In post-election America, it just wouldn’t feel right without some sort of over-sensationalized scandal, small chatter about the next presidential cycle or a looming political crisis that will inevitably result in a last-minute game of chicken between Republicans and Democrats.

One month out, we’re three for three – a salacious, but rather irrelevant sex scandal leading to the resignation of the director of the CIA, a formerly celebrated general; pundits overanalyzing the every move of expected candidates; and the threat of the economy going off a looming “fiscal cliff” at the beginning of the new year, unless a staunchly divided Congress can hammer out a deal.

So now, the nation places its attention and half-hearted hope yet again in the ability of Congress to simply do its job – work together and pass legislation to make America better. We’re asking Congress to do – in just a few weeks – what it hasn’t been able to accomplish in over four years. The chances of success this time around? I’d bet zero.

If a deal isn’t reached, tax rates will go up for all Americans, as the Bush-era tax cuts are set to expire. Military defense spending will see drastic cuts and funding for some government programs – including food assistance and some health care and agricultural subsidies – will be significantly slashed.

But the cliff isn’t really a cliff – more of a hill, I’d say. There’s not going to be some catastrophic, Depression-style collapse if a deal isn’t reached. No one will be writing a check to Uncle Sam on Jan. 2. There will still be time to still reach a deal in early 2013 and, with a new class of Congress, it might not be not be such a bad idea.

Democrats certainly have the upper hand in the negotiations as they enjoy a tidal wave of momentum after a very successful election night, which left Republicans licking their wounds in the dark corners of the political arena.

In their proposals to the Republicans, Democrats are seeking an extension of the current tax rates for all income brackets, except for those Americans making more than $250,000 per year. They argue that by increasing these rates, closing many unnecessary loopholes and deductions and slowing government spending, the measures can be avoided.

Republicans, however, argue a position which extends the tax breaks to all income brackets, closes some loopholes and cuts government spending as the best way to avert the looming increases in rates and cuts to military spending, both sacred cows to conservatives.

Going off this so-called “cliff” could have enormous advantages for Democrats, giving them significant leverage in their message against stalwart Republicans in Congress who were willing to raise tax rates on everyone as a protest against raising rates on the highest-earning Americans.

They could immediately begin to pressure Republicans to address the issue quickly, before the impact could be truly felt by their constituencies. Republicans could also technically not have to raise rates on any bracket at that point, since they would be lowering the new tax rates on those making less than $250,000 a year. They just simply keep the new rates imposed on those higher-income earners.

By allowing the new, slightly less conservative House to address the rates and cuts in January, the Republicans would face a caucus with less of a Tea Party influence, which could lead to more willingness by the Republican House leadership to work with Obama, who continually says that he is willing to make concessions to address the cliff issue.

So, for now, we wait and watch the familiar game of political chicken play out. This time around, however, Republicans look poised to blink first.

Austin Gaddis is a senior majoring in communication studies. His column runs on Wednesdays.