Divided is best

The electorate does not gain when political power falls to one party

LAST WEEK'S FEDERAL ELECTION RESULTS, which saw the House of Representatives fall from Democratic to Republican control, provide a development preferable to the electorate's decision in Illinois. Here, voters retained Democratic power in both houses, as in the governor's mansion.

The reason for the preference is apparent from recent political history.

There is no guarantee that a government which operates with diverse parties sharing power will be the wisest or most effective possible. Ultimately, however, it will represent the views of the largest segment of the governed.

On the other hand, a political leadership which legislates in accordance with the views of a single, overwhelmingly dominant, party - as happened in the first two years of the Obama administration - will most likely fail to represent anything other than that party (and perhaps not even the voters of that party). When only one segment of the electorate has "skin" in the game, only one segment of the country can feel engaged in the political process.

In this regard, pundits frequently look askance at the Israeli political scene, with its many small parties, and compare it unfavorably to the American system. Yet a case can be made that the Israel structure - raucous and s/tufe-like as it is - nonetheless includes in the decision-making process the greatest number of voices. That is surely beneficial, especially for a country which, since its founding, has faced existential issues which elude neat solutions.

Commentators have noted that the Obama administration moved too far from the central core of beliefs of most Americans, and suffered the consequences in this month's election. We agree with that assessment.

But we are also pleased that the federal balance of power - while still favoring the Democratic party - will be restrained by a House no longer in their control. If the Obama administration is to attain political achievements in the coming two years, brute political force will no longer be sufficient. "Consensus" will have to be turned from a word to be bandied-about into a required tactic.

THAT IS ONE BENEFICIAL DEVELOPMENT of the election.

The other is that it will force the Republicans to offer their prescriptions for repairing the deep economic, security, and other problems which this country now faces.

The results ofthat GOP effort will reveal whether those who called for "Throwing out the Democratic bums and replacing them with Republican ones" were expressing a cynical, or an accurate, picture of the impact of this mid-term election.