2006 Senate

A Glance Inside the Senate Crystal Ball Republican Held Seats up for Election in 2006: 15 (out of 55 held) Solid R (7) Likely R (1) Leans R (1) Toss-up (3) Leans D (3) Likely D (0) Solid D (0) IN (Lugar) AZ (Kyl) VA (Allen) MO (Talent) MT (Burns) ME (Snowe) RI (Chafee) OH (DeWine) MS (Lott) TN (OPEN) PA (Santorum) NV (Ensign) TX (Hutchison) UT (Hatch) WY (Thomas) WV (Byrd) WI (Kohl) NY (Clinton) NM (Bingaman) ND (Conrad) MA (Kennedy) HI (Akaka) FL (Nelson) DE (Carper) NE (Nelson) CT (Lieberman*) WA (Cantwell) MN (OPEN) VT (OPEN) NJ (Menendez) MD (OPEN) MI (Stabenow) CA (Feinstein) Solid R (0) Likely R (0) Leans R (0) Toss-up (1) Leans D (2) Likely D (3) Solid D (12) Democratic Held Seats up for Election: 18 (out of 45 held) The Brutal B – October 26, 2006: +3 to +6 D

A Glance Inside the Senate Crystal Ball Republican Held Seats up for Election in 2006: 15 (out of 55 held) Solid R (7) Likely R (1) Leans R (1) Toss-up (4) Leans D (2) Likely D (0) Solid D (0) IN (Lugar) AZ (Kyl) VA (Allen) MO (Talent) MT (Burns) ME (Snowe) OH (DeWine) PA (Santorum) MS (Lott) RI (Chafee) NV (Ensign) TN (OPEN) TX (Hutchison) UT (Hatch) WY (Thomas) WV (Byrd) WI (Kohl) NY (Clinton) NM (Bingaman) ND (Conrad) MA (Kennedy) HI (Akaka) FL (Nelson) DE (Carper) NE (Nelson) CT (Lieberman*) WA (Cantwell) MN (OPEN) VT (OPEN) NJ (Menendez) MD (OPEN) MI (Stabenow) CA (Feinstein) Solid R (0) Likely R (0) Leans R (0) Toss-up (1) Leans D (2) Likely D (3) Solid D (12) Democratic Held Seats up for Election: 18 (out of 45 held) The Brutal B, October 2006: +3 to +6 D

A Glance Inside the Senate Crystal Ball Republican Held Seats up for Election in 2006: 15 (out of 55 held) Solid R (7) Likely R (1) Leans R (2) Toss-up (3) Leans D (2) Likely D (0) Solid D (0) IN (Lugar) AZ (Kyl) TN (OPEN) MO (Talent) MT (Burns) ME (Snowe) VA (Allen) OH (DeWine) PA (Santorum) MS (Lott) RI (Chafee) NV (Ensign) TX (Hutchison) UT (Hatch) WY (Thomas) WV (Byrd) WI (Kohl) NY (Clinton) NM (Bingaman) ND (Conrad) WA (Cantwell) MA (Kennedy) VT (OPEN) HI (Akaka) NE (Nelson) FL (Nelson) MN (OPEN) DE (Carper) MI (Stabenow) CT (Lieberman*) NJ (Menendez) MD (OPEN) CA (Feinstein) Solid R (0) Likely R (0) Leans R (0) Toss-up (0) Leans D (1) Likely D (6) Solid D (11) Democratic Held Seats up for Election: 18 (out of 45 held) The Brutal B, September 2006: +3 to +6 D

Coverage and analysis of the Lieberman-Lamont primary results has likely consumed an entire national forest today, or at least a forest’s worth of giga-bytes on the internet. But before the Crystal Ball turns its attention northward, we present a brief glimpse of the current midterm picture. The Election as it Looks on August 10 Last week, the Crystal Ball updated its outlook to predict a pro-Democratic shift of 12-15 seats in the House, 3-6 Senate seats, and 4-6 governorships. This week, the Crystal Ball offers you our freshest perspective as to where Democrats are most likely to reap these gains: SENATE: That Sixth-Seat Itch (Currently 55 R, 44 D, 1 I/D) Probable D Senate pick-ups: Pennsylvania, Montana Leaning D Senate pick-ups: Missouri, Rhode Island, Ohio The “Sixth Seat” needed to switch the Senate to D control, in order of probability: Tennessee, Arizona, Virginia (all currently R favored, though Tennessee is the most competitive) _________________________________________________________ D Open Seats Leaning D: Maryland, Minnesota, Vermont D Open Seats Leaning R: None R Open Seats Leaning R: Tennessee R Open Seats Leaning D: None [Note: We have not listed Connecticut because the only two likely winners are Democratic nominee Ned Lamont and Senator Joe

What’s currently happening in the Democratic Party of Connecticut is either an ugly purge or a refreshing demonstration of grassroots democracy. Which side you take in this intra-party war reveals a lot about you. By now, virtually everyone knows that three-term U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman is in the fight of his political life with multimillionaire businessman Ned Lamont, with the decision coming shortly in the Democratic Senate primary on August 8. The chant from the Vietnam protest era went, “The whole world is watching,” but in the Nutmeg primary, the similar slogan is about another war, in Iraq. Sen. Lieberman has steadfastly supported President Bush from the first inkling of possible war in 2002, to the actual Iraqi conflict in 2003, through the tragic loss of 2,500 American service men and women, and on to the current dark days of sectarian violence. Even more than Democratic Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Lieberman is Bush’s favorite Senate Democrat, and the President’s alleged kiss to Lieberman’s cheek at the 2005 State of the Union Address may prove the kiss of death. For if there is one thing that Democrats now hate worse than George W. Bush, it is the Iraq War, and

Just over the last few weeks, there has been a fair amount of change in both the Senate and Governor contests up this fall. The primary season generates new candidates, retirements and scandals. Overall, the midterm picture continues to have a Democratic coloration. President Bush’s ratings remain at all-time lows, averaging in the mid-to-upper 30s, the Iraq War is still bedeviling Republicans and the country appears stuck in a sour mood that almost always results in election gains for the out-of-power party. The image of incompetence from Katrina has not abated, and the President has so far refused to bring in a fresh White House team to enable him to overcome some of his difficulties. The substitution of Joshua Bolten for Andrew Card as chief of staff is not exactly a makeover; both are insiders who have been with the President from January 2001. Perhaps Bolten has plans for a big turnover, but it will be a surprise if that happens. On the other hand, the President’s rhetorical offensive on Iraq has stopped further erosion in public support for now. More importantly, the economy is remarkably resilient, having absorbed the oil shocks of late 2005. Low inflation, growing productivity, still-reasonable

If the Democrats want to win the Senate, they need a big wave–the kind of tsunami they got in 1974 and 1986, or that the Republicans received in 1980 and 1994. Rough surf won’t do the trick, and at least at the start of 2006, November looks to be full of white caps but no Maui-style waves for the party out of power. This sea forecast can change in either direction over the next ten months, obviously. Yet our first 2006 midterm election survey of the Senate contests suggests only a small craft advisory. In subsequent weeks, we’ll look at the U.S. House and the 36 Governor’s match-ups to create a benchmark for this year’s Crystal Ball analysis. As we do so, the Crystal Ball urges our readers to keep in mind one of the most telling lessons of U.S. electoral history: When the American people decide to make a change, they do it. They don’t care that the forecasters and the prognosticators say it isn’t likely. They find a way to make the change happen, even if–on paper–there aren’t enough competitive districts or states to produce a party turnover. It will be a surprise if 2006 is not a

It is time for our first fall update of the 2006 Senate and Governor contests. To the layperson, they are an eternity and fourteen months away. To political junkies, the races are already in full swing, with recruiting season approaching its end in most places and fundraising machines humming everywhere. Enter the Senate (33 Chambers) With an effective lead of 55-45 in the Senate, Republicans continue to have the clear early edge to retain control–especially since they only have to defend 15 of the 33 seats up for election in next year. Yet Katrina, Iraq, gas prices, growing national debt, President Bush’s unpopularity, and other factors might conspire to produce Democratic gains or even a takeover, as wild as that speculation appears today. Before we get into what it would take to do that, let’s first take a look at the Crystal Ball’s current race rankings, by outlook: 2005 Senate Make-up: 55 Republicans, 45 Democrats (Including 1 Ind.) Senate Seats up for election in 2006: 15 Republican, 18 Democratic (Including 1. Ind.) Current Outlook Number of Seats States Solid Republican 9 IN, ME, MO, MS, NV, TX, UT, VA, WY Leans Republican 3 AZ, MT, TN Toss-up 4 MN, OH,

Everyone is focused on the Supreme Court now, with good reason, but just below the surface the campaigns of 2006 are heating up. Perhaps 16 of the 33 U.S. Senate contests and 19 of the 36 Governor’s races may be competitive and interesting. Therefore, about half of the big dogs on the ballot are worth following closely. That’s impressive, and far better than election watchers ever get in the U.S. House. Of course, it is highly unlikely that all these contests, or even most of them, will produce party turnovers or incumbent defeats. As we get nearer to Election Day 2006, the number of fiercely competitive races may well decline–unless the public is in a surly mood, as in 1974, 1980 or 1994, when the number of tight races expanded as we approached the election. We won’t know the driving components of public opinion until mid-way through 2006, and we might not recognize a voter tsunami or sixth-year itch, if there is one, until October of 2006. The Crystal Ball has updated our “outlook briefs” for all major Senate and Governor races, and the individual profiles tell the tale so far. Collectively, there is more hope than was earlier justified

Every election year is different, and the results of midterm elections have varied dramatically. Still, can recent history suggest anything about the 2006 Senate results? At the very least, our modern electoral experience can set goals for Democrats and Republicans alike. Let’s look at the last half-century of midterm elections for the U.S. Senate from 1950 to 2002. Note that we are including all midterm elections, both the first midterm election of a presidency and the second one in the sixth year of the two-term presidency. On average, the president’s party has lost three Senate seats in each of those 14 elections. The Democrats should aim to equal or beat the historical spread in 2006, bringing Republicans to 52 seats or fewer. The GOP and the White House have the opposite goal: to reduce the size of the average loss, or even post a gain above the Republicans’ current 55 seats. Both sides will play games with the numbers. (We know you are shocked speechless.) The games are easy to play, and to justify. Senate elections are idiosyncratic, not least because only a third of the seats are up in any election year. Moreover, some years see many open seats

All Crystal Ball junkies know the drill. Every election year, most Senators skate by, especially the venerable elders who well fit their states. Meanwhile, a handful of Senators are vulnerable, and those are the contests we watch like hawks. In last week’s Crystal Ball email ( https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/LJS2005032401), we examined seniority and the 109th Senate, as well as the seats that are currently open and those that might open between now and 2006. This week, we’ve brought you the 14 seats out of the 33 up for election that appear to be moderately to very vulnerable. In alphabetical order by state, they are: FL-Bill Nelson (D) MD-Open (D) MI-Debbie Stabenow (D) MN-Open (D) MT-Conrad Burns (R) ND-Kent Conrad (D)–only if GOP Governor John Hoeven runs NE-Ben Nelson (D) NJ-Open (D)–only if Senator Jon Corzine is elected governor in 2005 PA-Rick Santorum (R) RI-Lincoln Chafee (R) TN-Open (R) TX-Open (R)–only if Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison runs for governor in 2006 VA-George Allen (R)–only if Governor Mark Warner (D) decides to run WA-Maria Cantwell (D) On the surface, this appears to be an impressive total: 14 of 33, with another three potential retirees (mentioned in last week’s email: Dianne Feinstein, Trent Lott, and

Recently, Congressional Quarterly reported a startling statistic that received little attention, but should have been the source of extensive commentary for what it told us about the contemporary institution of the United States Senate. The current 109th Congress has achieved a remarkable milestone: It has the oldest Senate ever! The average senator serving today is 60.4 years of age. After the Reagan landslide of 1980 ushered in some fresh blood in the upper chamber, the average age was a much younger 52.5 years, for example. We can debate forever whether it is better to have more senior senators who have grown wise (rather than stale) with the decades, or whether youth should be served to a greater degree, infusing its energy and new ideas (despite a natural recklessness) into the upper chamber of Congress. What is indisputable is that both parties are begging their incumbents to continue serving, regardless of age. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.) was the role model for this trend, having been elected to his last Senate term in 1996 at the age of nearly 94 and serving after his 100th birthday, passing away just a few months after he left the Senate. Now Democrats have convinced Robert C.