With the midterm elections behind us, how does the political terrain in Congress look for both parties in 2008?

Research Fellow John C. Fortier

After the big wave election of 2006, we are likely to return to the pattern of hard-fought elections with only a few seats changing hands. Combine that with a favorable landscape in the Senate, and Democrats have a good chance of holding on to the majority in 2008, albeit with very narrow margins.

In the past, we have seen the House swing wildly back and forth between the parties. Take 1946, when Republicans gained 55 seats and took the majority in the House, only to lose 75 seats and the majority in 1948. But despite the big election results earlier this month, we are in an era of party parity and safe incumbents. The elections following 1994 had net seat swings of eight, five, two, and eight. Even the big-wave election of 2006 produced only a 29-seat gain, which does not compare to the swings of sometimes over 100 seats that we have seen in the past. So given how tough it is in today’s climate to win a lot of seats, a 14-seat majority for Democrats is probably enough to withstand some natural backsliding.

Republicans will likely gain seats, however, and close up the margin in the House. Most of the Republicans who had close calls will fare much better in an election without such a big Democratic direction. And just eight Republicans remain in seats that John Kerry won in 2004: Mike Castle (Del.), Charlie Dent (Pa.), Jim Gerlach (Pa.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), Dave Reichert (Wash.), Christopher Shays (Conn.), James Walsh (N.Y.), and Heather Wilson (N.M.). As for Democrats, political analysts will scour their ranks for the new Michael Flanagan. Flanagan was a 30-year-old political neophyte who beat scandal-plagued Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski in 1994 in a heavily Democratic Chicago district.

No one expected Flanagan to be reelected in 1996 when there was no anti-Democratic wave, and he did lose. While there may not be a Democrat as endangered as Flanagan, there are a few who won in very Republican districts either due to scandal or the political tide, and some of them will be beaten in 2008.

Republicans will be especially interested in reclaiming the seats of ousted Republicans Mark Foley (Fla.), Bob Ney (Ohio), Jim Ryun (Kan.), Richard Pombo (Calif.), and Don Sherwood (Pa.), all solidly Republican districts with relatively inexperienced freshman Democrats.

But it is hard to see more than six or seven freshman Democrats being washed out in 2008. And no one should hold his or her breath for a lot of open seats on the Democratic side. Now back in the majority, few will retire. The best bet, two years out, is for Democrats to retain a single-digit majority.

In the Senate, Democratic prospects are brighter. The conditions are in place for the party to increase its slight majority. Twenty-one Republicans and 12 Democrats are up for election. And in the most competitive category, Republicans have Wayne Allard (Colo.), Norm Coleman (Minn.), and John Sununu (N.H.), two freshmen and a sophomore who won their last election with less than 52 percent of the vote and whose states are competitive. Gordon Smith (R) must also run in Democratic-leaning Oregon. Democrats Mary Landrieu (La.) and Tim Johnson (S.D.) are in similarly vulnerable positions. Like their colleagues in the House, Senate Democrats are unlikely to retire, while some Republicans may. Retirements by John Warner (R-Va.), Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) or James Inhofe (R-Okla.) would create competitive races.

Two years is a long time in politics, but Democrats have a good chance of keeping their slim majorities in 2008.

John C. Fortier is a research fellow at AEI.