Dan Rather
After long years in the political wilderness, Demo-crats can perhaps be forgiven their moment of moonwalking and high-fiving in the end zone. But once the confetti has been swept up and the dust settles on all the talk of change in Washington, the new political ins will need to confront certain realities.
The first is the nature of the presidency. Newly-elected Democrats will be dealing with an executive branch that has been supersized beyond the confines of the individual who occupies the Oval Office, no matter how unpopular at present. A large part of this is the Bush administration's legacy of aggressively expanding executive power, something that was accomplished with the cooperation of a Republican Congress. But a large part, too, is the result of a decades-long trend in which Democratic presidents and legislators alike have also played a substantial role.
This dynamic is, of course, accentuated in times of war. Even a lame-duck president, as some have begun to prematurely label President Bush, retains substantial power to set the national agenda - especially in the foreign-policy realm.
Speaking of war, President Bush may soon discover that politics is not so much of a zero-sum game as some might believe. His party has lost something, but the president might have gained something more important - namely, a partner with whom to shoulder the responsibility for whatever must happen next in Iraq. With the Democrats and their "change the course" mandate as foils, the president suddenly has political cover for a new range of measures that may have seemed politically untenable before - and someone with whom to share the blame should they not work out. Look, for example, for the previously dismissed idea of sectarian partition of Iraq to gain new currency.
Alternative vision
On the domestic side, Democrats now will have the power to bring their legislation to the floor and even get it passed. But without the president's cooperation, they will have to accept that their role is to present the public with an alternative vision, rather than a fully realised legislative record. And to this end, the Democrats will need to craft a sustaining alternative vision.
Congressman Rahm Emanuel, the lead architect of the Democrats' House victory, stated on election night that "It's time for the endless campaign to stop and the hard work of governing to begin." But in a Congress that will see a two-term presidency draw to a close, political positioning for the 2008 election will likely be the Democrats' No. 1 mission. There's been a lot of talk about the Democrats using their newly won subpoena power to hold hearings on everything from Vice-President Dick Cheney's energy task force to contracting in Iraq. But the Democrats' desire for - and the country's need for - active congressional oversight will inevitably be balanced by the political demands of the big election ahead. Put simply, Democrats might not want to risk turning off the electorate with endless hearings and investigations.
Don't get your reporter wrong. The Democrats scored a big win on Tuesday, and the set of challenges they face now must seem infinitely preferable to those they faced before Election Day. But if they are to convert that win into anything more than a momentary victory, they will need to recognise the limits on what can be achieved in the present.
And if Democrats are looking for one piece of good news to carry with them from this election, it may be this: In a time when the Republican Party has become increasingly driven by ideological orthodoxy, this year's ideologically diverse group of Democratic candidates may be a sign that the Democrats could inherit the GOP's former 'big tent' status. After years of electoral futility, such is the stuff of Democratic strategists' dreams.
Dan Rather is an American television commentator.
