America's
close partisan division between Republicans and
Democrats is not only reflected in public opinion
polls. It also is evident through a much more
relevant yardstick: partisan control of the
nation's state legislatures. Of the 50 states, 49
have bicameral legislatures, meaning both a Senate
and House, while one, Nebraska, has a unicameral
legislature, with just a Senate.
Republicans
control both chambers in 21 states, and they also
control Nebraska. Democrats control both chambers
in 17 states, and 11 states have split control,
including 10 with each party holding a majority in
one chamber and one state with a tie in once
chamber. Of the nation's 7,382 elected state
senators and representatives, 3,724 of those seats
are held by Republicans and 3,659 are held by
Democrats -- a difference of 65 seats. This is
noteworthy, as it marks the first time since 1954
that the Republicans have had a majority.
But
those raw numbers are somewhat deceptive. For
example, a dinky state like New Hampshire has 400
members of its House (which Republicans control
281-119), while California's House has just 80
members (which Democrats control 48-32).
What
is not deceptive is the general correlation
between legislative dominance and presidential
performance. In 2000 George Bush won 30 states, to
Al Gore's 20. Of Bush's 30 states, Republicans
control the legislature in18, Democrats in seven
(all in the Deep South or border states: Alabama,
Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma,
Tennessee and West Virginia), and five have split
control (North Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Nevada
and Indiana). Bush will again win all the Deep
South states. With the possible exception of Ohio,
New Hampshire, Nevada, West Virginia and North
Carolina (due to the state's John Edward's being
on the Democratic ticket), the 2000 Bush states
will be 2004 Bush states. However, the president
cannot be re-elected if he loses more than one of
those five states.
Republicans
control both chambers in four states won by Gore
in 2000: Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin and
Pennsylvania. Democrat John Kerry is leading in
the polls in each of those states, with only Iowa
and Wisconsin even close.
Democrats
control both chambers in 10 Gore states: Illinois,
Hawaii, California, New Mexico, Connecticut,
Maine, Maryland, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New
Jersey and Rhode Island. All but New Mexico are
solid for Kerry-Edwards in 2004. Of the six split
states won by Gore, where Democrats control one
legislative chamber, Oregon, Washington and
Minnesota are possible flips to Bush in 2004,
while Delaware, New York and Vermont are solid for
Kerry.
So
the outcome of Bush-Kerry will be determined in
five legislatively split states (North Carolina,
Oregon, Washington, Nevada and Minnesota), one
Democratic-dominated state (New Mexico), and three
Republican-dominated states (Ohio, Iowa and
Wisconsin).
According
to a recent analysis in the Rothenberg Political
Report, the sharp Republican legislative gains of
2002 won't be wiped away in 2004. In fact,
regardless of the result in Bush-Kerry, they will
likely expand. Here's a region-by-region analysis:
South:
A half-century ago, virtually every state
legislator was a Democrat. Since then, there's
been an incremental ideological realignment, with
white conservatives affiliating with the
Republicans and white liberals and minorities
sticking with the Democrats. This realignment has
been most pronounced in the so-called Outer South.
Republicans are now dominant in the state Senate
and House, respectively, in Texas (19-12, 88-62),
Florida (26-14, 81-39), Virginia (24-16, 61-37),
South Carolina (25-21, 73-51) and Missouri (20-14,
90-73). In each of those states, Republicans hold
most suburban and rural seats, while Democrats
hold virtually all the urban and minority seats.
Three of the five states have a Republican
governor, with Missouri likely to elect a
Republican in 2004; the other Democrat is in
Virginia.
The
Republicans have made huge gains in the Deep South
in the past several decades, but their impediment
has been the resistance of rural voters to switch.
That barrier fell in 2002 in Georgia, when rural
voters helped elect a Republican (Sonny Perdue, a
former Democratic state senator from rural Perry)
as governor and a Republican state Senate (30-26).
Now, with a new redistricting, the Democrats'
106-73 House majority will shrink substantially;
Republicans need a net gain of 17 seats to win a
majority, and that is unlikely, but they will come
close.
Both
Alabama and Mississippi have Republican governors,
but Democrats still dominate the legislature,
primarily because some rural voters still resist
switching to the Republicans. The Senate and House
in Alabama (25-10, 63-42) and Mississippi (29-22,
74-45), as well as in Louisiana (26-13, 68-36),
likely will move into the Republican column within
10 years. In Louisiana, which had a Republican
governor from 1995 to 2003, many rural voters
still opt for the Democrats in legislative races.
Arkansas, Bill Clinton's state, has had a
Republican governor since 1996, but the party is
still vastly outnumbered in the Senate and House
(27-8, 70-30), and that's not likely to change
anytime soon.
The
border states of Oklahoma (28-20, 53-48),
Tennessee (18-15, 54-45) and West Virginia (24-10,
68-32) have Democratic governors, but Republicans
have been making steady legislative gains in the
former two states, and they could win the Oklahoma
House in 2004. In Kentucky, which elected a
Republican governor in 2003, the Senate and House
are split (22-16 Republican, 65-35 Democrat), but
here Republicans are strong in rural areas. North
Carolina has a Democratic governor, and the
Democrats control the Senate 28-22, but the
Republicans have a 61-59 House majority. Both
North Carolina chambers are in play in 2004.
Overall,
the Republicans will continue to make Southern
legislative gains.
East:
Contrary to expectations, this region is not a
Republican wasteland. Both chambers in New
Hampshire (18-6, 281-119) and Pennsylvania (29-21,
109-94) are Republican, and they will stay that
way. Six states -- Connecticut, Massachusetts,
Maryland, Rhode Island, New Jersey and Maine --
have huge Democratic legislative majorities in
both chambers, but the first four have Republican
governors. It seems that Easterners balance their
tendency to vote Democratic at the legislative
level by electing a Republican at the
gubernatorial level. New York and Vermont have
Republicans governors, and Republicans control the
New York Senate (37-25) and Vermont House (74-69),
while Delaware has a Democratic governor and a
Republican House (29-12).
Interestingly,
in New York, which has a Democratic House
(103-47), each chamber, at the time of
redistricting, draws its own district lines. So,
unlike Illinois, where each Senate district elects
two House members, the New York lines are
autonomous of each other. Each party draws itself
a hefty majority.
Midwest:
Of the 11 states in this region, Democrats hold
both chambers only in Illinois (32-27, 66-52);
that won't change in Illinois in 2004. Likewise,
Republican dominance in Kansas, North Dakota,
South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin
and Ohio won't change. Minnesota will stay split.
Only in Indiana's House, which Democrats control
51-49 (the Senate is 32-18 Republican), is a flip
possible.
West:
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's
problems in balancing the state budget are not
helped by the Democrats' legislative dominance
(25-15, 48-32). Not since Ronald Reagan was
governor, during 1969-70, have the Republicans
controlled either chamber. That won't change in
2004. Of the other 12 Western states, Republicans
control both chambers in Alaska, Arizona, Montana,
Wyoming, Colorado, Idaho and Utah, and Democrats
both in New Mexico and Hawaii. Control is split in
Oregon, Nevada and Washington.
Those
chambers in play in 2004 include the Colorado
Senate (18-17 Republican), the Nevada House (23-19
Democratic), the Alaska Senate (11-8 Republican),
the Oregon Senate (15-15 tie), and both the
Washington House (52-46 Democratic) and Senate
(25-24 Republican).
The
bottom line: Regardless of the outcome of the
presidential race, the Republicans will fare
better nationally than the Democrats at the state
legislative level in 2004.