Alfonso Cuenca
Counsel for the Spanish Parliament. Director of Budget and Contracting of the Senate / Franklin Institute
The US presidential election campaign is now in its final stretch, entering its decisive phase. Polls are predicting a very close result, with a slight lead for the moment for Harris, especially in the national vote total. The key swing states will be few and far between, with the number of states being progressively reduced: from nine to seven, and from seven probably to three: Pennsylvania, North Carolina and, especially, Georgia (Trump will not win if he does not win Pennsylvania, while the Democrats will have a hard time if they lose Pennsylvania and Georgia). One fact: if Harris wins, she would be the first vice-president who, without having held the office of president, has won since Bush senior, although the most accurate precedent is not in her favour: Vice-President Humphrey was defeated after President Johnson declined to run in the election. In Trump’s case, it should be remembered that only once before has a previous president, after failing to win immediate re-election, won in the subsequent election: Democrat Cleveland in 1892.
But, apart from the race that is naturally occupying all the media attention (especially on this side of the Atlantic), on 5 November Americans will also elect the entire House of Representatives and a third of the members of the Senate, and these elections are also of the utmost importance. In the case of the Senate, where Democrats currently have a slim majority, as is well known, polls predict a slim majority (51 or 52 seats out of 100) for the Republicans. Two states, Montana and Florida, seem to tip the balance, with an advantage for the elephant’s party. Moreover, this forecast should come as no surprise since, of the one-third of seats up for renewal, a significant majority of them are currently held by Democratic senators (23 of the 34 to be elected), so the party of the donkey has more seats to defend than the current situation. As far as the House of Representatives is concerned, the predicted results are also very close, although the polls, taking into account the large majority currently enjoyed by the Republicans in the House of Representatives, predict an advantage for the latter in terms of renewing their majority.
It is quite possible, in any case, that the overall result of next November’s vote will be a situation of divided government, that is, one in which the political sign (majority) in the three institutions that govern the United States is not identical. This scenario, strange to a European mentality, has been and is, however, practically consubstantial to the American political system. In fact, in about 75% of the time since Richard Nixon was elected president in 1968, this has been the case.
The system designed by the founding fathers in Philadelphia 250 years ago obliges the different branches of government to work together. Thus, it has been said that, especially in situations of differing majorities in the three institutions mentioned, compromise is ‘obligatory’. Although it is true that, from time to time – a situation that is on the rise in times of political polarisation such as those we have been witnessing for some years now – such collaboration is more difficult, placing the system on the brink of the abyss (as is the case, for example, with financial ‘renovations’ and administrative closures). Nevertheless, this obligatory compromise continues to work on most occasions, with many laws or measures being the result of bipartisan agreement (or of sectors of both parties), even if the disagreements have more media coverage. Thus, the Montesquian ideal of power reining in power is a desideratum that is very present in the United States and that, for better or worse, continues to be operative.
On the other hand, it is not absolutely impossible (more on the Republican than on the Democratic side, according to the polls) that the results of the elections on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of next November could lead to a ‘trifecta’, that is, to a situation of single-party hegemony in the three institutions (the term is borrowed from horse betting), a situation that has rarely occurred in recent decades. In such a scenario, the 60-vote rule in the Senate (which requires the agreement of both parties for the approval of the most important bills), an heir to the old filibuster, would take on particular relevance. As can be seen, however rusty the system of checks and balances may seem in some respects, it remains, fortunately, the key element of American democracy.
This article was originally published in Diálogo Atlántico, the blog of the Franklin-UAH Institute
