The National Journal's Stan Collender ($$) is feeling pessimistic about next year's budget. Key graf: If Republicans are in the majority, fiscal and social conservatives will have to work with moderates who will fear a lame-duck president and a weakened leadership even less than they did this year. That will make it very hard to get majority support for any of the key budget, tax and spending issues. If Democrats are in the majority, the traditional split between the Blue Dogs/deficit hardliners and the rest of the party will be just as prevalent as it was before. The major difference, however, will be that, after more than a decade in the wilderness, most Democrats will better understand what it's like to reach the promised land of being in the majority and will be more likely to work together behind the scenes than they were before. Therefore, regardless of whether one party has a majority in both chambers or whether the House and Senate are split, the FY08 budget debate is likely to be highly contentious and a constant struggle. Collender doesn't think meaningful budget process reform stands much chance of getting anywhere, either. Finally, there has been a great deal of talk about Democrats re-establishing the pay-as-you-go budget procedures that used to require entitlement increases and tax cuts to be offset with other mandatory spending cuts or tax increases. This is far more likely to be a House or congressional rule than a change in the budget law. Paygo rules for tax cuts will be unacceptable to the White House and a veto would not be overridden. An internal rule, however, will be more symbolic than substantive. He may be right, but it's still worth a shot. After all, there's some chance Bush wouldn't veto a perhaps weaker but still fair version of PAYGO...isn't there?