Elections américaines et associations : Que signifiera la victoire des Démocrates pour les multinati

Alfons Westgeest, vice-président du groupe de Kellen Company, se penche sur les implications pour les entreprises des deux côtés de l’Atlantique si, comme prévu, les Démocrates prennent le contrôle de la Chambre et du Sénat américains. 

1. On a macro level:
Supposing the polls are accurate, Democrats will have a majority in the House, and possibly also the Senate. What will this mean for companies and associations on both sides of the Atlantic? A divided US government could lead to a centralist approach to policy, but could also cause gridlock

2. US Congressional Committees
The chairs of powerful committees dealing with taxes, energy, and finance are likely to change. Many association policies could be impacted by the political gridlock, others might have their outcomes affected by switches in majorities and chairs. 
For example, on energy policy, Republicans take a market approach whereby economic forces would drive change. Democrats, however, would support greater regulation, on emissions and mileage, and tax incentives for conservation and energy alternatives. 

3. Changes in Strategy and Staffing
Of course such changes will require work by all US trade associations modify and adjust themselves to the new political field, including such practical aspects as establishing timely relations with new government contacts. 

What does this mean for a multinational company or international association? Each situation requires its own analysis. But potential gridlock and the philosophical shift to more business regulation will be hallmarks of a swing from Republican to Democrat. In many cases, (such as the energy example given above) this will translate to switching from an offensive strategy – trying to obtain an advantageous legislative change, to a defensive one – trying to block a disadvantageous one.

Those companies or associations that have a large presence and leading role (i.e. those which are most visible) might be able to secure a former Congress member or personnel as their leader or flag carrier promoting their interests further (the revolving door principle). This may subsequently lead to changes in the government affairs staff of these companies and associations.

4. EU – US
The bilateral relations would not significantly change, except in few areas, which include energy and climate change (global warming debate and what to do about it; the security of supply, and new views on the promotion of alternative energy, such as renewable energy and hydrogen). 

On bilateral trade, the major question is if both EU and US are prepared to re-launch an (reduced) agenda for closure of the Doha Round. This will mostly affect the relations with “third countries”, who are awaiting new “openings”. If this fails, the bi-lateral agreements will prospect with more protectionism as a result.
 What about government process and influence across the Atlantic? Compared to EU level the outcome of the mid-term elections could be much more « dramatic » because of differences between EU and US political systems.
 The EU has of course much more variety both in parties on national level and in the political groups on an EU Level. Al though there is only one chamber on an EU level its power is significantly lower than that of Congress even though there have been recent increases in its power. EU policy is also limited in its scope due to the rights afforded to it from its member states. Furthermore changes in the European Parliament composition matter less for broad general EU policies than say the rotating European Council of Ministers Presidency and the five-year changes at the head of the European Commission. However, in the US a « mid-term » election can have a significant effect during the term of a US President, whereas in the EU the national elections in its 25 (soon 27) member states provide a “constant flow” of changes in national governments.