Dole

WASHINGTON — Gordon Smith, of Oregon, is a moderate, two-term Senate veteran from a Democratic state who votes against his party more often than all but three Republican colleagues. The 56-year-old lawyer and businessman also has one of the GOP’s strongest records of opposition to President Bush on key issues before the Senate.

“In a normal year, Gordon Smith is the kind of Republican who would probably be OK,” according to Nathan Rodriguez, an independent campaign analyst for the Rothenberg Political Report in Washington, D.C. “But this is not a normal year,” said Rodriguez, so Smith is in danger of losing in a partisan sweep that might expand the slim Democratic Senate majority by at least a half-dozen seats.

Another tout sheet, the Cook Political Report, puts the proposition this way: “Is Smith the Lincoln Chafee of 2008?”

Indeed, the thrust of the Democratic campaign against Smith — that he promises a continuation of Mr. Bush’s unpopular policies — echoes the line of attack that felled Rhode Islander Chafee two years ago and now threatens Republicans from the presidential nominee, Sen. John McCain, to congressional candidates from coast to coast.

It is even possible that the Democrats will claim a 60-vote Senate majority, a milestone that — at least on paper — could let them maneuver without the threat of filibusters. But in practice, the march to a “filibuster-proof’” majority is “a phony narrative” because some conservative Democrats would buck their leaders on certain issues, said Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

If Democratic numbers in the Senate approach 60, Ornstein and others foresee the possibility of significant action early in the new Congress, particularly on economic issues, but only if Democratic leaders get a measure of bipartisan cooperation.

Ornstein held out the example of last month’s economic rescue bill — which commanded a big bipartisan Senate majority after relatively harmonious bargaining — as ground for hope that if Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama leads a Democratic sweep of the elections, he might draw some Republican support for compromise economic measures early next year.

“Doing it all with one party is going to be very tricky,” he said.

But Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse told the New York times, “I think we are in enough trouble in enough areas that I would rather own it and then have to perform than continue with this back and forth, back and forth with Republicans, particularly while they are engaged in this absolute determined policy of obstruct, obstruct, obstruct.”

Chastened by the loss of their Senate and House majorities in the 2006 elections, Republicans have long expected another difficult campaign season this year. The Senate’s political terrain was particularly rocky for the GOP because the party was defending a disproportionate share of the seats to be contested this year. In addition, popular Republican incumbents decided to retire in Virginia, New Mexico and Colorado — all states where Democrats have made inroads in recent years.

Mr. Bush’s unpopularity, moreover, seemed likely to exacerbate historical trends favoring the “out” party in Congress after eight years of Republican rule in the White House.

Nevertheless, few commentators a year ago would have predicted the situation now facing the GOP in the final days of the Senate campaigns. “Overall, the national political environment has gone from bad to worse for the Republicans,” said Rodriguez.

The economic crisis is the biggest factor feeding an already-healthy appetite for changing the status quo. That has skewed the odds against the Republicans across the board. A promising Democratic candidate such as former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner has lately become a big favorite to claim a seat held by a Republican, the retiring Sen. John W. Warner, for decades. Some seasoned Republican hands with reasonable prospects for reelection against strong opponents have seen their prospects worsen in recent weeks. Example: New Hampshire Sen. John E. Sununu trails former Democratic Gov. Jeanne Shaheen in several polls.

Lately, even some comparatively safe bets have turned into challenges for the GOP. Sen. Elizabeth Dole, of North Carolina, is one.

The Cook Political Report envisions a 7- to 9-seat gain for the Democrats in the Senate. The Rothenberg Political Report predicts a gain of 6 to 9 seats for the Democratic majority — which now stands at 5, counting those of independent Senators Bernard Sanders, of Vermont, and Joseph I. Lieberman, of Connecticut, who caucus with the Democrats. Lieberman, a former Democrat who endorsed McCain, may find himself unwelcome in the Democratic caucus but it is not clear whether he would accept GOP overtures to hold the Democrats short of a 60-vote mark.

Senate rules permit any member to engage in unlimited debate of an issue on the floor — unless a super-majority of 60 votes can be mustered to shut off debate by a procedure known as cloture. The filibuster, as open-ended debate is commonly known, was once comparatively unusual, but in recent times it has become standard Senate practice, so it takes 60 votes to get action on all but the least-controversial measures.

A Senate majority of 60 Democrats will not necessarily be “filibuster-proof,” but any gains that bring the party close to that threshold would plainly give Majority Leader Harry Reid, of Nevada, more running room than he has previously enjoyed.

“At least initially, I suspect the Democrats will get their way more often than not,” said Jennifer Duffy, who tracks Senate campaigns for the Cook Political Report. She cautioned that there will be a gray zone in the vicinity of the 60-vote mark because neither party can command unbroken loyalty on a given policy question. “To get 60, it will mean you have defeated all the Republican moderates,” such as Smith, of Oregon, or Sen. Norm Coleman, of Minnesota, who sometimes cross the aisle on certain issues, Duffy said.

jmulligan@belo-dc.com