Over the hill? - Bob Dole and other Republicans; includes related article on Senate campaigns - NR Guide to the 1996 Election

National Review, Oct 14, 1996 by Kate O'Beirne

WITH the political community drafting obituaries for the Dole campaign, attention has shifted to whether the Republicans can repeat the feat of 1928, the last time they retained control of the House. Come January will Speaker Gephardt be hauling that famous dinosaur skull out of Newt's office, or will a triumphant Speaker Gingrich be building a beach volleyball court on the Capitol's south lawn? The media stand ready to drape crepe on the Republican Revolution, but retirements, the issues, and the political climate provide life-support for the GOP in its struggle to hold the House.

In early September Bob Dole and Jack Kemp met with congressional Republicans on Capitol Hill to calm their nerves. The troops were reportedly in wholesale panic over what November might hold for them should Dole be defeated. In fact, Republican members are no more nervous than incumbents typically are in an election year. They increasingly believe they'll be back in charge even if Bob Dole is back in Russell. And it appears that House Republicans have good reason to feel a jittery optimism as Democratic operatives glumly survey the unfriendly political landscape that must yield them a net gain of twenty seats if they are to take back the House.

Bill Clinton enjoys an 8-to-17 point lead in national polls, but congressional Democrats don't share in his newfound popularity. In generic ballot tests, Republicans basically tie with Democrats when voters are asked their preference. As Clinton expanded his lead over the summer, congressional Democrats have trailed him by roughly 6 points, while Republicans surpass Dole in popularity by about 7 points. The "Republican" tag is more appealing than Bob Dole, and the "Democrat" label is less attractive than Bill Clinton. (No wonder there were so few donkeys in Chicago).

In addition to the brand-name advantage, the political climate appears to favor Republicans this November. The incumbent Congress benefits almost as much as Clinton from the good economy and the absence of polarizing issues. In 1994, voters unhappy with the political status quo "threw the bums out;" 75 per cent of close races went to the GOP. There is little evidence of similar voter sentiment this year. In late June Congress's disapproval ratings were 18 points ahead of its approval ratings; disapproval has been reduced by 2 points. Congressional Republicans are basking in the sunrise of Clinton's Morning in America.

Even in the revolt of 1994, 91 per cent of incumbents who ran were re-elected, and this year 235 Republicans will enjoy the benefits of incumbency that used to frustrate conservatives. Republicans as the majority party now hold the fundraising and agenda-setting advantages exploited by Democrats in the past. "Now that I'm on the inside I finally understand why Democrats held the House during the Reagan years," says one grateful GOP leadership aide.

The Republicans today enjoy a much smaller majority than the Democrats had in the 1980s, but the electoral math still favors them this year. Democrats are defending 30 open seats -- 17 of which are in the South. Republicans appear to be ahead in 13 of the 30 (in 6 races they lead by over 18 points). There are 23 open Republican seats, about half of which are being credibly contested. But resources are not as evenly matched as the number of vulnerable open seats."Our challengers are being outspent in open seats and that's making it tough," complains a Democratic operative. If the parties each hold half their open seats, Democrats would also have to defeat about 25 Republican incumbents to win the 218 seats needed to control the House.

Some GOP freshmen are considered the most vulnerable incumbents because, as one Democratic political strategist explained in reference to the 1994 election, "in tidal waves dead fish wash up on shore." The huge GOP freshman class of two years ago contained some weak candidates, and others won in districts whose demographics are heavily stacked against them. Democrats believe that about ten of these newcomers are "probably gone," including Michael Flanagan in Illinois, Steve Stockman in Texas, Jim Bunn in Oregon, Jim Longley in Maine, Helen Chenoweth in Idaho, and Andrea Seastrand in California. The AFL - CIO has pounded these freshmen with attack ads, spending an estimated $900,000 in Rep. Seastrand's district alone to soften her up for a re-match with her 1994 opponent, whom she beat by only 1,500 votes. Democrats currently lead in some of these races, but they remain "tricky" by the strategist's admission.

Another two dozen vulnerable GOP incumbents, though ahead of their challengers, are below 50 per cent in the polls. But timing has favored the Republicans. The Democratic Party was recruiting candidates over a year ago, when Republicans had an air of invincibility and Bill Clinton was reduced to explaining that he wasn't irrelevant. So not all the Democratic challengers will be of the quality necessary to exploit the weaknesses of GOP incumbents.