Nervous Republicans, eyeing national opinion polls and an energized Democratic base, are seeking to hold on to their narrow majority and the historic gains they’ve made since the early 1990s. They are trying mightily to emphasize local matters, though voter interest and media buzz is primarily centering on large-scale issues such as gas prices, immigration, taxes, the minimum wage, and government corruption. Meanwhile, Democrats are seeking to make President George W. Bush’s declining popularity into a major advantage, while harnessing Internet-based fundraising and organizational tools to turn left-wing anger into electoral success in November. Some might see this as an accurate description of the emerging battle for control of the U.S. Congress in 2006, but I am actually talking about the thousands of state legislative contests up for grabs this year. For Republicans, one of the most promising signs of party growth over the past two decades is that success at the federal level has been accompanied by success in state and local elections. To accomplish a true alignment, a party needs to be competitive up and down the ballot. Republicans became so in the 1990s and early 2000s. Even after some losses in the 2004 cycle, Republicans retained a majority of legislative chambers. They’d like to maintain it. But it won’t be easy. Here’s how the numbers stack up as of this writing. There are 99 legislative chambers (Nebraska as a unicameral and nonpartisan legislature). Of the 98 partisan bodies, Republicans hold 49 and Democrats 47. Two chambers, the Iowa senate and Montana house, are tied. As a whole, Republicans control 20 state legislatures and Democrats 19, with 10 legislatures split between the parties. On the other hand, Democrats enjoy a slight edge in the total number of state lawmakers, at 3,663 to the GOP’s 3,643. The 2006 cycle offers plenty of opportunities for either party to push this precariously balanced coin down on either heads or tails. Of the 98 partisan chambers, 88 will have elections this year (a few states have odd-numbered election cycles or four-year terms for some legislators). Partisan control of most of these chambers, however, is not really up for grabs this year due to large margins and stable electorates. There are many hot races. Having talked to several party officials and political consultants, here’s my initial list of the key ones to watch: • Alabama–At first glance, it would seem odd to place this state on the list, with Democrats enjoying relatively comfortable majorities in the house (63-42) and senate (25-10). But I’m told that if Republicans gain only a handful of seats in the senate, there is a possibility that conservative Democrats will caucus with them, yielding a change in leadership and direction. • Colorado–Republicans experienced a major disappointment here in 2004 when demographic changes and a well-funded independent expenditure conspired to flip both legislative chambers to the Democrats. The race will be extremely competitive in 2006, with Democrats trying to defend their 35-30 house majority and 18-17 senate edge. GOP divisions over immigration and a contested gubernatorial primary may play a role. • Indiana–Republicans hold a 33-17 margin in the senate, but only a 52-48 edge in the house. One GOP operative told me that he expects Indiana’s races to be “close and competitive” and that, for the foreseeable future, “they always will be.” Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels, former budget director for President Bush, had only a 35 percent approval rating in an April poll. This is one instance where a truly local issue may matter a lot: Daniel’s controversial and successful push to put Indiana on daylight-saving time. No kidding. • Iowa–Talk about a battleground state. Bush lost Iowa in 2000, won it in 2004. In the legislature, the GOP has a 51-49 house majority. The senate is tied at 25-25. One difference from some of the other competitive states is that Iowa presents Republicans with a potential pick-up of a governor’s seat, a race that may affect issues and turnout in the legislative contests. But four Republican incumbent senators are stepping down. • Maine–I heard more enthusiasm from national Republicans about their prospects in Maine than in any other Democratic-held legislature. The house is 74-73, the senate 19-16. The Democratic governor, John Baldacci, has only recently seen his approval ratings bounce back above 50 percent. One factor driving the potential for partisan shifts is term limits forcing longtime incumbents up or out of their current offices. Lest we forget, that was one of the original selling points for the idea. • Michigan–The first thing to know about this state is that Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm has weak poll numbers and a well-funded challenger in Republican Dick DeVos. Democrats hoped Michigan would be another golden opportunity in state races in 2006, but that’s not what I’m hearing. It will be competitive, but the GOP’s 58-52 house margin and 22-16 senate margin have a good chance to survive the challenge. • Minnesota–The 68-66 Republican majority in the house is in play. The Democratic senate is not. Most of the competitive races are in the suburbs of Minneapolis-St. Paul and Rochester, as was true in previous cycles. The issues will be similar to those in other states’ races, but here you can add abortion to the list, given Republican efforts near the end of the 2006 legislative session to enact two pro-life measures in the state-budget bill. Statewide, Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty is locked in a tough re-election race against Democratic Attorney Gen. Mike Hatch, which will soak up a lot of campaign cash. • Montana–Given its location and presidential preferences, many wrongly assume that Montana is colored deeply scarlet. In fact, it features highly competitive politics. Democrats took the governor’s mansion in 2004, GOP Sen. Conrad Burns faces a significant challenge in 2006, and in the legislature there is a 50-50 tie in the house and a 27-23 Democratic edge in the senate, which was also won in 2004. Some Democrats see Montana as their next Colorado. • New Hampshire–Yes, it’s on the list. Another state thought of by some as Republican but in fact trending Democratic, New Hampshire seems likely to re-elect Democratic Gov. John Lynch, who first won in 2004, and may also de-elect the 16-8 Republican majority in the senate. Bush’s approval numbers here are lower than in the nation as a whole, while Lynch enjoys 65 percent to 70 percent approval. • North Carolina–This is a “blue-moon” election in my home state, in that once every 12 years there are no major statewide races. The last time that happened was 1994, when North Carolina had one of the largest swings towards the GOP of any state. Since then, the party has fared far less well in state races. In 2006, with an intra-party split among house Republicans essentially won by anti-tax conservatives in hard-fought primaries, they have the unity and momentum to upend a 63-57 Democratic majority led by a speaker currently under state and federal investigation. Republicans may narrow the 29-21 Democratic lead in the senate, but getting to 26 seats will be tough. • Oklahoma–Democrats have controlled the Oklahoma senate since the state was created out of Indian territory. Republicans had planned to make a major push to end the Dems’ 25-22 majority in 2006, a push that began May 9 with a special election in a Southwestern Oklahoma district where the wife of a Democratic senator who died in office sought to retain the seat. She lost to the Republican, which made the GOP count 23. On the plus side for Democrats is that incumbent Gov. Brad Henry enjoys solid voter approval. • Oregon–The reverse of New Hampshire can be found in Oregon, where some may expect to see only blue, but in fact the state has a 33-27 Republican majority in the house and there is only an 18-12 Democratic edge in the senate. I’m told that GOP hopes in the senate have dimmed, but that the party has a good chance to defend its house turf against a well-funded Democratic effort. Democratic Gov. Ted Kulongoski faces a primary election on Tuesday and what will likely be a serious Republican challenge in the fall. • Tennessee–Republicans won control of the Volunteer State’s senate in 2004 for the first time in a century. Shortly afterward, Democrats began formulating plans to take it back. But in the interim, the Tennessee Waltz Scandal–allegations of bribery and, later, voter fraud involving mostly Democratic lawmakers–took a bit of the wind out of their sails. As is also true in North Carolina, the ethics issue, which may help Democrats in federal races, could hurt them in state-level races. • Washington–Republicans, frustrated by the “loss” of Dino Rossi in the 2004 gubernatorial race, are hungry for some electoral gains this year. They may find them in the senate, which has a 26-23 Democratic edge. Unified Democratic government this year generated a projected $700 million budget deficit for the next fiscal year and the addition of sexual orientation as a protected class in the state’s anti-discrimination regulations. Gov. Christine Gregoire won’t be on the ballot, and her tepid approval ratings offer Democrats little political assistance. As you can see, while Republicans do see opportunities for gains in a number of states, for the most part they seem to be playing defense against resurgent Democrats. Sound familiar? –John Hood is a syndicated columnist and president of the John Locke Foundation, a state policy think tank in North Carolina.