For example, looking at the composition of the Senate since 1988, it is possible to identify at least four distinct periods of regional party coalitions, including three periods since 1994. The following table looks at party control of the Senate both within the eleven states of the old Confederacy, and the thirty-nine states outside of it (numbers reflect Senate balance at the end of each session):
78 non-southern seats 22 southern seats Congress D R D R 101st 40 38 15 7 102nd 42 36 15 7 103rd 44 34 12 10 104th 38 40 9 13 105th 38 40 7 15 106th 37 41 9 13 107th 42 36 9 13 108th 40 38 9 13 109th 41 37 4 18From 1989-1992, the wide Democratic majority in the Senate was held together through a narrow majority outside of the eleven states that once formed the Confederacy, and a wide supermajority within those eleven states. In the 103rd Congress, Democrats were able to offset significant losses in the south with noticeable gains outside of the south, where they formed a wide 44-34 majority.
The first three Congresses following the 1994 Republican takeover featured a Republican coalition held together by a narrow non-southern majority and somewhat less narrow southern majority. However, the 2000 election witnessed a reversal of the non-southern portion of the 1994 takeover, as Democrats were able to restore their non-southern majority to its pre-1994 level. While that did not change in either the 2002 or 2004 elections, Republicans were able to restore their Senate majority to its 1995-2000 level by completing their long takeover of the conservative south.
Thus, taking the long view of the Republican takeover, the entire shift in the balance of power in the Senate has occurred within the eleven states that once formed the Confederacy. While the balance of power in non-southern seats remains essentially the same as it was from 1986-1994, the Republican takeover, which originally had a real national flavor, can now be understood as entirely a southern revolution. This can even been seen as we look to 2006, as six of the seven seats most ripe for Democratic takeover--Arizona, Missouri, Montana, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Rhode Island--are outside of the old south. If Democrats were to engage in a wide sweep in 2006, it would effectively be a full-fledged "non-southern revolution," as Republicans would retain a stranglehold over the twenty-two southern seats.
Taking a very long view, such a non-southern sweep would not, in and of itself, be enough in order for Democrats to once again become the natural governing party of the Senate. As long as the two coalitions remain primarily ideological, I have a difficult time believing that Democrats will ever again achieve parity, much less majority control, within the most conservative area of the nation. However, it will be necessary for Democrats to regain the minority, but competitive, stance that they held from the 104th -108th Congresses. Combined with a non-southern revolution, being able to pull between seven and nine seats in the south would be enough for Democrats to become the natural governing party again.
Either way, realizing that the Republican revolution of 1994, which was national in character, has been reduced to a southern Republican revolution by 2005, gives us a better understanding of the current political situation, and serves as a starting point for envisioning a Democratic breakthrough on the magnitude of 1994.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 18 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.