Finding A Winning Tune

(2 of 2)

The other big problem for Democrats is that their issues don't seem to be working as well as they had hoped. First, they thought prescription-drug benefits were a surefire winner. After all, turnout is low in midterm elections, and seniors are the most diligent about voting. But the Republicans and their allies in the pharmaceutical industry have done a tremendous job of neutralizing this once potent issue. The United Seniors Association, a group funded by the pharmaceutical industry, has pumped $2 million into ads around the country during this cycle. Over a dinner of Thai shrimp curry, Richard Gephardt explodes at the pro-G.O.P. drug ads he saw when he was home in St. Louis, Mo. They feature Representative John Shimkus, a Republican from the Illinois side of the Mississippi River, being thanked by the association for his vote for the G.O.P.-sponsored prescription-drug bill. "It's Orwellian," says Gephardt in frustration. "The pharmaceutical lobby writes the bill, passes it, and then they run ads thanking them for passing it." It doesn't help Gephardt's mood any that the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee has raised more than twice as much money as its Democratic counterpart.

The Democrats' best bet may be the economy. The most recent ABC News/Money magazine poll shows that 67% of Americans think the economy's condition is "not good" or "poor." For the Iowa congressional seat held by the head of the House Budget Committee, Jim Nussle, Democrat Ann Hutchinson is running on her fiscal record as mayor of Bettendorf. She may have come up with a winning strategy for Democrats: talk up economic issues, and make the case that there needs to be a counterbalance to Bush. "Everyone supports him in the war on terrorism, but we need to be thinking about our economic security," she says.

Economic issues will probably be central to the Governors' races. This year, with states hemorrhaging red ink, once popular incumbents have found themselves in trouble. In Connecticut, Republican John Rowland seemed like a lock. Now Democrat Bill Curry is making gains with an ad that asks of the state's deficit, "Governor, what did you do with all that money?" One big gubernatorial trend with national implications is the decline of the so-called Frostbelt Republican Governor. In the 1990s some of the biggest names in the G.O.P. came from this tier: John Engler of Michigan, William Weld of Massachusetts, Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin, Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania, Christie Todd Whitman of New Jersey, to name a few. These Governors aided the G.O.P. in two fundamental ways: they helped control redistricting to make it more favorable for Republicans, and they helped moderate the national G.O.P., setting the stage for the "compassionate conservatism" selling point of George W. Bush's 2000 campaign. This fall Democrats seem poised to take over the governorships in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Wisconsin.

It's a truism of midterms that most races wind up turning on local issues. In New Jersey the deciding issue will probably be the ethics of Democratic incumbent Robert Torricelli. In Arkansas, Senator Tim Hutchinson, a Republican, left his wife of 29 years to marry his much younger former legislative director. His opponent Mark Pryor has wisely avoided commenting directly on the awkward position that Hutchinson, a Baptist minister and past winner of the Christian Coalition's Friend of the Family Award, now finds himself in. And third-party candidates have the ability to throw elections this time around, just the way they did in the last presidential contest. In New York State, millionaire Tom Golisano is running on the Independence Party ticket as a true conservative, accusing George Pataki of being a big tax-and-spender. Golisano's heavily financed race could complicate life for Pataki, whose moderation and Sept. 11 credentials were expected to give him an easy victory. "Look, so much of this is local. You put up a stupid ad here, you muff a debate, and you've thrown the Senate," says a Democratic insider.

The other thing about midterms is that they tend to take shape later than presidential races. Only diehards follow politics in September; by October everyone's involved. In mid-September 1994, it seemed certain that Democrats would lose seats in the House. It was only in October, as G.O.P. crowds swelled around the country, that it became clear Dems might lose big. Even so, analysts were stunned on election night when Republicans picked up 52 seats. It's doubtful the storm this time will be as fierce. But the mystery and fun of midterms is that — like the Halloween season in which they take place — you don't know until the last minute whether you'll get a trick or a treat.