Another subject regarding France, in addition to what I wrote here: The original Fifth Republic constitution set presidential terms at seven years, and the maximum parliamentary term at five years. Effective with the 2002 elections, both are set at five years.
In 1986, a center-right coalition won a majority in the National Assembly (lower house of the parliament), during the presidency of Francois Mitterand, a Socialist. That was the first time in the Fifth Republic that the president's party was not part of the governing coalition in the National Assembly. In other words, the presidency and the parliament were controlled by different parties. The French called the situation "cohabitation".
Cohabitation recurred from 1997 to 2002, when a Socialist-led coalition had a parliamentary majority, during the presidency of Jacques Chirac, a center-right Gaullist. That turned the tables on Chirac, who had been prime minister during that earlier period of cohabitation.
This leads me to one of my favorite subjects: political language, especially the differences in political language between countries.
A similar scenario occurs from time to time in the United States, when one party controls one or both houses of Congress, and the president is of the other party. That has been the case with the 2007-8 Congress, with Democratic majorities tangling with a Republican president. Here in America, we often call that "gridlock".
I consider it an interesting commentary on our cultural differences, that the French compare that divided-government scenario to an intimate relationship, while we draw an analogy to a traffic jam.
The recent French shift to five-year terms for both the president and the National Assembly is intended to reduce the likelihood of cohabitation. The theory is that, if presidential and parliamentary elections are held at the same time, the voters are likely to elect the same party in both. It has worked out that way in 2002 and 2007, but that is by no means guaranteed.
The American electorate has elected a president of one party, and a congressional majority of the other party, on the same day, in a few instances, such as 1996, 1988, 1972, 1968 and 1956.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Successor to Alexander Hamilton
President-elect Obama has reportedly decided to appoint Timothy Geithner, who is currently president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, to be secretary of the treasury.
As I wrote here, speculation for quite a while has centered around Geithner and former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers.
If that is indeed what the choice came down to, Obama may have opted for Geithner for two reasons: 1) his reputation has risen, due to his role in dealing with the financial crisis; and 2) Obama may have wanted to avoid questions about the controversial manner in which Summers left the presidency of Harvard.
Stock markets rallied yesterday, after significant losses earlier in the week. Those who write such things have called that Wall Street's endorsement of Geithner.
Presidents, maybe with some reluctance, tend to acknowledge the need to gain acceptance, or at least lack of hostility, on the part of the financial types, to their economic personnel and policy choices.
Again, the wisdom on this point comes from James Carville, that political consultant I would love to ignore, but he's just too quotable. At the beginning of the Clinton Administration, when the president and his staff cited financial market considerations as their rationale for turning their promised tax cut into a tax increase, Carville mused about reincarnation:
As I wrote here, speculation for quite a while has centered around Geithner and former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers.
If that is indeed what the choice came down to, Obama may have opted for Geithner for two reasons: 1) his reputation has risen, due to his role in dealing with the financial crisis; and 2) Obama may have wanted to avoid questions about the controversial manner in which Summers left the presidency of Harvard.
Stock markets rallied yesterday, after significant losses earlier in the week. Those who write such things have called that Wall Street's endorsement of Geithner.
Presidents, maybe with some reluctance, tend to acknowledge the need to gain acceptance, or at least lack of hostility, on the part of the financial types, to their economic personnel and policy choices.
Again, the wisdom on this point comes from James Carville, that political consultant I would love to ignore, but he's just too quotable. At the beginning of the Clinton Administration, when the president and his staff cited financial market considerations as their rationale for turning their promised tax cut into a tax increase, Carville mused about reincarnation:
I used to think if there was reincarnation, I wanted to come back as the President or the Pope or a .400 baseball hitter, but now I want to come back as the bond market. You can intimidate everybody.
Friday, November 21, 2008
France
The French Socialists are in the middle of the process of choosing a new party leader. Here is some background on the French political system, and how their parties have reached their current situation.
The constitutional arrangements currently in place in France are called the "Fifth Republic".
France switched back and forth between monarchy and republican government, in the aftermath of the French Revolution at the end of the 18th century. Also, they have adopted new constitutions at certain points during their republican eras.
After the French regained control of their territory from Germany in World War II, they launched a short-lived arrangement called the Fourth Republic. A political crisis that arose in 1958, largely stemming from France's war against rebels in Algeria, then a colony, sounded the death-knell of the Fourth Republic.
General Charles de Gaulle, hero of the French Resistance in World War II, came out of retirement in 1958, to become president under the new Fifth Republic.
As was the case with previous French republican constitutions, the Fifth Republic is a parliamentary system. However, the head of state, an elected president, has greater political power than is the case in most other countries with parliamentary systems.
That stems in part from constitutional powers, such as the president's (real, not just formal) right to dissolve parliament and call a general election. But I think it also derives from the manner in which presidents are elected. De Gaulle was originally chosen by an electoral college. But his reelection in 1965, and all subsequent presidential elections, have been by direct popular vote. That gives the president a type of authority that a hereditary monarch, such as Queen Elizabeth of the U.K., or an indirectly-elected president, such as that of Germany, does not possess.
French presidential elections are conducted in two rounds. If no candidate gets more than 50% in the first round (and none ever has), the top two candidates stand in a runoff election.
De Gaulle put a very personal stamp on his movement. He and his allies were informally called the Gaullist party. That party became institutionalized after his resignation in 1969, and has been known at various times by such names as Rally for the Republic, and the Union for a Popular Movement.
The Socialists were also-rans for the first couple of decades of the Fifth Republic. Their high-water mark came in 1981, when Socialist Francois Mitterand was elected president and, for the first time in the Fifth Republic, a coalition led by the party gained a majority in the National Assembly, the lower house of parliament.
The party's nadir came 21 years later, when they failed to make it through to the second round of the 2002 presidential election. The electorate's only choices were center-right (incumbent President Jacques Chirac, a Gaullist) and far-right (Jean-Marie Le Pen, leader of a xenophobic party called the National Front). Chirac won.
The Socialists did better in the 2007 presidential election, but still lost. Their candidate, Segolene Royal, the first woman to make it into the second round, lost to Nicholas Sarkozy, by 53% to 47%.
As you can see in the BBC piece I linked to above, Royal is one of the candidates in the upcoming runoff of the Socialist leadership election.
UPDATE: What do Segolene Royal and Al Franken have in common? Pressing a recount of an extemely close vote.
The constitutional arrangements currently in place in France are called the "Fifth Republic".
France switched back and forth between monarchy and republican government, in the aftermath of the French Revolution at the end of the 18th century. Also, they have adopted new constitutions at certain points during their republican eras.
After the French regained control of their territory from Germany in World War II, they launched a short-lived arrangement called the Fourth Republic. A political crisis that arose in 1958, largely stemming from France's war against rebels in Algeria, then a colony, sounded the death-knell of the Fourth Republic.
General Charles de Gaulle, hero of the French Resistance in World War II, came out of retirement in 1958, to become president under the new Fifth Republic.
As was the case with previous French republican constitutions, the Fifth Republic is a parliamentary system. However, the head of state, an elected president, has greater political power than is the case in most other countries with parliamentary systems.
That stems in part from constitutional powers, such as the president's (real, not just formal) right to dissolve parliament and call a general election. But I think it also derives from the manner in which presidents are elected. De Gaulle was originally chosen by an electoral college. But his reelection in 1965, and all subsequent presidential elections, have been by direct popular vote. That gives the president a type of authority that a hereditary monarch, such as Queen Elizabeth of the U.K., or an indirectly-elected president, such as that of Germany, does not possess.
French presidential elections are conducted in two rounds. If no candidate gets more than 50% in the first round (and none ever has), the top two candidates stand in a runoff election.
De Gaulle put a very personal stamp on his movement. He and his allies were informally called the Gaullist party. That party became institutionalized after his resignation in 1969, and has been known at various times by such names as Rally for the Republic, and the Union for a Popular Movement.
The Socialists were also-rans for the first couple of decades of the Fifth Republic. Their high-water mark came in 1981, when Socialist Francois Mitterand was elected president and, for the first time in the Fifth Republic, a coalition led by the party gained a majority in the National Assembly, the lower house of parliament.
The party's nadir came 21 years later, when they failed to make it through to the second round of the 2002 presidential election. The electorate's only choices were center-right (incumbent President Jacques Chirac, a Gaullist) and far-right (Jean-Marie Le Pen, leader of a xenophobic party called the National Front). Chirac won.
The Socialists did better in the 2007 presidential election, but still lost. Their candidate, Segolene Royal, the first woman to make it into the second round, lost to Nicholas Sarkozy, by 53% to 47%.
As you can see in the BBC piece I linked to above, Royal is one of the candidates in the upcoming runoff of the Socialist leadership election.
UPDATE: What do Segolene Royal and Al Franken have in common? Pressing a recount of an extemely close vote.
Congressional Leadership
The congressional leadership elections that I previewed here, have now taken place.
The most significant votes were on the Republican side in the House. And by that I mean significant for the future, not the present. With the enhanced Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, the main job for the Republican leadership will be to lay the groundwork for a future comeback. Their influence on the current running of the Congress is likely to be small.
There were no surprises in the elections to fill vacancies in the number two and number three spots in the House Republican leadership. Eric Cantor of Virginia will be minority whip, and Mike Pence of Indiana will chair the House Republican Conference.
House Democrats chose John Larson of Connecticut to replace Rahm Emanuel as chair of the House Democratic Caucus. Emanuel will leave the House, to become White House chief of staff.
Getting back to the subject of Republicans and the future, this post on The Fix blog on the Washington Post's website, lists 10 "Republicans to watch".
The most significant votes were on the Republican side in the House. And by that I mean significant for the future, not the present. With the enhanced Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, the main job for the Republican leadership will be to lay the groundwork for a future comeback. Their influence on the current running of the Congress is likely to be small.
There were no surprises in the elections to fill vacancies in the number two and number three spots in the House Republican leadership. Eric Cantor of Virginia will be minority whip, and Mike Pence of Indiana will chair the House Republican Conference.
House Democrats chose John Larson of Connecticut to replace Rahm Emanuel as chair of the House Democratic Caucus. Emanuel will leave the House, to become White House chief of staff.
Getting back to the subject of Republicans and the future, this post on The Fix blog on the Washington Post's website, lists 10 "Republicans to watch".
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Stevens Concedes Defeat
It's now official. Senator Ted Stevens, Republican of Alaska, has conceded defeat to his Democratic challenger Mark Begich. That brings the totals in the next Senate to:
Democrats and their Independent allies: 58
Republicans: 40
Undecided: 2
Democrats and their Independent allies: 58
Republicans: 40
Undecided: 2
Obama's Cabinet, So Far
What strikes me about the tentative choices for the Cabinet that have been reported to date, is how conventional they are. I'm referring to the following list which, while not official yet, seems to reflect the president-elect's will:
They're unconventional in some ways. Holder would be the first African American attorney general. The Department of Homeland Security is very new, so it's not particularly significant that Napolitano would be its first female secretary. But there was only one past female Cabinet member in such a law enforcement/security position: Janet Reno, Bill Clinton's attorney general.
But they're conventional in other ways. They are all of the same party as the president-elect. There has been some talk of a bipartisan Cabinet. That might still happen. There are some major jobs still out there. For instance, rumor has it that Robert Gates might be retained as secretary of defense, a job to which he was appointed by President Bush.
The potential nominees listed above are also conventional in terms of background: a prominent senator, a prominent former senator, a governor, and a man with sub-cabinet experience in a previous Democratic administration. Those are all categories from which previous presidents have taken many of their Cabinet nominees. Not that, as Jerry Seinfeld has said in a different context, there's anything wrong with that. But we're all still curious as to how Obama's "Change" mantra will play out in real life.
- Secretary of State: Senator Hillary Clinton
- Attorney General: Former Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder
- Secretary of Homeland Security: Governor Janet Napolitano of Arizona
- Secretary of Health and Human Services: Former Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle
They're unconventional in some ways. Holder would be the first African American attorney general. The Department of Homeland Security is very new, so it's not particularly significant that Napolitano would be its first female secretary. But there was only one past female Cabinet member in such a law enforcement/security position: Janet Reno, Bill Clinton's attorney general.
But they're conventional in other ways. They are all of the same party as the president-elect. There has been some talk of a bipartisan Cabinet. That might still happen. There are some major jobs still out there. For instance, rumor has it that Robert Gates might be retained as secretary of defense, a job to which he was appointed by President Bush.
The potential nominees listed above are also conventional in terms of background: a prominent senator, a prominent former senator, a governor, and a man with sub-cabinet experience in a previous Democratic administration. Those are all categories from which previous presidents have taken many of their Cabinet nominees. Not that, as Jerry Seinfeld has said in a different context, there's anything wrong with that. But we're all still curious as to how Obama's "Change" mantra will play out in real life.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Senate Elections: North and More North
The official tally has been completed in the U.S. Senate race in Minnesota, and the tally is apparently all-but-final in Alaska.
Mayor Mark Begich, Democrat of Anchorage, Alaska, has defeated Republican incumbent Senator Ted Stevens. I was incorrect in this post, when I wrote that the slim lead Stevens appeared to have in the immediately aftermath of the election would not be overturned. However, it is still remarkable that Begich's victory margin is only 0.29 of a percentage point, when pre-election polls had indicated that he might win by 10 points or more.
According to this New York Times report, Stevens could ask for a recount but, apparently, he would have to pay for it. He might not want to go to too much bother because, even if the recount were successful for him, his Senate colleagues would probably overturn his election via an expulsion vote.
The current official figures from Minnesota show an even closer margin. Out of 2,885,555 votes cast, Republican incumbent Senator Norm Coleman leads his Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party challenger Al Franken by 215 votes. The percentage difference is 0.00745%.
There's an old saying that life imitates art. I would go that one further by saying that life imitates Monty Python's Flying Circus. One episode of that comedy series from British television featured the Olympic Men's Hide-and-Seek final. Don Roberts (Graham Chapman) goes first, and finds Francisco Huron (Terry Jones) in 11 years, 2 months, 26 days, 9 hours, 3 minutes, 27 seconds. Then, when it's Huron's turn, he finds Roberts in 11 years, 2 months, 26 days, 9 hours, 3 minutes, 27 seconds. It's a tie, and the replay is scheduled to begin the following day.
Unlike the hide-and-seek final, the Coleman-Franken race is not quite a tie, but it's close. Minnesota election law requires an automatic recount in any election decided by less than half of one percentage point. Therefore, the margin in the current figures is 67 times closer than it needs to be to trigger the recount. Apparently there is no similar provision in Alaska law that Stevens could count on to bolster any claim he might make for a recount.
The Minnesota recount begins today.
There is precedent for a result similar to the hide-and-seek final. There was a do-over of a 1974 Senate election in New Hampshire. There has been some speculation about whether the Minnesota case is headed in a similar direction.
Mayor Mark Begich, Democrat of Anchorage, Alaska, has defeated Republican incumbent Senator Ted Stevens. I was incorrect in this post, when I wrote that the slim lead Stevens appeared to have in the immediately aftermath of the election would not be overturned. However, it is still remarkable that Begich's victory margin is only 0.29 of a percentage point, when pre-election polls had indicated that he might win by 10 points or more.
According to this New York Times report, Stevens could ask for a recount but, apparently, he would have to pay for it. He might not want to go to too much bother because, even if the recount were successful for him, his Senate colleagues would probably overturn his election via an expulsion vote.
The current official figures from Minnesota show an even closer margin. Out of 2,885,555 votes cast, Republican incumbent Senator Norm Coleman leads his Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party challenger Al Franken by 215 votes. The percentage difference is 0.00745%.
There's an old saying that life imitates art. I would go that one further by saying that life imitates Monty Python's Flying Circus. One episode of that comedy series from British television featured the Olympic Men's Hide-and-Seek final. Don Roberts (Graham Chapman) goes first, and finds Francisco Huron (Terry Jones) in 11 years, 2 months, 26 days, 9 hours, 3 minutes, 27 seconds. Then, when it's Huron's turn, he finds Roberts in 11 years, 2 months, 26 days, 9 hours, 3 minutes, 27 seconds. It's a tie, and the replay is scheduled to begin the following day.
Unlike the hide-and-seek final, the Coleman-Franken race is not quite a tie, but it's close. Minnesota election law requires an automatic recount in any election decided by less than half of one percentage point. Therefore, the margin in the current figures is 67 times closer than it needs to be to trigger the recount. Apparently there is no similar provision in Alaska law that Stevens could count on to bolster any claim he might make for a recount.
The Minnesota recount begins today.
There is precedent for a result similar to the hide-and-seek final. There was a do-over of a 1974 Senate election in New Hampshire. There has been some speculation about whether the Minnesota case is headed in a similar direction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
