Democrats won Congress. But can they deliver on their promises?

Despite their midterm election victories, Democrats face major obstacles to reining in Trump on Iran, tariffs and more.

Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries is expected to be selected as House speaker in the 120th Congress [J Scott Applewhite/AP Photo]

Democrats rode a blue wave to victory in the United States midterm elections , winning control of both chambers of Congress . Now comes the question of whether they can deliver on their promises.

The party campaigned on bringing down the cost of living, ending the war on Iran and holding President Donald Trump accountable, as well as pushing back against his immigration crackdown.

list 1 of 4 Hakeem Jeffries promises ‘affordability’ focus after Democratic midterm win

list 2 of 4 Democratic progressive wing notches win in California Central Valley

list 3 of 4 Iranians celebrate Democrat victory in US midterms

list 4 of 4 Democrat leaders hail midterm election success

But Democrats won’t take control of Congress until January. Even then, there’s only so much they’ll be able to do without Republican cooperation.

Most bills need 60 votes to get past a filibuster in the Senate, and even if Democrats manage that, Trump can still veto their legislation. He has already threatened to do just that, telling a podcast on Monday, “I’ll veto everything.”

But the Democrats now also have other tools at their disposal, including power over Senate confirmations and control over committees that can launch investigations.

So what can Democrats realistically accomplish over the next two years, and where might they struggle to make good on their promises?

Can Democrats bring down the cost of living?

Affordability was one of the biggest issues for voters heading into Tuesday’s midterm elections, and Democrats seized on that, promising to bring down the costs of energy, housing, healthcare and groceries.

Dean Baker, an economist and cofounder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a US-based think tank, said one of the most effective things Democrats can do to bring down costs is push for an end to the war on Iran.

Since February, the conflict has driven up energy prices, as Iran has restricted commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for the oil and gas trade.

Baker argued that Democrats could use congressional investigations and oversight to pressure the Trump administration to end the war, potentially helping to give consumers relief.

Foreign policy is an area where some Republicans could find common cause with Democrats, said Baker.

Another area, he added, might be healthcare, an issue that similarly hits voters in the pocketbook.

The expiration of enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies in 2025 has left many Americans facing higher insurance premiums.

With their new congressional majorities, Democrats could push to restore those subsidies and reverse cuts to Medicaid, the government healthcare programme for low-income Americans.

A possible path to accomplishing that goal would be to include those measures in government spending bills that Congress needs to pass, according to Baker. That would also make them harder for Trump to reject.

“Republicans living in a post-Trump world, I don’t think they want to be on the side of preventing people from getting healthcare or basically paying more for healthcare,” Baker said. “They can make the politics such that he doesn’t want to veto it.”

Trump’s tariff campaign is another factor driving up consumer costs. But Baker warned that they could be tougher to reverse, without substantial support from Republicans to override a Trump veto. Even if they do manage that, prices could take a while to actually drop.

“Prices are like rockets and feathers. They shoot up like rockets; they come down like feathers,” said Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, a progressive economic think tank.

Jacquez, however, pointed to another path Democrats could take that wouldn’t need Trump’s approval.

With majorities in Congress, Democrats could wield congressional committees to investigate companies that have been raising the prices of everything from groceries to electricity bills.

“There’s a lot of precedent for getting some real material outcomes just through having the gavels and being able to subpoena CEOs and haul people in front of Congress,” Jacquez told Al Jazeera.

While there’s no guarantee these investigations would bring down prices, they could put pressure on companies to explain or adjust their decisions.

Could a Democratic Congress hold Trump accountable?

Laura Blessing, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Government Affairs Institute, expects Democrats to make extensive use of their new investigative powers.

“In terms of time spent and newspaper ink spilled, this is where you’re going to see the most action from Dems, by a mile,” she told Al Jazeera in an email.

Congressional investigations do not require White House approval. But they could make life harder for Trump by scrutinising his actions both within and outside of government.

Many Democrats have signalled they plan to investigate the source of the Trump family’s wealth as part of January’s incoming Congress.

Trump’s personal wealth has soared by about $2.2bn since the start of his term, according to financial disclosure forms released earlier this year.

His family’s business empire has likewise expanded over the last two years into everything from cryptocurrency and drones to artificial intelligence and prediction markets — industries his government has favoured in its policies.

Democratic senators have already been laying the groundwork for potential investigations, sending letters to companies and government departments demanding that they preserve records.

Among the issues they could examine are whether donors to Trump’s White House ballroom received favourable treatment from the government, and whether the Justice Department targeted his political opponents.

There is no guarantee, however, that everyone will cooperate.

Trump administration officials could challenge subpoenas in court, delaying investigations. But while Blessing doesn’t expect “Trump’s nuclear family to show up to a subpoena”, she said Democrats could still question government employees and others connected to Trump’s inner circle.

Even if they uncover wrongdoing, however, there is no guarantee of legal consequences, since it’s Trump’s own Justice Department that would have to decide whether to take up the cases.

Impeachment is another possibility. Lawmakers have already introduced articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for multiple reasons, including allegations that he waged war against Iran without seeking congressional approval first.

Republican Representative Thomas Massie has said he will try to force a House vote on Hegseth’s impeachment when the outgoing Congress returns to session next week.

Trump, who was impeached twice during his first term, however, dismissed the prospect of facing a third impeachment himself, telling reporters on Wednesday that he was “not even a little bit” worried.

“I think it would destroy the Democratic Party if they did that, because it would be impeachment for no reason,” he said.

Trump also defended Hegseth, saying he was doing “a very good job”.

Even if the House of Representatives votes to impeach a government official, the case must still be weighed in a Senate trial.

Removing an elected official would require a two-thirds vote in the Senate, meaning many Republicans would need to get on board to oust a figure like Trump or Hegseth. No president in US history has ever been removed from office as a result of an impeachment proceeding.

Could Democrats end the war on Iran?

With less than two months until the 120th Congress is sworn in, experts anticipate Trump will use his final weeks with the outgoing Republican majorities to push through any remaining legislative priorities.

It also leaves Trump a critical window in which to escalate the war on Iran, according to Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a foreign policy think tank.

“He has shown a pattern in which, in the face of humiliation and defeat, he becomes more reckless,” Parsi told Al Jazeera.

Democrats could pursue a binding resolution to wind down the war. After all, the US Constitution assigns Congress the sole authority to declare war, and laws like the War Powers Act of 1973 give lawmakers a path to ending unauthorised conflicts past the 60-day mark.

But there is no guarantee that those efforts would work, given the possibility of Trump vetoing their proposed measures.

Experts, however, say there is another way that Democrats could rein in Trump’s war powers. One of their most powerful tools will be control over government spending.

The Trump administration can continue using money already allocated for military operations, but Democrats could try to block additional funding for the war.

“It creates a limitation for how long he can pursue the war,” Parsi said. “If he needs more funding for it, we’re not talking about small sums that he can just reallocate from other places easily.”

With control of congressional committees, Democrats could also investigate the administration’s conduct during the war, including whether its military operations complied with US law.

“Rigorous oversight would not restrict military operations by itself but could raise the political costs of the war beyond what the president or other key officials are willing to endure,” said David Janovsky, a policy analyst at the Project on Government Oversight.

How much political will Democrats have to end the conflict, however, is an open question.

Blessing, the government affairs fellow, noted that the party has historically been reluctant to withhold military funding out of fear of being accused of undermining US troops.

But Parsi warned that failing to act would be politically unsustainable — and could be seen by the party’s base as a tacit endorsement of US military involvement in the Middle East.

“It will no longer be just Trump’s war,” Parsi said. “They will also co-own it, because they will be complicit, because they have the ability to stop it.”

Could Democrats rein in Trump’s immigration crackdown?

Another target for the incoming Democrat-led Congress could be Trump’s hardline immigration crackdown.

His pledge to oversee the largest mass deportation in US history has sparked widespread public backlash. A public opinion poll earlier this year found that 65 percent of Americans believe Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has “gone too far” in its efforts.

With control of both chambers of Congress, Democrats could launch investigations into ICE and other agencies involved in the crackdown.

Their probes could seek information about conditions inside detention centres, allegations of abuse and how taxpayer dollars are being used for immigration enforcement, said Heidi Altman, the vice president of policy at the National Immigration Law Center.

Altman argues Congress could also claw back the roughly $240bn already given to the Trump administration for immigration enforcement over the past two years.

That amount of money, she explained, has allowed ICE to operate with few constraints, without having to prioritise which communities to go into or who to detain.

“The only way to force a slowdown and actual sort of decision-making and prioritisation and enforcement is to dramatically curtail their budget by taking back the funding from the last session,” she said.

Doing so would require passing legislation that Trump could eventually veto. But Altman argued that Democrats should push ahead anyway.

“The worst possible thing we could do is throw up our hands and say we have limited power,” she said.

“Pass the bills, see what happens, put them on the president’s desk, and dare him to look at the American people and say he’s not signing something that they overwhelmingly demanded.”

尽管民主党在中期选举中获胜，但在伊朗问题、关税等问题上，他们仍面临着遏制特朗普的重大障碍。

民主党领袖哈基姆·杰弗里斯有望当选为第120届国会众议院议长。[J Scott Applewhite/AP Photo]

民主党在美国中期选举中乘胜追击，赢得了国会两院的控制权。现在的问题是，他们能否兑现自己的承诺。

该党竞选时承诺降低生活成本、结束对伊朗的战争、追究唐纳德·特朗普总统的责任，并反对他的移民打压政策。

列表 1/4：哈基姆·杰弗里斯在民主党中期选举获胜后承诺关注“可负担性”

加州中央谷地民主党进步派赢得四项胜利中的第二项

伊朗人庆祝民主党在美国中期选举中获胜（共4条记录，此为第3条）

四位民主党领导人中的第四位称赞中期选举成功

但民主党人要到明年一月才能掌控国会。即便如此，如果没有共和党的合作，他们能做的事情也十分有限。

大多数法案需要60票才能在参议院通过，以应对冗长辩论，即便民主党人成功获得60票，特朗普仍然可以否决他们的法案。他已经威胁要这样做，周一在一个播客节目中说：“我会否决一切。”

但民主党人现在还有其他工具可以利用，包括对参议院确认程序的权力以及对可以发起调查的委员会的控制权。

那么，民主党人在未来两年内究竟能取得哪些实际成就？他们又会在哪些方面难以兑现承诺？

民主党人能降低生活成本吗？

在周二的中期选举中，经济承受能力是选民最关心的问题之一，民主党人抓住这一点，承诺降低能源、住房、医疗保健和食品杂货的成本。

美国智库经济与政策研究中心的经济学家兼联合创始人迪恩·贝克表示，民主党人降低成本最有效的方法之一就是推动结束对伊朗的战争。

自 2 月以来，这场冲突推高了能源价格，因为伊朗限制了通过霍尔木兹海峡的商业交通，而霍尔木兹海峡是石油和天然气贸易的重要水道。

贝克认为，民主党人可以利用国会的调查和监督向特朗普政府施压，要求其结束这场战争，从而有可能帮助消费者获得救济。

贝克表示，外交政策是部分共和党人可能与民主党人找到共同点的领域。

他还补充说，另一个领域可能是医疗保健，这个问题同样会影响选民的钱包。

2025年《平价医疗法案》加强补贴到期后，许多美国人将面临更高的保险费。

民主党人凭借在国会的新多数席位，可能会推动恢复这些补贴，并扭转对医疗补助计划（为低收入美国人提供的政府医疗保健计划）的削减。

贝克认为，实现这一目标的一个可能途径是将这些措施纳入国会需要通过的政府支出法案中。这样做也会让特朗普更难否决这些法案。

贝克说：“在后特朗普时代，共和党人我认为他们不想站在阻止人们获得医疗保健或增加医疗保健支出的一边。他们可以利用政治手段，让他不想否决这项法案。”

特朗普的关税政策是推高消费者成本的另一个因素。但贝克警告说，如果没有共和党人的大力支持推翻特朗普的否决，这些关税政策可能更难逆转。即便最终成功推翻否决，物价也可能需要一段时间才能真正下降。

“物价就像火箭和羽毛。它们像火箭一样飙升，像羽毛一样飘落，”进步经济智库 Groundwork Collaborative 的政策和倡导主管 Alex Jacquez 说。

然而，雅克兹指出，民主党人还可以采取另一条无需特朗普批准的道路。

民主党在国会占据多数席位，可以利用国会委员会调查那些提高从食品杂货到电费等各种商品价格的公司。

“通过掌握议事槌，能够传唤首席执行官并将相关人员传唤到国会作证，就能取得一些真正的实质性成果，这方面有很多先例，”雅克兹告诉半岛电视台。

虽然不能保证这些调查会降低价格，但它们可能会给企业施加压力，促使其解释或调整决策。

民主党控制的国会能否追究特朗普的责任？

乔治城大学政府事务研究所高级研究员劳拉·布莱辛预计，民主党人将广泛利用其新的调查权力。

“就投入的时间和报纸上的篇幅而言，民主党人在这里的行动力度绝对遥遥领先，”她在给半岛电视台的电子邮件中写道。

国会调查无需白宫批准。但通过审查特朗普在政府内外的一切行为，国会调查可能会让他的日子更难过。

许多民主党人已表示，他们计划在明年一月新一届国会中调查特朗普家族的财富来源。

根据今年早些时候公布的财务披露表格，自特朗普上任以来，他的个人财富已飙升约 22 亿美元。

过去两年，他家族的商业帝国也同样扩张到了加密货币、无人机、人工智能和预测市场等各个领域——而这些领域正是他所在政府在其政策中大力扶持的行业。

民主党参议员们已经开始为可能的调查做准备，他们致函各公司和政府部门，要求他们保存记录。

他们可以调查的问题包括：向特朗普白宫宴会厅捐款的人是否受到了政府的优待，以及司法部是否针对他的政治对手。

然而，并不能保证每个人都会合作。

特朗普政府官员可能会在法庭上对传票提出异议，从而拖延调查。但布莱辛表示，虽然她认为“特朗普的核心家庭成员不会应传票要求出庭”，但民主党人仍然可以质询政府雇员以及与特朗普核心圈子有关联的其他人士。

即使他们发现了不当行为，也不能保证会受到法律制裁，因为是否受理这些案件将由特朗普自己的司法部决定。

弹劾是另一种可能性。议员们已经以多项理由对国防部长皮特·赫格塞斯提出了弹劾条款，其中包括指控他未经国会批准就对伊朗发动战争。

共和党众议员托马斯·马西表示，他将在下周即将卸任的国会复会时，努力推动众议院对赫格塞斯的弹劾进行投票。

然而，在第一任期内曾两次被弹劾的特朗普，却对面临第三次弹劾的可能性不以为然。他周三告诉记者，他“一点也不”担心。

“我认为如果他们那样做，将会摧毁民主党，因为这将是毫无理由的弹劾，”他说。

特朗普还为赫格塞斯辩护，称他“做得非常好”。

即使众议院投票决定弹劾一名政府官员，该案件仍需在参议院进行审判。

罢免民选官员需要参议院三分之二的多数票，这意味着要罢免像特朗普或赫格塞斯这样的人物，需要很多共和党人的支持。美国历史上没有一位总统因弹劾程序而被免职。

民主党人能否结束对伊朗的战争？

距离第120届国会宣誓就职还有不到两个月的时间，专家预计特朗普将利用与即将卸任的共和党多数派共事的最后几周时间，推动任何剩余的立法优先事项。

昆西负责任治国研究所（一家外交政策智库）执行副总裁特里塔·帕尔西表示，这也为特朗普提供了一个关键的窗口期，让他可以升级对伊朗的战争。

帕尔西告诉半岛电视台：“他表现出一种模式，那就是在面对羞辱和失败时，他会变得更加鲁莽。”

民主党人可能会寻求通过一项具有约束力的决议来结束战争。毕竟，美国宪法赋予国会宣战的唯一权力，而诸如1973年《战争权力法》之类的法律也为立法者提供了一条途径，可以在未经授权的冲突持续超过60天后结束战争。

但考虑到特朗普有可能否决他们提出的措施，这些努力能否奏效尚无保证。

然而，专家表示，民主党人还可以通过另一种方式来限制特朗普的战争权力。他们最有力的手段之一就是控制政府开支。

特朗普政府可以继续使用已分配给军事行动的资金，但民主党人可能会试图阻止为这场战争追加拨款。

帕尔西说：“这限制了他能持续发动战争的时间。如果他需要更多资金，我们说的可不是他能轻易从其他地方挪用的小额款项。”

如果民主党人控制了国会委员会，他们还可以调查政府在战争期间的行为，包括其军事行动是否符合美国法律。

“严格的监督本身并不能限制军事行动，但可能会使战争的政治代价超出总统或其他关键官员愿意承受的范围，”政府监督项目政策分析师大卫·亚诺夫斯基说。

然而，民主党人究竟有多少政治意愿来结束这场冲突，目前还是个未知数。

政府事务研究员布莱辛指出，该党历来不愿扣留军费，因为担心被指责破坏美军。

但帕尔西警告说，不采取行动在政治上是不可持续的，而且可能会被该党的基本盘视为对美国军事介入中东的默许。

帕尔西说：“这不再仅仅是特朗普的战争。他们也将是这场战争的共同责任人，因为他们是共犯，因为他们有能力阻止这场战争。”

民主党人能否遏制特朗普的移民打压政策？

即将上任的民主党控制的国会可能将把矛头指向特朗普强硬的移民政策。

他承诺监督美国历史上最大规模的遣返行动，引发了广泛的公众反对。今年早些时候的一项民意调查显示，65%的美国人认为美国移民和海关执法局（ICE）的行动“做得太过火了”。

如果民主党控制了国会两院，他们就可以对美国移民及海关执法局（ICE）和其他参与打击行动的机构展开调查。

国家移民法律中心政策副总裁海蒂·奥特曼表示，他们的调查可能会寻求有关拘留中心内部状况、虐待指控以及纳税人的钱是如何被用于移民执法的信息。

奥特曼认为，国会还可以追回过去两年中已经拨给特朗普政府用于移民执法的约 2400 亿美元。

她解释说，有了这笔资金，美国移民及海关执法局（ICE）就可以在几乎没有任何限制的情况下运作，而无需优先考虑进入哪些社区或拘留哪些人。

她说：“要迫使他们放慢脚步，真正进行决策、确定优先事项并加强执行，唯一的办法就是大幅削减他们的预算，收回上届会议的拨款。”

这样做需要通过立法，而特朗普最终可能会否决这项立法。但奥特曼认为，民主党人无论如何都应该继续推进。

“我们最不应该做的就是举手投降，承认我们能力有限，”她说。

“先把法案通过，看看会发生什么，然后把法案放到总统的办公桌上，让他看着美国人民，说他不会签署他们压倒性要求的东西。”