Bush, Pataki Win
Both Charted a More Moderate Course for the Future of Their Party
By Joseph Mercurio
November 7, 2002
The nation only seems to be evenly divided on indicator questions that pollsters ask, but the character of the debate in the House and Senate inherently biases what questions are asked. It is hard to get anything done in Congress because the leadership from each party caucus frames the debate on legislation so they can have the issue later, in the next election, rather than have a solution now . . . or to cater to the extreme wings of their party caucus to keep the other side from control. Neither side had enough votes to govern.
There were 435 House races, but only a couple of dozen were actually contested. Reapportionment carved out safe seats where the outcome was known since the legislatures voted. The electorate never had a chance to be evenly divided. There was no contest in more than three-quarters of the nation, nearly 160 Democratic and more than 100 Republican incumbents spent very little money and hardly campaigned. But they wound up with at least a 10-point landslide and, for most, a huge lopsided margin. In New York State there was effectively only one contested House race -- in the 1st district in Suffolk.
The New York State legislature has a similar problem. Reapportionment to protect incumbents has perpetuated elections with few genuinely contested races, which has created "super majorities" in each house. As a result no legislator can put together a large enough group in support of an issue that would successfully challenge the leadership.
An interesting change occurred nationally and in New York State. This election intensified the strength of the President and the Governor. And each has, both organizationally and on issues, moved their party to the center and away from the right wing. Those who speculate about Pataki's role in national Republican Party affairs after so successfully triangulating Democratic issues and constituencies miss this important change.
President Bush spent a considerable amount of time, after their work on reapportionment, in a hunt for House and Senate candidates -- many of them moderates, some replacing conservatives. In the Carolinas they made way for Lindsay Graham and Elizabeth Dole, in Minnesota Norm Coleman; and they even replaced an incumbent to get a more moderate John Sununu in New Hampshire.
Then the President went all out to get his candidates elected. The legislative debate and the message in the campaign were nationalized around Bush's agenda. He went into districts where Republicans where in close races. He not only obtained additional seats in the House, his party took the Senate back. Moreover, George Bush was seen to be the reason for the success.
He did not just get a few chits from members who he helped. He did not just get a few extra votes in the House and his party taking control of the Senate -- he also engineered a more moderate makeup of Congress. The result will be less extreme legislation and a more moderate debate and, more often than not, more Democrats moving over to vote with the President's agenda. No gloating and more horse-trading will be the norm.
Even though four of the five statewide elected officials, one Elliot Spitzer winning this year with a huge margin, and the Assembly are in Democratic hands, Pataki's was greatly strengthened. Not only did he have a substantial win, he did it by moving into Democratic territory geographically and ideologically. Like Bush he moved his party to the center.
Elsewhere, Democrats running for Governor won some of the big states -- largely on fiscal, budget and economic issues. They, however, did not win as many net as pundits thought. And the Republican Party picked up a net of more than 200 state legislative seats with only one state legislative chamber moving to the Democratic side and six to the Republican. Most of these gains were in the south.
The extremes on the left and right are a legislative conversation not the way the vast majority of the electorate thinks about issues. To govern successfully in difficult times, Bush and Pataki will need to moderate their party and convince Democratic legislators to vote with them.
Is there a place for Pataki in the national arena? If a Republican President and Governor both triangulate a Democratic position does that make it a Republican issue? Will the Democrats get a last "72 Hour Campaign" plan organized to get its vote out next time? More later.
