Factbox: Analysts’ views on election results

WASHINGTON (BestGrowthStock) – Republicans were projected to win control of the U.S. House of Representatives and pick up seats in the Senate on Tuesday, crippling President Barack Obama’s policy agenda over the next two years.

Here is reaction from analysts to the midterm elections and their policy implications once the votes are counted:

ETHAN SIEGAL, ANALYST, THE WASHINGTON EXCHANGE, PUBLIC

POLICY ADVISORY FIRM

“The post-election GOP win could deliver more fluff than stuff.”

“The newly elected crop of House and Senate Republicans will see their mission as not to compromise and cut deals with President Obama, but rather to destroy his remaining agenda and undo healthcare and financial services reform …”

“This will be a positive sentiment election for investors — they will get the peace of mind they want, at least for a day or two, until the Bush tax cuts issue resurfaces.”

CHRIS DOLAN, POLITICAL SCIENCE PROFESSOR, LEBANON VALLEY

COLLEGE IN PENNSYLVANIA

“It will be difficult to almost impossible for President Obama to get any of his legislation through the Senate, let alone Congress.”

“The president will be forced to compromise on certain issues, namely by accepting some spending cuts most likely in exchange for finding new revenues …”

“On entitlement issues — such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — he will likely compromise or triangulate on some things. On others, namely health care, the president will likely have the Senate to prevent Republican legislation from passing. Or he will use his veto pen.”

JIM KESSLER, VICE PRESIDENT FOR POLICY AT THIRD WAY, A

MODERATE PROGRESSIVE THINK TANK

After the election, Obama will need to reorient his party.

“He needs to lead the Democratic Party in a new and modern direction. The party needs to transform from one that is focused principally on economic security to one obsessed with economic growth … The 80-year quest to construct a sound safety net is now over.”

If Republicans capture not only the House of Representatives, but the Senate as well, “it would be a punch in the stomach” for Obama.

He could govern with Republicans in control of both chambers of Congress, as President Bill Clinton did. “However, I wouldn’t expect much in terms of agreement in the first year … the best a Republican Senate could do is thwart a future Obama agenda. With Obama holding the veto pen, the GOP could only do so much.”

DAVID MIN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR AMERICAN

PROGRESS, A MODERATE THINK TANK

Legislative gridlock, Min suggested, will encourage Tea Party activists, but restrict Washington’s ability to respond to potential further economic distress and to give the economy another shot in the arm. He said, “Clearly it’s not going to be from fiscal stimulus at this time.”

“We could see some reckless activity in the cessation of spending … Worse than gridlock, we could see a shutdown of normal government activity. That would have a significant effect on economic growth, an anti-stimulus if you will.”

JARET SEIBERG, POLICY ANALYST, WASHINGTON RESEARCH GROUP,

AN INVESTMENT ADVISORY FIRM

“The ability of this administration to get major new programs done was already limited. This just seals the deal.”

“We are firm believers that divided government leads to moderation at the legislative and regulatory levels. So GOP control of Congress is a broad positive for the financial sector.”

(Reporting by Kevin Drawbaugh; Editing by Eric Walsh and Tim Dobbyn)

Factbox: Analysts’ views on election results