As recently as a few
months ago, prospects
for a Democratic takeover
of the U.S. House
of Representatives in
2006 looked marginal, at best. After
slowly scratching its way back into
contention in the three congressional
cycles that followed the debacle of
1994, the party lost seats in the last
two elections. Republicans, meanwhile,
were enjoying all the benefits of
incumbency, a sharp reduction in
competitive districts due to a highly
partisan round of GOP-engineered
gerrymandering, and an ideological
realignment of the electorate that had
been fueling consistent Republicans
gains in "red states." So Democratic
pessimism seemed entirely rational.
But at the beginning of 2006, the
trend arrows have turned in a very different
direction. With Republicans
mired in a never-ending series of ethics
scandals, approval ratings for President
Bush and the GOP-controlled Congress
are abysmal. House GOP leaders are
particularly embattled. They have
steadily lost control of their own membership,
and with it, their ability to promote
an agenda. Republicans' extreme
partisanship and take-no-prisoners tactics
have also helped keep House
Democrats united. Meanwhile, they've
been running out of ways to pad their
numbers: The harvesting of conservative
districts in red states, especially in
the South, has reached the point of
diminishing returns.
For the first time in more than a
decade, the "lay of the land," as measured
by vulnerable incumbents, open
seats, and candidate recruitment,
seems to be favoring Democrats.
Moreover, Democrats need a net pickup
of just 15 out of 435 seats in order
to regain control of the House -- a relatively
modest number by historical
standards, and one achieved by the
minority party in four of the last eight
midterm elections.
With all this wind at their backs,
Democrats may now be able to expand
the number of competitive races and
overwhelm vulnerable Republican
incumbents who have survived by narrow
margins in the past. Also in their
favor will be an emerging Democratic
advantage in candidate recruitment and
retirement decisions, and a dwindling
Republican margin in fundraising.
The Democrats' momentum is perhaps
best illustrated by recent polls
showing them ahead by unusually large
margins (ranging from the high single
digits to double digits) in generic congressional
match-ups. If that trend
holds -- and is reinforced by the historic
tendency of voters to frown on a president's
party halfway through a second
term -- then Democrats simply have to
be smart about projecting a popular
national message that features a sharp
critique of Republican misgovernment
and a clear alternative agenda.
The greatest concentration of vulnerable
House Republican incumbents
is in the Northeast, where many
of them represent districts recently
carried by Democratic presidential
candidates.
In Connecticut, Republican Reps.
Rob Simmons and Christopher Shays,
both re-elected by less than 10 percentage
points in 2004, face rematches
against strong Democratic challengers.
Democrats have also recruited a
formidable candidate to oppose
Republican Rep. Nancy Johnson in a
district carried by both John Kerry
and Al Gore. New Hampshire Rep.
Jeb Bradley is also quite vulnerable,
and his Granite State colleague Rep.
Charles Bass could become so.
Democrats could pick up several
House seats in Pennsylvania, where,
higher up on the ticket, Democratic
Gov. Ed Rendell and the Democratic
challenger to Sen. Rick Santorum, State
Treasurer Bob Casey, were both leading
in recent polls. Most notably, in a suburban
Philadelphia district where Kerry
beat Bush, Democrat Lois Murphy
may be the favorite against Republican
Rep. Jim Gerlach. The race is a rematch
of their very close 2004 race.
Meanwhile, also in the Philadelphia
suburbs, Republican freshman Rep.
Mike Fitzpatrick faces a tough race.
Elsewhere in the state, Republican
Reps. Curt Weldon (whose Delaware
County district was won by both Gore
and Kerry) and Melissa Hart (whose
western Pennsylvania district was
recently represented by a Democrat) are
likely to face serious challenges.
In the 7th District of New Jersey --
a state where the recent Democratic
trend was underlined by former Sen.
Jon Corzine's double-digit win in the
2005 gubernatorial race -- the recruitment
by Democrats of experienced
State Assemblywoman Linda Stender
has made incumbent Republican Rep.
Michael Ferguson look vulnerable.
Next door in New York, likely
landslide wins for Democrats Eliot
Spitzer (in the governor's race) and
Hillary Clinton (in her bid for reelection
to the U.S. Senate) could
sweep out several House Republican
incumbents.
The bottom line is that the
Northeastern region could provide
more than half of the net gains required
to produce a Democratic Congress, as
moderate Democrats slowly but surely
continue to replace moderate Republicans
in suburban districts.
Another hot spot is Ohio, the pivotal
battlefield of 2004, where the long-dominant
state Republican
administration may now
be as unpopular as any in
history -- and where Rep.
Robert Ney, a longtime
House committee chairman,
has become deeply embroiled in
the Jack Abramoff influence-peddling
scandals. The leading indicator of surging
Democratic strength in Ohio was
the near-win by neophyte candidate
Paul Hackett in an August 2005 special
election. That race was in a profoundly
conservative district in the southern
part of the state, where Bush won by a
two-to-one margin just a year earlier.
Aside from Ney -- and Hackett's now-notorious
opponent, Rep. Jean
Schmidt, who accused Pennsylvania's
Democratic Rep. John Murtha of cowardice
on the House floor -- at least two
other Ohio Republicans are also facing
tough opposition.
In the South and Southwest, a number
of perennially vulnerable Republican
incumbents may finally meet
their matches against strong opponents
and generally favorable circumstances
for Democrats. These include Republican
Rep. Heather Wilson of New
Mexico; Republican Reps. Mike Sodrel
and John Hostettler of Indiana (Sodrel
is facing former Democratic Rep. Baron
Hill); Republican Rep. Charles Taylor
of North Carolina (opposed by former
football star Heath Shuler); and
Republican Rep. Clay Shaw of Florida
(challenged by Democratic State Sen.
Ron Klein). But the most symbolically
important vulnerable GOP incumbent
is, of course, deposed House Majority
Leader Tom DeLay of Texas. He is not
only trailing in early polls against former
Democratic Rep. Nick Lampson,
but also faces a primary challenge from
former Rep. Steve Stockman.
There is also a scandal-generated
Democratic opportunity in California's
Central Valley: Veteran GOP Rep.
Richard Pombo's alleged links to the
Abramoff scandal have made him suddenly
vulnerable.
Meanwhile, Democratic incumbents
in highly competitive districts look
strong. Outside of contests skewed by
redistricting, only seven incumbent
Democrats have lost since 1996. A couple
of upset winners in 2004 -- most
notably Rep. Melissa Bean of Illinois --
will have tough races. And only one
Southern Democratic incumbent
expects a strong challenge -- Rep. Jim
Marshall of Georgia, whose district was
gerrymandered to make it less
Democratic. He nonetheless has held a
sizable lead in early polls. So, by and
large, Democrats are unlikely to lose
many seats that would offset their probable
gains.
In the competition for open seats,
most of the big targets at this point are
districts now held by Republicans.
That's a big change from the recent past.
Republicans shored up their control of
Congress by dominating competitive
open contests in 1996, 2000, and 2002.
But the recent announcement by
Arizona Rep. Jim Kolbe that he will
retire could be a sign that the tough
landscape will produce additional GOP
retirements early this year.
There are two open GOP seats in
districts carried by John Kerry that are
good prospects for Democratic gains:
Colorado's 7th District, represented
by gubernatorial candidate Rep. Bob
Beauprez, who won the seat by less
than a thousand votes, and Iowa's 1st
District, where Rep. Jim Nussle is
retiring from a district that Kerry won
by 8 percentage points. Democrats in
Florida and Wisconsin also have
open-seat targets.
If the current Republican disarray
continues or even deepens, there may
yet be additional opportunities for
Democrats as the competitive battleground
expands. And in Rep. Rahm
Emanuel of Illinois, the Democratic
House campaign effort enjoys a smart
and very aggressive field marshal who
is unlikely to make many mistakes.
Add it all up, and 2006 looks to be
a political year in which Democrats
have all the elements for a big win. But
that's if, and only if, they can balance
their critique of Republican misgovernment
with a credible argument that
they can offer better, reform-minded
leadership.
The ball is in the donkey's court.
