Don’t Count the GOP Out

It’s far too early to entertain the notion of presidential coattails, but improved GOP congressional performance, Texas Gov. George W. Bush’s engagement on issues of concern to voters and his passion for education reform suggest that the Republican Party is well-positioned to extend its congressional majority. Add to this Vice President Al Gore’s inexhaustible capacity for political expediency at the expense of his party, and the GOP’s chances are even better.

No question the GOP challenge is formidable. The current alignment in the House of Representatives--222 Republicans, 211 Democrats and two independents--is the narrowest majority in modern history. A net switch of just six seats would put Democrats in charge. But the country seems relatively comfortable with the notion of divided control. Moreover, a switch in party control at both the presidential and congressional levels has not been occurred in more than 150 years.

Republicans face a structural disadvantage since they have to defend 23 open seats, versus seven for Democrats. But Democrats face a significant uphill battle in winning these seats because of candidate recruitment, fund-raising prowess and the dynamics of the presidential race. In California, for example, state Assemblyman Jim Cunneen, the GOP nominee for Rep. Tom Campbell’s open seat, is perfectly positioned ideologically for this district and will have no problem raising money. And Darrell Issa will probably succeed Rep. Ron Packard (R-Oceanside) in a race that Democrats were looking to build their majority.

Bush must make a key strategic decision on the importance of California to his electoral chances, which may also affect the GOP House majority. No one has been elected president in modern history who lost both California and New York, which collectively constitute 87 electoral votes, nearly one-third of what’s necessary to win. New York appears to be solid for Gore. Not California. Averaging the candidate’s percentages in the four most recent statewide polls, Gore has 50.5%, to Bush’s 43.25%. This despite the fact that Gore made 40 trips to California as vice president, while Bush has yet to campaign extensively in the state.

Polling data also indicate how far the Republican Party has come since its favorability ratings plummeted during the impeachment and trial of President Bill Clinton. The job-approval rating of the GOP-controlled House of Representatives is 56%, according to my polling. The same poll showed that the GOP’s rating as a party and its reelection prospects have greatly improved from December 1998, when the House voted to impeach Clinton.

True, voters are satisfied with the direction of the country, the state of the economy, and we remain at peace. These factors tend to boost incumbents at all levels, not just the presidency. But they will have less of the expected impact on presidential voting, because voters will assume this is the natural order of things. If these factors were really helping Gore, he would be significantly ahead of Bush, a first-time national candidate who faced a fiery primary challenger, in the polls. Moreover, Gore’s party would be way ahead in any congressional ballot test. Neither is happening. Gore has been unable to attract more than 50% of the vote against Bush in current national polling.

Still, Democratic strategists and pundits claim the public’s current issue agenda--improving the quality of education, health-care reform, prescription-drug benefits, Social Security and Medicare reform--favors Democrats. But they overlook two facts. Bush and Republicans are talking about these issues. Last week, Bush delivered speeches on both education and the environment.

Republicans in Congress have also been busy rehabilitating their image. They have passed legislation cutting the oppressive marriage penalty and killed the earnings limit for seniors on Social Security. They are challenging the Clinton administration to articulate a plan to deal with the rising cost of gasoline.

Republicans know the issue that drives their success is checking the size and scope of government. There is no better example of the need for their watchdog role than Gore calling for a taxpayer-created, $7-billion fund to pay for federal races. Remember First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton’s unmitigated failure at creating a national health-care program in 1993 and how that affected congressional elections in 1994? The GOP took over Congress.

Democrats also dismiss the continuing power of moral values as an issue. But swing voters aren’t likely to look to a party headed by Gore as long as Bush is seen as the best candidate to restore honesty and integrity to the White House.

Furthermore, voters like Bush. The most current CBS News poll shows Bush with a 42% favorable-32% unfavorable rating, compared with Gore’s mediocre 34% favorable-40% unfavorable.

Finally, there is the impact of Bush as the presumptive GOP presidential nominee. A review of national polling data over the past year reveals that Bush shows greater strength among critical electoral groups--stay-at-home moms, working women, senior women, moderates, ticket-splitters, Latinos, younger voters, suburbanites, industrial Midwesterners, Californians--than did former President George Bush and former Sen. Bob Dole. This advantage will immensely help congressional GOP incumbents and challengers in competitive races. *