Updated Race Ratings for Senate and Governor

W A S H I N G T O N, May 7, 2002 -- Here are our latest takes on the competitive races for U.S. Senate and state governor:

ABC 2002: The U.S. Senate

ABC 2002: The Governors

Note that many states still have not held their primaries, making definitive general election evaluations impossible.

Overall, control of the Senate remains up for grabs, while on the governors front, Republicans continue to fight to make the November results more a "year of SOME losses" than "a year of MAJOR losses."

Yet even with many primaries pending in key races, develop.m.ents have caused the playing fields to shift a bit.

We have made the following changes in our Senate rankings: Senator Tom Harkin (D) of Iowa and Senator Wayne Allard of Colorado (R) have moved from "Toss-Up" to "Incumbent Party Favored," while GOP Senator Fred Thompson's retirement in Tennessee has moved that seat in the other direction, from "Incumbent Party Safe" to the somewhat more vulnerable "Incumbent Party Favored." Republican Senator Jeff Sessions, who seems unlikely to lose his Alabama seat, has moved from "Favored" to "Incumbent Party Safe."

We have also made the following changes to our gubernatorial ratings. On the Republican side, Massachusetts is no longer looking like a loser for the GOP; their odds now stand at about 50-50 of keeping the seat, making it a "Toss-up." But their seats in Arizona and Wisconsin now look more endangered than before, and have moved from "Incumbent Party Favored" to "Toss-up." In addition, Texas Gov. Pick Perry no longer seems safe, given his Democratic opponent's willingness to spend his personal fortune and Democrats' expected heavy turnout operation in the state, so Perry has shifted from "Incumbent Party Safe" to "Favored."

On the Democratic side, Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama and the open seat in Hawaii have landed in the Toss-Up column, while the open seat in Maryland, now that Republicans have a decent candidate for it, is no longer looking so safe for Democrats and has shifted to Incumbent Party Favored.

Also at this writing, the list of House races that are expected to be competitive this year isn't quite set yet, because of pending primaries and court challenges to several proposed redistricting maps in big states such as Florida, Michigan, and New York.

Even so, the conventional wisdom among close observers is that the pool of competitive House races will be smaller than usual, given House incumbents' success in protecting themselves during the redistricting process, and spotty candidate recruitment by both parties.

By October, the total number of truly competitive House races could end up being as few as 25, and almost certainly will be fewer than 35.

Democrats do stand just six seats away from retaking majority control of the House, but a net gain of six seats seems disproportionate, and quite uphill, given the small number of real races and the absence of any signs of a Democratic tidal wave like the one Republicans rode in 1994.

Because of the president's wartime popularity, the continuing threat of dramatic international develop.m.ents, and the lack of traction both parties are finding so far for their domestic agendas, no one can say at this point what the 2002 elections will be "about," making the evaluations of individual races more about fundraising, candidate performance, and individual states' issues and quirks than any national dynamic.

It is fair to say, however, that few political players are predicting that the president's party will suffer the "normal" substantial midterm election losses in Congress, although bleeding among the GOP's gubernatorial ranks might ding the president's political standing a bit.

Although the stakes are quite high in all three categories of races, with the exception of North Carolina Senate contender Elizabeth Dole and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, few marquee names or races offer national newsworthiness at this point.

As in every election, the vast majority of incumbents are expected to win re-election, but only a handful of contests could decide the balance of power, in Congress at least, for the rest of the president's first term.

Both parties believe this election will turn on who does better at getting out the base vote, and view it as a test run for all-out 2004 efforts.