrow Hussein to little avail. The McCain Administration remained focused on the war on terror, and less focused on policies of regime change. Iran, Iraq's long-time enemy, maintaned a balancing act with its rival. President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani maintained a strong military stance towards Iraq, but avoided moving towards a potentially devastating conflict. Rafsanjani defeated Mehdi Karroubi in the Presidential elections a year earlier, and maintained a generally non-confrontational attitude with the west. This was quite different than the attitude of North Korea. Kim Jong-il's totalitarian government pulled out of multi-nation talks in January and committed to developing nuclear weapons. After several missile tests, the United Nations Security Council unanimously condemened North Korea for putting the entire region at risk. President McCain was particularly adamant that the United States and the internatioal community would not tolerate aggression from the North: "Any action by North Korea interpreted as an act of war will be met with a swift rebuttal from the United States and its allies. Quite simply, Kim Jong-il must embrace the path to peace and disarmament." Due in part to this reaction, the North agreed to return to the table at the end of the year.

In Palestine, elections were held in January to choose a new government. Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip had decreased tensions between the peoples, but did not diffuse the conflict entirely. Poverty, unemployment, and deteriorating humanitarian conditions were largely blamed on the ruling Fatah Party and Israel’s control of the border. In response, voters narrowly chose Hamas to lead them. The terror organization still observed a cease-fire with Israel, but did not officially recognize the nation. While international aid organizations continued to distribute food and medical supplies, many foreign countries cut off aid to the Hamas government. This led to mass-layoffs of government employees, further worsening economic conditions. The summer brought renewed bloodshed to the region. Hamas militants killed three Israeli soldiers, leading to airstrikes knocking out much of Gaza’s already inadequate infrastructure and military incursions. Casualty figures for Palestinians continued to mount as Hamas and Fatah could not work out an effective power-sharing agreement and street-fights broke out between the two parties. By the end of 2006, the Palestinian Authority was divided. Hamas controlled Gaza, while Fatah controlled the West Bank.

March elections in Israel provided at least some stability. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon suffered a serious stroke in January, nearly killing him. Ehud Olmert was selected to lead the government in his place. Olmert and Sharon’s Kadima Party performed well in the following elections, winning 34 seats in their first election. The Labour Party, led by Shimon Peres, finished in a strong second place with 20 seats. Bibi Netanyahu’s Likud Party, now made up of the most hawkish elements of the center-right, was relegated to third place with 14 seats. The ultra-orthodox Shas Party won 11 seats, as did the largely secular Russo-centric Yisrael Beitenu. A coalition government was formed between Kadima, Labour, and Shas. Olmert remained Prime Minister while Peres was named Finance Minister. However, these results did not lead to continued peace. Besides the intensifying conflict with Hamas, Israel was pushed into war in Lebanon. In June, Hezbollah fighters launched rockets into Israel and killed several soldiers before retreating back into southern Lebanon. In response, Israel began an intense air and ground campaign that lasted over a month. With American support, Prime Minister Olmert deployed ground troops into Lebanon in retaliation to Hezbollah’s actions. Their goal was to destroy the terrorist organizations capacity to wage war against Israel. In this regard they were unsuccessful. Hezbollah was stronger and better entrenched than the IDF anticipated, and the conflict dragged on with ever mounting casualties. The end result was a ceasefire requiring Hezbollah’s disarmament and an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon. This was not entirely satisfying to either party. Israel had greatly weakened, but not destroyed, Hezbollah, while the terrorist organization remained alive but in no position to launch further offensive actions. Within the White House, there were serious divisions about the war. Prime Minister Olmert was reluctant to initiate such an aggressive response without the backing of the United States. Colin Powell and Chuck Hagel urged President McCain not to endorse a ground invasion of Lebanon. They argued it could lead to a drawn-out conflict akin to the Lebanese Civil War of the 1980s, which created a power vacuum Syria slid into. On the other side were John Bolton and Randy Scheunemann who both argued for American support for the Israeli action. They believed that Israel had to be allowed to defend itself, and opposing such action would damage America’s support in the region. Finally, McCain endorsed the invasion, due partially to the advice of his more neoconservative allies, but also a sense that breaking Hezbollah would lessen Syria’s influence in the Middle East. The result of the war did little to harm the President’s popularity in the United States. In fact, it bolstered his credentials with the Jewish population, who saw him as a strong defender of the State of Israel.

A conflict that received considerably less attention from the Administration, but was a major focus of humanitarian groups, occurred in Sudan. Darfur, a region in Sudan, became the center of a horrific genocidal conflict between the government-backed Janjaweed militia and local, non-Arab forces. The roots of this conflict stem from ethnic and geographic concerns. The people of Darfur are ethnically independent from the majority of Sudan. The Sudanese government began a practice comparable to apartheid against the regions natives, leading to the formation of the Darfur Liberation Group. The DLF and associated groups began a successful guerilla conflict against the Sudanese military, embarrassing the government in the process. In response, the Khartoum regime began supplying and supporting the Janjaweed militia. The militia groups began targeting civilians, killing tens of thousands and displaying many more. Entire villages were destroyed by the Janjaweed. The international community condemned Sudan and its president, Omar al-Bashir, but was unable to effectively counter their actions. Both China and Russia received considerable amounts of oil from Sudan, and blocked any UN action against the country. The African Union did deploy a small peacekeeping force to Darfur, but it was unable to effectively prevent the ongoing genocide. Finally, the UN Security Council approved a 20,000 man peacekeeping force, but deployment was contingent on al-Bashir’s agreement. Unsurprisingly, he refused but did agree to allow the African Union force to stay in the region. As the year came to a close, there was little hope for an effective peace agreement in Darfur. Casualties mounted, and the Sudanese government appeared just as committed to wiping out the opposition as ever.

On a more positive note, several major countries went to the polls in 2006 to choose their governments. In Canada, the Liberal Party and Prime Minister Paul Martin were dealt a serious blow. They barely retained power in 2004, leaving open the possibility for a vote of no confidence. That’s exactly what happened in the winter of 2006 after a series of corruption scandals in the Martin and Chretien governments became public. A reinvigorated Conservative Party, running on a platform of good government and family values greatly benefited from voter frustration with the Liberals, and managed to win a strong plurality with 135 seats. The Liberals lost a whopping 49 seats, winning just 84, while the social-democratic NDP and pro-Quebec sovereignty Bloc Quebecois gained three and four seats respectively. Conservative leader Stephen Harper formed a minority government and hoped to usher in a new era in Canadian politics.

There was also a changing of the guard in other countries. In Italy, former Prime Minister Romano Prodi narrowly gained a majority in parliament over the controversial conservative, Silvio Berlusconi. Andres Manuel Lopez Abrador brought the center-left Party of the Democratic Revolution into power after years as Mexico’s Third Party. His promise of a “New Deal for Mexico” generated support from the poor and working classes, but drew concern from international creditors who feared an increase in debt and business leaders apprehensive of greater regulation. Post-election protests from the conservative National Action Party spread doubt about the results, but ‘El Peje’ was inaugurated nonetheless. The results in Germany’s parliamentary elections represented a significant shift in European politics. Chancellor Edmund Stoiber devoted most of his tenure in office to significant labor and economic reforms. These policies drew the opposition of the opposition SPD and the unions, who launched crippling protests and strikes. Making matters worse, Stoiber made several off-hand remarks that seemed to patronize workers. His already tenuous position was further eroded by a sense that Angela Merkel, leader of the CDU, was working to subvert Stoiber within the governing coalition. These factors combined to defeat the CSU/CDU coalition in the 2006 elections. The SPD, led by Franz Munterfeing, was able to form a governing coalition with the greens as the Social Democrats returned to power after a four-year hiatus.

While international politics dominated much of 2006, there was still a great deal of attention paid to affairs within the United States. It was the second year of the McCain presidency, and the White House was determined to avoid the pitfalls of the previous year. An early victory came in January, when the House and Senate ratified the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) on a largely party-line vote. The President and Congress had a rocky relationship, due in large part to substantial philosophical differences between the leadership and the Administration. However, this roadblock was largely moved away after House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was indicted on corruption charges in Texas. New Republican Leader Roy Blunt lacked DeLay’s power and following within the House. President McCain was given a newfound degree of power within his party as the members turned to him for support. With this surprising wind behind his back, the President pushed for a significant piece of legislation that had long been of personal importance: immigration reform. As a Senator from Arizona, McCain was forced to deal with the problem of undocumented workers and an unsecured border for many years. But a comprehensive immigration reform bill stood little chance of passage with DeLay at the helm of the House. Now, with a weakened Republican leadership and a generally supportive Democratic Party, the time was right to make a move on the issue.

John McCain turned to the Senate to lead the way on immigration. With a smaller Republican majority, passage of a comprehensive plan seemed more likely than in the House. The legislation was written by Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts. Kennedy was a liberal icon, but most conservatives saw him as anathema to their cause. He was the Senate’s most outspoken supporter of the welfare state and the symbol of everything wrong about ‘big government.’ Yet he was also one of the most experienced members on the issue of immigration, having sponsored legislation in 1965 that greatly changed America’s outdated quota system. Kennedy was joined by Senators Graham and Brownback on the Republican side, and Jeff Bingaman on the Democratic wing. The legislation, titled the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006, performed several functions. It increased funding for border security, appropriated funds for a border fence, increased the number of H1-B visas issued each year, created a new ‘blue card’ for guest workers, and established a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants within the United States. The legislation drew considerable bipartisan support. Democrats largely supported the plan, though the AFL-CIO rejected it due to the guest worker provision. Labor believed it would undercut the ability of American workers to get hired in low-skill jobs. Republicans were more divided over the plan. While the Chamber of Commerce and other business organizations supported the plan, conservative pundits such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Bill O’Reilly all rejected it as amnesty. However, the President officially endorsed the proposals put forward in CIRA during his State of the Union Address. The legislation was officially introduced in the Senate in March, and made its way to the floor in the beginning of June. Several amendments were added to the bill, shrinking the size of the H-1B and guest worker provisions. The Inhofe Amendment established English as the national language of the United States. No government documents or services would need to be written in any other language. Finally, after several weeks of debate, the Senate passed CIRA by a vote of 62-37. Republicans split over the vote, with moderates joining the leadership in support. Democrats generally voted in favor of CIRA, with only a handful of moderates opposing it.

A greater challenge to immigration reform came in the House. Despite the departure of DeLay, the leadership was unified in its opposition to a pathway to citizenship. Speaker Dennis Hastert, Majority Leader Roy Blunt, and Majority Whip John Shadegg met with the President in Congress while the legislation was debated on the Senate floor. Hastert was strongly opposed to violating the so-called ‘Hastert Rule’ which established that the Republicans would not bring any legislation to the floor which lacked the support of a majority of the party. Therefore, he wanted to propose a bill focused on border security and greater penalties for companies that hired illegal immigrants. These elements were already incorporated in the Senate version, and the President fought hard to include a pathway to citizenship in the House plan. However, polling numbers showed a majority of Americans opposed amnesty and thought illegal immigration was a pressing problem. Many Democratic challengers began to attack Republicans for their support of CIRA, especially those running in red states, and Hastert was unwilling to lose his majority over “a bill which barely affects Illinois!” In July, shortly before the House recessed, the chamber voted on the Border Security and Illegal Immigration Control Act. It passed on a largely party line vote, with a dozen Democrats joining all but a handful of Republicans in opposition. At this point, the legislation was on life support. With the summer and midterm recess, Congress would not convene again until after the elections in late November. This meant that the election results could have a very tangible impact on the fate of immigration reform. The President took his case on the road, campaigning with Republicans who supported a comprehensive immigration plan. Immigration would clearly play a major role in the elections, as a divided Republican Party faced off against a largely united Democratic Party on the issue.

Another major factor in the midterms was corruption. Several Republican Congressmen, most notably Tom DeLay, were hit with legal charges at the end of 2005. The scandals only got worse in March of 2006, when supper-lobbyist Jack Abramoff agreed to a plea deal in exchange for a shortened prison sentence. It was revealed that Abramoff had close personal and business ties with DeLay, who was forced to resign entirely from Congress upon this revelation. Other Republicans were also tied to Abramoff, including Bob Ney who pled guilty to being bribed. Congressmen Duke Cunningham of California and Bill Jefferson of Louisiana (a Democrat) were also indicted on corruption charges. The combination of corruption, an unpopular immigration bill, and an effectively run Democratic campaign organization threatened to throw Republicans out of power for the first time since 1994. The kicker came in October, when Congressmen Mark Foley resigned after it was revealed that he was secretly sending sexual text messages to congressional pages. Hopes for Republicans holding on to the House were further diminished when it was revealed the leadership had known about these texts for months. Many Republican Congressmen attempted to distance themselves from the leadership and cling to the relatively high popularity of the President, but it was too little, too late in most cases. President McCain had taken some blame for choosing to work on immigration, rather than wage what would probably be a losing battle on lobbying reform. This decision, made in the spring of 2006, came back to haunt McCain in the midterms. In the House, Democrats picked up 24 House seats to take a narrow 221-214 majority. Nancy Pelosi became the first female Speaker of the House, while Hastert resigned his leadership position after seven years holding the gavel. The Senate was an even fiercer affair. Democrats picked up two seats, tying up the Senate at 50-50. Vice-President John Engler gave the Republicans a majority, albeit the narrowest sort. Despite the apparent defeat for President McCain, he hoped that Democrats would be willing to work with him to pass a constructive agenda. The immigration issue was settled for the time being in December, when the conference committee between the House and Senate was unable to reach a compromise on the pending legislation. Nonetheless, the President was hopeful of progress the next year.

 

[hcallega]

2006 Senate Election Results​

· Arizona: Senator Jon Kyl (R) defeats former Chairman Jim Pedersen (D) for reelection. R Hold
· California: Senator Diane Feinstein (D) defeats former State Senator Dick Mountjoy (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Connecticut: Senator M. Jodi Rell (R) defeats Ned Lamont (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Delaware: Senator Tom Carper (D) defeats Jan Ting (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Florida: Senator Bill Nelson (D) defeats LeRoy Collins, Jr. (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Hawaii: Senator Daniel Akaka (D) defeats Jerry Coffee (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Indiana: Senator Richard Lugar (R) defeats Steve Osborn (L) for reelection. R Hold
· Maine: Senator Olympia Snowe (R) defeats Jean Hay Bright (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Maryland: Congressman Ben Cardin (D) defeats former Congressman Robert Ehrlich (R). D Hold
· Massachusetts: Senator Ted Kennedy (D) defeats Kevin Scott (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Michigan: Senator Debbie Stabenow (D) defeats Sheriff Michael Brouchard (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Minnesota: County Attorney Amy Klobuchar (D) defeats Congressman Mark Kennedy (R). D Hold
· Mississippi: Senator Trent Lott (R) defeats State Representative Erik Fleming (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Missouri: Senator Jim Talent (R) defeats State Auditor Claire McCaskill (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Montana: Senator Conrad Burns (R) defeats State Senate President Jon Tester (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Nebraska: Senator Ben Nelson (D) defeats Pete Ricketts (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Nevada: Senator Jon Ensign (R) defeats Jack Carter (D) for reelection. R Hold
· New Jersey: Former Acting Governor Richard Codey (D) defeats State Senator Tom Kean, Jr. (R). D Hold
· New Mexico: Senator Jeff Bingaman (D) defeats Allen McCulloch (R) for reelection. D Hold
· New York: Senator Hillary Clinton (D) defeats District Attorney Jeanine Pirro (R) for reelection. D Hold
· North Dakota: Senator Kent Conrad (D) defeats Dwight Grotberg (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Ohio: Congressman Sherrod Brown (D) defeats Senator Mike DeWine (R). D Gain
· Pennsylvania: Former Mayor Ed Rendell(D) defeats Senator Rick Santorum (R). D Gain
· Rhode Island: Senator Lincoln Chafee (R) defeats Mayor David Cicilline (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Tennessee: Mayor Bob Corker (R) defeats Congressman Harold Ford, Jr. (D). R Hold
· Texas: Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R) defeats Barbara Ann Radnofsky (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Utah: Senator Orrin Hatch (R) defeats Pete Ashdown (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Vermont: Congressman Bernie Sanders (I) defeats former Governor Howard Dean (D) and Richard Tarrant (R). I Hold
· Virginia: Senator George Allen (R) defeats Harris Miller (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Washington: Senator Maria Cantwell (D) defeats Chairman Pete Vance (R) for reelection. D Hold
· West Virginia: Senator Robert Byrd (D) defeats John Raese (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Wisconsin: Senator Herb Kohl (D) defeats Robert Lorge (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Wyoming: Senator Craig Thomas (R) defeats Herb Groutage (D) for reelection. R Hold
R: 50 (-2)
D: 49 (+2)
I: 1

2006 Gubernatorial Election Results​

· Alabama: Governor Bob Riley (R) defeats Lieutenant Governor Lucy Baxley (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Alaska: Mayor Sarah Palin (R) defeats State Representative Eric Croft (D). R Hold
· Arizona: Governor Janet Napolitano (D) defeats Don Goldwater (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Arkansas: Attorney General Mike Beebe (D) defeats former Congressman Asa Hutchinson (R). D Gain
· California: Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) defeats Controller Steve Westy (D). R Gain
· Colorado: District Attorney Bill Ritter (D) defeats Congressman Bob Beauprez (R). D Gain
· Connecticut: Mayor John DeStefano, Jr. (D) defeats former State Representative Michael Fedele (R). D Gain
· Florida: Attorney General Charlie Crist (R) defeats State Senator Rod Smith (D). R Hold
· Georgia: Commissioner John Oxendine (R) defeats Lieutenant Governor Mark Taylor (D). R Gain
· Hawaii: Governor Linda Lingle (R) defeats former State Senator Randy Iwase (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Idaho: Congressman Butch Otter (R) defeats Jerry Brady (D). R Hold
· Illinois: Governor Rod Blagojevich (D) defeats State Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Iowa: Secretary of State Chet Culver (D) defeats Congressman Jim Nussle (R). D Gain
· Kansas: Governor Tim Shallenburg (R) defeats State Representative Tom Holland (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Maine: Governor John Baldacci (D) defeats State Senator Chandler Woodcock (R), State Representative Barbara Merrill (I), and Pat LaMarche (G) for reelection. D Hold
· Maryland: Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (D) defeats former Party Chairman Michael Steele (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Massachusetts: Governor Steve Grossman (D) defeats Chairwoman Kerry Healey (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Michigan: Governor Jim Blanchard (D) defeats Dick DeVos (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Minnesota: Governor Tim Pawlenty (R) defeats Attorney General Mike Hatch (R) for reelection. R Hold
· Nebraska: Congressman Tom Osborne (R) defeats David Hahn (D). R Hold
· Nevada: Congressman Jim Gibbons (R) defeats State Senator Dina Titus (D). R Hold
· New Hampshire: Governor John Lynch (D) defeats State Representative Jim Coburn (R) for reelection. D Hold
· New Mexico: Governor Bill Richardson (D) defeats Chairman John Dendahl (R) for reelection. D Hold
· New York: Attorney General Eliot Spitzer (D) defeats Assemblyman John Fasso (R). D Gain
· Ohio: Congressman Ted Strickland (D) defeats Attorney General Jim Petro (R). D Gain
· Oklahoma: Governor Steve Largent (R) defeats Attorney General Drew Edmonson (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Oregon: Governor Jack Roberts (R) defeats Treasurer Jim Hill (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Pennsylvania: Governor Bob Casey, Jr. (D) defeats Lynn Swann (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Rhode Island: Governor Sheldon Whitehouse (D) defeats Mayor Steve Laffey (R) for reelection. D Hold
· South Carolina: Governor Mark Sanford (R) defeats State Senator Tommy Moore (D) for reelection. R Hold
· South Dakota: Governor Mike Rounds (R) defeats State Representative Jack Billion (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Tennessee: Governor Van Hilleary (R) defeats Mike McWherter (D) for reelection. R Hold
· Texas: Governor Rick Perry (R) defeats Congressman Chris Bell (D), Comptroller Carol Keeton Strayhorn (I), and Kirby Friedman (I) for reelection. R Hold
· Vermont: State Senator Peter Shumlin (D) defeats Brian Dubie (R). D Hold
· Wisconsin: Governor Jim Doyle (D) defeats Congressman Mark Green (R) for reelection. D Hold
· Wyoming: Governor Joe Meyer (R) defeats Chairwoman Leslie Petersen (D) for reelection. R Hold

2006 House Election Results​

D: 221 (+24)
R: 214 (-24)​

 

[Whanztastic]

Whoa, talk about a split Government.

 

[THE OBSERVER]

Bravo hcallega! Brown's been elected to the Senate and Rendell is going to Washington. But VA, RI, MT, MO, and CT are Republican, probably because there is no Iraq War ITTL, and no backlash against the Republicans nationally. That said, you saved the Rockefeller Republicans. One last thing, see you have Schwarzenegger elected Governor in 2006. Wonder what will happen when everyone finds out about his love child ITTL? I sense bigger scandal than OTL.

 

[THE OBSERVER]

I see Immigration Reform and strong Climate Change legislation coming to the floor and getting passed and signed into law in '07. Think I can support McCain for reelection.

 

[d32123]

I see Immigration Reform and strong Climate Change legislation coming to the floor and getting passed and signed into law in '07. Think I can support McCain for reelection.

Unfortunately for McCain, the Great Recession is most likely just around the corner.

 

[THE OBSERVER]

Unfortunately for McCain, the Great Recession is most likely just around the corner.

Perhaps there'll be butterflies, perhaps not. But if a Democrat is gonna win in '08, I hope it's either Feingold or Wellstone!

 

[d32123]

Perhaps there'll be butterflies, perhaps not. But if a Democrat is gonna win in '08, I hope it's either Feingold or Wellstone!

My money is on Hillary Clinton.

 

[THE OBSERVER]

· Nevada: Senator Jon Ensign (R) defeats Jack Carter (D) for reelection. R Hold

Should it be John Ensign?

 

[THE OBSERVER]

My money is on Hillary Clinton.

Maybe hcallega can merge his Hillary Clinton TL with this TL.

 

[hcallega]

Perhaps there'll be butterflies, perhaps not. But if a Democrat is gonna win in '08, I hope it's either Feingold or Wellstone!

Not to spoil anything, but it's pretty hard to butterfly away such a systemic crisis. The economy crashed due to trends in the financial service and housing sectors (spurned on by government policies) that were ongoing for well over a decade. Over-leveraging, excessive consumer debt, the sub-prime mortgage bubble, and bank deregulation all had a part to play in causing the market meltdown of 2007-2008. Those factors will not change in this timeline because 1) many of them were in place well before Bush v. Gore was decided and 2) a New Democrat and a pro-free market Republican won't suddenly bombard Congress with new regulatory laws that 3) wouldn't get passed anyway.

That being said, the government's response to the recession could be quite different. Without the War in Iraq, a second round of tax cuts, and a spend-thrift Bush presidency, the budget deficit will be much smaller, which gives the President in 2009 (whoever that may be) more flexibility in terms of stimulating demand. Also, the international political situation will be different. You already know that the German Chancellor will be a social democrat, not a conservative, and that Tony Blair will be the UK's Prime Minister. The French and American Presidents have yet to be decided, but you can already see how the global response to the Great Recession could be very different from our timeline.

 

[Expat]

Interesting update! I can imagine this Congress being able to pass a nice, moderate immigration reform bill. We might also see the failed provisions of McCain's "all of the above" energy plan make it through.

It's doubtful the financial crisis can be butterflied away, considering how much emphasis both parties place on home ownership. Whether Gore or McCain or Clinton or Bush, they'll probably endorse anything the private sector does to increase the number of home-owners. What will be interesting is how McCain handles the aftermath.

Edit: Ninja'd by hcallega

 

[Cylon_Number_14]

You kept out John Tester, my favorite Senator underdog from 2006 and 2012
Could he try again when the other seat comes up?

But then I remember that Wellstone lives and I'm content.

 

[John Farson]

Good update. Now McCain has to work with Speaker Pelosi and a divided senate.

Be interesting to see how things go from here.

 

[THE OBSERVER]

You kept out John Tester, my favorite Senator underdog from 2006 and 2012
Could he try again when the other seat comes up?

But then I remember that Wellstone lives and I'm content.

As am I. If hcallega plans to have McCain reelected in 2008, don't have Wellstone run. Perhaps John Edwards can run instead (Snicker snicker).

Maybe we can have a McCain in 2000 TL. That ought to be very fun. The POD is easy. Hell, maybe Gore chooses a different running mate since Lieberman might not want to run against his friend McCain.

 

[Stolengood]

I'm pretty sure the only reason elections were allowed OTL is because Bush and his State Department were pushing for them; a more realistically-minded John McCain, however, would know this would put Hamas in power, and would so try to be party to preventing it.

...so, bit of a difference, there.

 

[NickCT]

It's entirely plausible that the even could be delayed a few months at least

 

[d32123]

It's entirely plausible that the even could be delayed a few months at least

Or it could arrive a few months early...

 

[NickCT]

Or it could arrive a few months early...

right but that would make it even harder for mccain