If things are not bad enough for congressional Republicans at the national level, then look to the Empire State, where already-poor Republican prospects are looking bleaker.

Research Fellow John C. Fortier

New York is clearly a Democratic state. Republicans have not held a majority of the New York House delegation nor held both Senate seats since the 1960s. Bush lost New York in 2000 and 2004 by 25 and 18 percentage points, respectively.

Despite their minority status, New York Republicans are still significant players. Their success stems in great part from the Republican moderate tradition seen most famously in figures such as John Lindsay and Jacob Javits, both of whom would not fit easily into today’s Republican Party.

Even in the 109th Congress, the New York delegation sits at the left edge of the Republican caucus. Looking at the vote ratings from political scientists Keith Poole and Howard Rosenthal (voteview.com), all nine New York Republicans in the 109th are among the most liberal 20 percent of House Republicans.

Republicans have also remained relevant because they have controlled the governorship for the past 12 years under George Pataki and the state Senate for the past 40 years, currently under the leadership of Joseph Bruno. The control of those two institutions has made Republicans relevant in state policy, but even more important, because of their role in redistricting, they have kept Republicans from being wiped off the political map.

Redistricting is essentially controlled by three figures: the governor, the Democratic Speaker of the House (now Sheldon Silver) and the Republican majority leader of the Senate. Under a long-standing deal, Democrats draw the lines for the Assembly, and consequently they have a very large majority (105 to 45). Republicans draw the lines for the Senate, which has allowed them to hold on to this chamber in a heavily Democratic state, although their majority has been shrinking and stands at 35-27.

All of this may change in 2006 or 2008.

Democrats have two titans on the 2006 ticket, Hillary Clinton for Senate and Eliot Spitzer for governor. Clinton gets a practice run before moving on to the presidential race. Republicans have not been able to field even a B-level candidate against her, and it remains only for Clinton to polish her message and polish off her fall opponent.

Spitzer is nearly as strong, the clear heir apparent to the governor’s mansion. Republicans enticed former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld into the race, but he lost badly at the party convention and withdrew. Given the prominence of Clinton and Spitzer, expect big wins and better Democratic turnout than in typical noncompetitive races.

In the House, the slightly Republican open seat being vacated by Sherwood Boehlert will be competitive, and while it is hard to imagine ensconced incumbents such as Sue Kelly, Peter King or Tom Reynolds losing, the underlying demographics of all of the Republican districts are competitive. Bush won 56 percent of the vote or less in each district in 2004, and in 2000 Gore won three of the districts and Bush broke 52 percent in only Randy Kuhl’s district (53 percent).

The real drama in New York will be to see if Democrats pick up the four seats needed to take the state Senate and break the redistricting protection Republicans have enjoyed. If that occurs, some will push for a Texas-style middecade redistricting. But even if the new lines are not drawn until 2012, the loss of population upstate, combined with aggressive redrawing of the lines would likely put Republicans in the wilderness for a long time.

John Fortier is a research fellow at AEI.