The Washington Post speculates.

...President Bush has new hopes for action on his conservative slate of judges, his energy plan calling for drilling in Alaska's wildlife refuge, and the policies he favors on topics such as homeland security, terrorism insurance and prescription drug coverage. With Democrats losing their ability to set the Senate schedule and launch probes of the administration, chances improve for Bush's hopes to extend last year's tax cuts, curtail jury awards, cut business regulations and overhaul Medicare.



At the same time, White House officials said last night that most of their early effort in the new Congress will revolve around stimulating economic growth. Wary of the struggling economy as a vulnerability for Bush heading into his reelection race, administration officials said Bush was likely to introduce a new economic-stimulus package early next year. Among the plans being drawn up are new tax cuts for businesses and investors.



This all sounds pretty good to me, and the sooner the better.

Other conservatives have other ideas. From the National Review Corner:

SUPREME PLEASURE [Rod Dreher]
It is hard to know which of the many pleasures of last night's results to choose as one's favorite, but I think it's got to be the future of the federal judiciary, in particular the U.S. Supreme Court. It is now safe for Rehnquist, O'Connor and other possible retirees to go gently. Issues related to the sanctity of life -- from abortion, to cloning, to biomedical research -- aren't the most immediate (the war is), but are the ones with the potential to do the most long-term damage to our culture if the wrong side prevails. With a popular pro-life president in the White House and the Senate in control of his party (owing primarily to his labors), those who believe in what the Pope has called the "culture of life" stand perhaps our best chance ever at seeing our convictions made into law -- and upheld by a pro-life Supreme Court. Alas, the cynic in me can't help being tortured by thoughts of the excuses we may soon hear from Republicans, explaining why we can't have pro-life legislation and judges just yet ("In a time of war, we mustn't be divisive...," etc.). For now, it is enough to chant silently the mantra "Chief Justice Scalia," in the same jubilatory manner in which I invoked the happy phrase "Speaker Gingrich" on this day eight years ago.

...Alas, the cynic in me can't help being tortured by thoughts of the excuses we may soon hear from Republicans, explaining why we can't have pro-life legislation and judges just yet...

Well, you're hearing from at least one. While I personally don't approve of abortion, and wouldn't mind a little tighter protection for unborn kids at certain points (parental permission for abortions for minors, restrictions on partial-birth abortions) this is not the time or place to indulge "all abortions are illegal" fantasies when more critical things are going on. Conservatives who make this a litmus test for the Republicans are as loopy as leftists who base every political decision on the right to abort.

If you want to know the truth, Roe vs. Wade aside, there is no Constitutional reason this controversy should be handled at the Federal level at all. Now please sit down and be quiet so you don't blow it for the rest of us.