The catchphrase of Election Night 2006 seemed to be "Balance of Power," though Wolf Blitzer and his fellow political pundits were not discussing the tension between the executive and legislative branches.
Instead, a partisan seat-counting craze spread through the cable networks as the complex views of each Congressional member were condensed into red and blue color oppositions in an effort to turn the people's election into an all-out color war.
Such a diminution is insulting both to the American voters who carefully chose their candidates and to the members of Congress whose ideals often transcend party lines.
While designation of Congressional members by colors is useful in many circumstances, it's important to look at the broader picture: Though party majorities are necessary to designate leadership within the House and Senate, members do not always vote along party lines.
Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman is one such senator who garnered support across party lines. In May 2005, he, along with other senators, demonstrated the importance of such crossing-over when they successfully averted an extended partisan showdown regarding judicial nominations and filibusters.
As Lieberman explained last evening in his victory speech, "I will return to the Senate with the foremost goal of breaking through the partisan gridlock in Washington." This aversion to color is to be applauded.
Election Night's cable news graphics - the crawl of red and blue inching from either side towards power in the center - set a zero-sum tone that was counterproductive to national interests. If members of the next Congress are to make sound policy, they must doff their red and blue shirts and avoid petty party politics.
As elected representatives of a people who are very troubled by the current state of affairs in Iraq, Congressional members should be quick to pressure the executive branch for changes in the Iraq policy. Although Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's resignation is a positive first sign of a Bush administration that may be responsive to pressure from a more accountable Congress, such action should only be the beginning.
An unofficial student group on the Tufts campus is admirably championing bipartisanship. As the Daily reported on Oct. 28, Unity08 is advocating for a bipartisan presidential ticket or an Independent ticket acceptable to both parties in 2008. While its viability is still largely up for debate, it is but one suggestion that the climate for cooperation may warm up to over the next two years (insert global warming joke here).
This Congress should set aside the do-nothing example of the last year, roll up its sleeves and get down to business to tackle the bread-and-butter domestic policy of the day.
Health care, social security and education all deserve congressional attention in a peaceful and cooperative manner, as do global terrorism, nuclear weapons proliferation and global warming. Such a re-framing would surely trickle down through the entire nation's political environment and open up both parties to further bipartisan initiatives like Unity08.
As former President Thomas Jefferson commented 205 years ago, "The greatest good we can do our country is to heal its party divisions and make them one people."
Perhaps only a purple Congress will be strong enough to balance a strengthened executive branch. And perhaps only a purple Congress will give the Bush administration the opportunity to change strategy in Iraq and still save face both domestically and internationally after eschewing a "stay the course" policy.
The real challenge for Congress will not be the opposing colors but the blending of ideas. The Tufts community should strive for similar collaboration.
