OPINION:
Barack Obama is clearly no Bill Clinton.
When Democrats lost control of the House back in 1994, the Clinton White House responded by adjusting to what was clearly a new political reality. The president and his advisers realized in a nanosecond that the election results had been a referendum on his administration’s policies and were quick to push what the Obama crew would call the “reset” button.
The president signed bills that he had previously opposed, announced that “the era of big government” was over and essentially decided to present a different and more voter-friendly face to the public. It worked. He was easily re-elected two years later, and his vice president almost hung onto the White House in 2000. Today, Mr. Clinton is remembered fondly by his fellow Democrats and is as popular or more popular than he was when he left the presidency.
President Obama suffered an even greater defeat on Nov. 4. His party lost the Senate, many incumbent senators up for re-election distanced themselves from him, few wanted him anywhere near their states and a few wouldn’t even admit they had ever voted for him. When the smoke cleared, Republicans had not only taken the Senate, but had upped their margin in the House, won governorships even in states that had faithfully voted for Mr. Obama twice and controlled more state legislative seats than at any time since 1929.
Mr. Obama has reacted to a sweeping rebuke far differently than Mr. Clinton had in the ’90s. He suggested that off-year elections don’t mean much, doubled down on his signature health care reforms and on immigration. Observers were shocked by his reaction, and even as Republican leaders suggested it was time to work together, he announced that he would essentially govern by executive order.
Incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has therefore been left with two choices. He can roll over because he knows the president can veto any bill he doesn’t like and has to know there will be no compromise from a president who says he doesn’t care about election results and will blow up the city rather than compromise with Republicans. His message seems to be, “OK, you won. Now it’s time for you to surrender.”
Although Republican leaders doesn’t want another government shutdown, they have no choice but to do everything in their power to prevent a lawless president from doing by executive order what Congress would never support and the public rejects. The lame duck now underway gives the president and Sen. Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, power until Mr. McConnell becomes majority leader in January, so between now and then Republicans have to do all they can to prevent the president from doing irreversible damage to the economy and the country they are all supposed to serve. Much of what he does can be reversed in January or at least legislation reversing it can be sent to him to be signed or vetoed.
That is exactly what should be done. Some months ago, Mr. McConnell told reporters that if he were to become majority leader he would likely model his leadership on that of former Senate Democratic Leader George Mitchell. Mr. Mitchell is today regarded as a statesman and has served the nation well since his retirement from the Senate, but he was among the most partisan Senate leaders ever.
He was a constant thorn in the side of President George H.W. Bush’s administration, and many thought his one goal during his time as leader was to destroy any chance he might have of winning in 1992. He stopped much of what Mr. Bush sought, forced him into compromises that split the GOP base and put legislation on his desk that would help Democrats if signed and hurt Republicans if vetoed.
It is our fervent hope that Mr. McConnell meant it when he said he wanted to be a leader like Mr. Mitchell.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.