From a political perspective, it has far more impact than the National Football League's or the National Basketball Association's draft picks. Recruitment of talent in 2004 contests for the U.S. Senate or the U.S. House has national implications: It will determine whether the Republicans and the Bush Administration control the national agenda after he 2004 election, presuming Bush wins a second term.

The Republicans' 51-49 majority in the Senate is at risk in 2004. But more Democratic seats expire: Of the 34 senators up for re-election in 2004, 19 are Democrats and 15 are Republicans. Until his announced retirement, Illinois Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald's seat was deemed to be the most vulnerable of the 15 Republicans. However, Fitzgerald's retirement may actually enhance the Republicans' prospects of keeping the seat.

Given the obvious trend toward the Democrats in Illinois, especially considering their 2002 statewide sweep, a Democrat is certain to win Fitzgerald's seat in 2004 unless the Republicans recruit an exceptionally formidable candidate. That prospective "formidable" candidate is former governor Jim Edgar. But will Edgar run?

There are various gradations of potential Senate candidates, ranging from intimidating to irrelevant. And there are major differentiations between "open" seats, where the incumbent is retiring, and contested seats, where the incumbent is seeking re-election. In recruiting candidates for open seats, as in Illinois, there is a definite recruitment hierarchy, to wit:

Class I: Celebrities. Somebody who has a positive image and name recognition with the general public outside of politics, who has no attackable public record, and who is perceived favorably.

Class II: Self-funded millionaires: Somebody who is rich and wants to spend whatever it takes to win. They usually do.

Class III: Sitting or former governors, provided that they are popular when they leave office. They are well liked and well known, and the electorate is comfortable with them. Those under an ethical cloud, like former Illinois governor George Ryan, do not qualify.

Class IV: Legacies, meaning someone whose forbears won elective office in the past and whose name is still known and respected. This can mean dynasties, like the Kennedys in Massachusetts or the Tafts in Ohio, or it can mean the son or daughter of a famous man, like Adlai Stevenson III in Illinois.

Class V: Incumbent state officials. Since they have won at least one statewide race, they have some name identification, credibility and the ability to raise money.

Class VI: Prior statewide losers who came reasonably close. They have a built-in statewide political organization, ready to be reactivated, and the credibility of having almost won a prior race.

Class VII: Incumbent U.S. representatives, depending on the size of their state. The smaller the state, the greater the viability of the congressman. Usually, if there are 10 or fewer House seats in a state, a congressman has the name recognition to be a statewide competitor; if the state has many more than 10 seats, a congressman is virtually invisible. In Illinois, for example, with 19 congressional districts, each congressman is not very well known statewide. But in smaller states, a sitting congressman has name recognition in at least one major media market, and great credibility on federal issues. Plus, with Washington contacts, a congressman can raise a large amount of campaign cash.

Class VIII: Mayors of big cities have great visibility, and usually great popularity, but they rarely win statewide office. Voters in rural areas usually vote against candidates from urban areas.

Class IX: State legislators and local county officials. If a congressman is obscure in a large state, state legislators or local officials are even more so. From that base, it's hard to raise funds or be taken seriously.

Here's a look at the various Illinois candidate classes and how they affect the race to succeed Fitzgerald:

Class I: Celebrities. Without the baggage of prior elective office, or a voting record to attack, celebrities make great Senate candidates, and they usually win. Recent celebrity winners include then-first lady Hillary Clinton in 2000 in New York and Elizabeth Dole, the wife of former Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole, in 2002 in North Carolina. Past winners include astronaut John Glenn (Ohio), United Nations Ambassador Patrick Moynihan (New York), astronaut Harrison Schmitt (New Mexico), educator S.I. Hayakawa (California) and actor George Murphy (California).

In Illinois, at present, the only potential "celebrity" Senate candidate is Bill Daley, the brother of Mayor Richard Daley, former U.S. Commerce secretary, 2000 Al Gore campaign manager and current SBC chairman. But Daley is not inclined to run.

Class II: Popular current or former governors. There is a definite comedown from governor to senator, particularly in America's bigger states. A big-state governor controls a vast bureaucracy, has great decision-making power and has near-universal name recognition. But while a governor is a big cheese in his state, he'd be just one of 100 in the U.S. Senate, with a small staff and consigned to spend insufferable amounts of time at boring committee hearings.

There are 12 former governors in the Senate: from Ohio, Indiana, Missouri, West Virginia, Nebraska, Tennessee, Florida, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Georgia, Virginia and Delaware. Only two of those 12 defeated an incumbent, elected senator. But while governors have a major problem defeating a sitting senator, they usually win open seats.

In the last half-century, governors won open seats in Oregon (1966), Oklahoma (1972 and 1978), Washington (1981), Nevada (1974), Wyoming (1966), Arizona (1964), Nebraska (1988), Iowa (1968), Missouri (1986 and 1994), Arkansas (1978), Indiana (1998), Ohio (1998), New Hampshire (1992), Tennessee (2002), Virginia (1988), Rhode Island (1976), Connecticut (1962) and South Carolina (1966) -- a total of 20 wins.

Current or retired governors beat sitting senators just five times: Kentucky (1974), Oklahoma (1968), Florida (1986), Virginia (2000), Arkansas (1974) and North Carolina (1986); in 2000 Governor Mel Carnahan of Missouri, who died just before the election but who remained on the ballot, beat incumbent Republican John Ashcroft.

Current or retired governors lost U.S. Senate races to incumbents 11 times: North Carolina (1984), Mississippi (1984), Kentucky (1972), Pennsylvania (1991), Maine (1996), New Hampshire (2002), Tennessee (1964 and 1966), Wyoming (1994), California (1982) and South Dakota (1986).

In Illinois, former Republican governors Edgar (1990-98) and Jim Thompson (1976-90) left office with reasonable popularity and high name recognition. Either would be a formidable Senate candidate. Thompson is a prosperous attorney and will not run, but Edgar, age 56, is seriously considering a Senate bid.

In fact, an Illinois governor has not been elected to the U.S. Senate since 1912, the advent of popular elections. Back in the 1800s two Republican governors, Richard Olgesby and Shelby Cullom, became senators. Edgar, if he runs, would surely bust that tradition.

Class III: Self-funding millionaires. In 2000 New Jersey Democrat Jon Corzine, a Goldman Sachs executive, spent more than $60 million of his own fortune to win an open seat, Minnesota Democrat Mark Dayton, heir to the Dayton-Hudson retail fortune (now Target), spent $12 million of his own money to beat a Republican incumbent, and Washington Democrat Maria Cantwell, who made a fortune with the Internet-based RealNetworks, spent $11.3 million of her own money to beat a Republican incumbent. In 1998 Fitzgerald spent $12 million of his own money and beat incumbent Democrat Carol Moseley-Braun.

In Illinois, two self-funding millionaires are in the 2004 Senate mix: Democrat Blair Hull and Republican Jack Ryan. Hull, who sold his brokerage firm to Goldman Sachs for $531 million in 1999, has already loaned his campaign $2 million and has promised to spend $40 million to win the seat. Ryan's plans are unclear.

Class IV: Democrat Dan Hynes, the state comptroller, is the son of former Cook County assessor Tom Hynes. He won his job because of the clout of his father, and he has made a decent record. He had $801,000 in cash on hand in his Senate kitty as of March 31.

Class V: Two statewide officials, Hynes and Republican state Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka are eyeing the Senate seat. Past Class V winners in Illinois were Adlai Stevenson III (treasurer) in 1970 and Alan Dixon (secretary of state) in 1980; losers include lieutenant governors Bob Kustra in 1996 and Dave O'Neal in 1980.

Class VI: Chuck Percy lost for governor in 1964 but beat Paul Douglas in 1966. Paul Simon lost for governor in 1972, won a House seat, and beat Percy in 1984.

Class VII: Democrat Dick Durbin, then a Springfield congressman won an open Senate seat in 1996. Sitting congressmen beat incumbents in 1950 and 1984 but lost to incumbents in 1962 and 1972. Republican Ray LaHood, a Peoria congressman, is mentioned as a potential candidate, but he is unknown outside his district.

Class VIII: Chicago is the pre-eminent city in Illinois, but no Chicago mayor has ever been elected to the Senate. Rich Daley could, but apparently doesn't want to.

Class IX: Republican Al Salvi, a state representative, tanked when he ran for senator in 1996. Democrats Barack Obama, a black state senator, and former Chicago schools chief executive officer Gery Chico are running for Fitzgerald's seat. Other than Moseley-Braun in 1992, when she was Cook County recorder of deeds, no sitting state legislator or county or city official has made the leap to senator in the last century.