DEMOCRATS FAR FROM SHOO-IN TO TAKE SENATE; AS ICONS READY TO RETIRE, A BATTLE ROYAL SHAPES UP FOR COVETED NEW YORK SEAT.

Byline: Matthew N. Klink

HOW quickly the political winds change. With Bill Clinton's bipartisan acquittal by the United States Senate, many political insiders hypothesized that the Democrats might not only retake the House of Representatives, where the GOP maintains a paltry six-seat advantage, but Bill Clinton's party could also recapture the United States Senate, where Republicans hold a 10-seat lead.

However, with the unexpected announcements that two incumbent Democratic Senators will hang it up, the hubris expressed by many Democratic partisans waned considerably last week. Now, any Democratic hope of recapturing the Senate is but a dim light emanating from some far-off place. Such thoughts of Senate conquest are expressed only by dyed-in-the-wool Democrats or the politically naive.

Democratic true-believers state that the GOP has to defend 19 Senate incumbents while the Democrats have only 14, therefore Democrats have an inherent election advantage. True, if the actual number of seats was all that mattered.

While the GOP will face a difficult re-election task, the Lincoln Party's political forecast has taken a positive turn with the above-mentioned retirements.

Why should Democrats worry? Because in the 1994, 1996 and 1998 election cycles, while only three Democratic incumbents lost their Senate seats, 11 seats held by retiring Democrats went to Republican candidates. If this trend continues, Democrats will struggle to hold these open seats, which could actually mean GOP Senate pickups in 2000.

To further complicate matters for Democrats, a quick look at the home states of recent Senate retirees demonstrates the dire straits faced by the Democratic Party.

In Nevada, Sen. Richard Bryan called it quits, stating ``It is time to come home'' to spend more time with his family. In 1998, Republican Rep. Bob Ensign lost by the barest of margins, less than 1 percent, to incumbent Democratic Sen. Harry Reid. Without Bryan's incumbent advantage, an easily restarted Ensign campaign should be able to move Bryan's Democratic seat into the Republican column.

In New Jersey, Sen. Frank Lautenberg cited the rigors of campaign fund raising as the chief reason for retiring. With Lautenberg's departure, moderate Republican Gov. Christie Todd Whitman waits in the wings and will be the odds-on favorite to capture the seat. She has been elected governor twice and narrowly lost a Senate campaign to then-incumbent Sen. Bill Bradley in the early 1990s. Whitman's fiscal conservatism and socially moderate positions make her ideally suited to run and win statewide, something she has already done twice. Thus, another Democratic seat goes Republican.

In New York, a true Senate statesman has decided that now is the time for his political swan song. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, often a critic of President Clinton and a true big thinker, will not seek re-election.

Democratic Congresswoman Nita Lowey, a little-known candidate from the Bronx, has stated her intention to run for Moynihan's seat. However, first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, the race's proverbial 1,000-pound gorilla, is considering a run. While she's a carpetbagger, meaning that she's not from New York, a quick look at Robert F. Kennedy's campaign for a New York Senate seat in the early 1960s demonstrates that New Yorkers don't care about a person's state of residence. However, don't start calling Hillary Clinton ``senator'' yet. Also waiting in the wings is New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Should the first lady and Mayor Giuliani square off, it would be the battle royal in the Senate.

Both Giuliani and Hillary Clinton poll well in New York City and in Upstate New York. And, should the two face each other, the campaign could quite possibly turn out to be the most-expensive Senate race ever.

What is in doubt is whether Hillary Clinton can stand the heat of a political campaign where she is the candidate. True, her popularity is significant, in part because most Americans perceive her as a victim of her husband's incessant philandering. But once she becomes the issue, expect her popularity to decrease. Her once publicized dalliance with public policy came when she tried to implement Hillary-Care, a government takeover of medicine. While it failed miserably, such liberal-leaning policies cost the Democrats the Congress in 1994 and did significant short-term damage to her husband's presidency.

So, with 19 months until the first election of the 21st century, it is incredibly naive for anyone to predict Democratic gains in the Senate or, perish the thought, a takeover in the House. To do so ignores today's ever-changing political climate and presupposes that impeachment remains foremost in the American public's mind.

It also assumes, as many Democratic House members desperately hope, that the 106th Congress is truly a do-nothing Congress, meaning it accomplishes nothing. But, to further complicate the political climate, the Clinton administration desperately needs to work with the Republican-controlled Congress to pass legislation. President Clinton must have Republican support on major public policy items to improve his tarnished historical legacy. Vice President Al Gore also needs some near-term public policy accomplishments to spark his 2000 presidential run.

About the only thing that is certain is that America's political climate is in a state of flux.

Who knows, with a little bit of luck, the GOP could not only hold the House and Senate, but if polls hold up, a Republican could recapture the presidency.