It’s tempting to draw a simple connection between the Democratic Party’s recent surge in policymaking and its simultaneous rise in the polls. There is no guarantee that it will last for days.
Voters often claim to be frustrated with Washington for “doing nothing”, so they should probably be happy when their leaders do something. unveiled a battleground state ad campaign touting the Republican Party’s recent accomplishments. Finally, incumbents have a strong attraction inherent in the belief that they will be rewarded with satisfied voters for fulfilling their campaign promises.
In other words, it is natural to treat the enactment of new policies as, by definition, successful governance.
History shows otherwise. Some of Congress’ historically most productive sessions have resulted in heavy electoral losses for the president’s party: seven seats in the House and seven in the Senate. The Republican Party lost Ronald Reagan’s 27 seats in 1982 after the first round of tax cuts and military buildups. Even after the popular creation of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965, the ruling Democratic Party lost 47 seats in the House and three seats in the Senate in the following year’s midterm elections.
In some cases, such as the ACA, the law has been controversial and caused public backlash. Elsewhere, Americans had other things on their minds before the next election, including the recession of 1982 and his 1966 urban riots.
Even when voters applaud policy changes, their memory often fades and their attention is quickly turned to other concerns. Polls show that the bipartisan infrastructure bill was widely approved when Mr. Biden signed it last November. However, in one survey conducted in June this year, only about a quarter of respondents remembered the bill becoming law.
So even if the recent resurgence in popularity of the Democratic Party reflects an appreciative response to policy-making haste, rather than the steady decline in gasoline prices since midsummer or the waning of coronavirus-related turmoil. Whether it continues is an open question.
Dissatisfaction tends to be a much more energizing and lasting emotion in politics than gratitude. Opposition lawmakers usually have incentives to voice their dissent in the polls, but swing voters know they can cut the power of the president without handing over full control of the government to their opponents. because there is
To have any chance of avoiding this fate, Democrats may need to harness their anger for their own good. This strategy is usually doomed to failure in the midterm elections. Rebellious politics rarely benefit those in charge. But his June ruling of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade was a rare instance of federal policy on a key issue moving sharply in the opposite direction of the president’s political party, and already Election engagement appears to be on the rise among Democratic voters.
Donald Trump’s continued high profile in public opinion, and the pro-Trump candidate’s success, especially in the Senate Republican primary, makes the 2022 midterm elections more likely than usual for a referendum on the incumbent president. Mr. Trump is not as popular as Mr. Biden, and a one-way election could be more of a split decision than a Republican landslide.
Some Democrats may find cold solace in the fact that the price of upbeat election predictions is the Dobbs ruling and the continued presence of Trumpism. It provides incentives for achieving goals, but those incentives are rarely enforced by middle voters. When it comes time for re-nominations, it usually pays off, as party members are the ones who do the most to press politicians to deliver on their promises.
Biden’s policies on health care, climate change and student loans may not help his party win seats this year. But don’t be surprised if he uses them to convince his fellow Democrats that he deserves his second chance in 2024.
Bloomberg Opinion Details:
• Why Biden’s poll numbers are improving: Jonathan Bernstein
• Biden is unpopular, Democrats are unpopular: Julianna Goldman
• Biden’s Debt Relief Plan Worsen American Politics: Clive Crook
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
David A. Hopkins is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Boston College and author of Red Fighting Blue: How Geography and Election Rules Polarize American Politics.
More articles like this can be found at bloomberg.com/opinion.
