DEMOCRATS FEAR SCANDAL LESS.

Byline: Steven Thomma and Elsa C. Arnett Knight Ridder Newspapers

After weeks of fearing that President Clinton's sex scandal would doom them to landslide losses on Election Day, this week's budget victories finally leave Democrats feeling like they can get back to issues and have a fighting chance on Nov. 3.

And anything that gets candidates off the Monica topic is just fine with voters.

Around the country, Americans say they care more about education, crime and the economy than they do about the scandal. And most candidates - both Democrats and Republicans - are responding with campaigns about the issues, rather than the president's possible impeachment.

``The result,'' said Democratic pollster Mark Mellman, ``will end up being the same as it would have been if Monica Lewinsky had never left 90210.''

Republicans still have many advantages, especially as the party running Congress at a time when the economy remains strong and voters are likely to reward incumbents. And Republicans will get an edge in several close races where passionate anti-Clinton voters are certain to turn out to vote.

Democrats can counter with a slew of issues like health care reform that are popular with Americans, while hoping that some voters will be mad enough at Clinton's accusers that they turn out to punish Republicans.

Tired of scandal

Anger isn't going to motivate voters like Joan Fullard, 28, a computer analyst from Clayton, N.C. She is typical of many Americans who have tuned out the scandal and fret that the scandal has tuned out other issues.

``I get frustrated because there are a lot of other issues that need to be addressed, like schools and crime and violence,'' Fullard said. ``I should vote, but I probably won't. I've been wrapped up in my own world, my own concerns.''

In polls and interviews in places ranging from California suburbs to small-town Illinois to the high-tech enclave of North Carolina's Research Triangle, a majority of Americans say they are sick of the Clinton scandal and eager to turn back to other subjects.

Many say they have been turned off from voting.

Even among those who are likely to vote Nov. 3, a majority say they will make up their minds on the kinds of issues that affect them more directly than a Washington brouhaha, the kind of issues that normally drive elections.

Bottom of list

In one typical poll, Americans ranked the scandal at the bottom of the list of issues that will determine their votes for Congress. At the top was education, followed by crime, the economy, health care, Social Security, taxes, the environment, foreign affairs and finally, the possible impeachment of the president, according to a poll for CNN/Gallup/USA Today.

Candidates are responding with traditional campaigns that largely avoid the subject of Clinton or impeachment.

In California, Sen. Barbara Boxer, a Democrat, and Matt Fong, the Republican candidate, are fighting it out over abortion and gun control. In western Illinois, Rep. Lane Evans, a Democrat, argues with Mark Baker, the Republican candidate, over taxes and farm policy. In North Carolina, Sen. Lauch Faircloth, the Republican, trades barbs over personal ethics as well as taxes and education with Democratic challenger John Edwards.

That's the kind of stuff that is working on someone like Shawn Strother, 28, a graduate student from Garner, N.C. He doesn't like Clinton, thinks he should resign. But Strother said he plans to vote for Faircloth because of the incumbent's positions on taxes and economics, not Clinton.

And it's working on Cheryl Harper, 53, a hairdresser in Moline, Ill., who finds the Clinton scandal disgusting, but plans to vote for Democrat Evans because he is trying to save the 6,000 jobs at the Rock Island Arsenal. ``My main concern is how the local economy will be affected if the arsenal is closed,'' she said.

Appeals to voters

Some candidates have used the scandal in direct appeals to voters. In North Carolina, Republican House candidate Tom Roberg has run television ads calling on Clinton to resign and criticizing Rep. David Price, D-Raleigh, for not doing the same.

Roberg said he ran the ads because it reflected his own beliefs and because it ``delighted'' Republican activists. But he added that, ``I want to go back to talking about education and Social Security and the environment'' and said he would back away from the attacks on Clinton.

``The candidates have kind of kept their distance. They don't talk about Clinton much,'' said Ferrel Guillory, a political scientist at the University of North Carolina.

``There are other forces out there. No. 1 is the economy. This state is humming along pretty well. The stock market might make some people a little jittery, but overall they're still pretty happy. And that is good for incumbents.''

Republicans control the Senate by a margin of 55-45, and control the House by a margin of 228-206 with one independent.

``Absent the scandal, it would be a status quo election, purely status quo,'' said Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster based in Atlanta.

Even with the scandal, he said, the country still has a fairly complacent electorate thanks largely to the good economy.

``That leads to satisfaction with incumbents,'' Ayres said. ``We could see the highest re-election rate for incumbents we've seen in years.''

In a few contests, however, the races are close. And there, the results could depend which side is more motivated to vote, those mad at Clinton or those mad at his pursuers.

Republican anger

Since the scandal broke, Republicans have been confident that anti-Clinton voters were angry enough that they could be counted on to go to the polls. They've looked to people like Donna Burch, 67, a retired accountant from Alamo, Calif., who is so mad at Clinton that she's determined to vote against Sen. Boxer and her Democratic colleague, Rep. Ellen Tauscher of Pleasanton, Calif.

``I'm gonna do everything I can to get every Democrat out,'' said Burch, once a Clinton supporter. ``I'm gonna go straight Republican, right down the line.''

For weeks, Clinton and congressional Democrats argued that Congress was only working on the impeachment and ignoring all other issues. Even with the settlement of the budget, they still had enough issues unresolved, like new regulations of tobacco or a bill of rights for patients in health maintenance organizations, to help energize some Democrats.

``More has been made of it than it should have,'' said Sandy Gess, 49, about the scandal and impeachment inquiry. ``The only way we can stop Congress from letting this spiral out of control is to get the Republicans out,'' added Gess, a reference librarian in Walnut Creek, Calif.

Democratic lethargy

Democrats worry that their supporters are not quite as energized as Republican supporters.

Leon Panetta, a former congressman from Monterey, Calif., and a former White House chief of staff, said recently that Democrats are still nervous that the scandal will dampen turnout from their supporters.

``In some key races, turnout is everything,'' he said. ``It was always going to be low. The danger is that you clearly face a reinvigorated Republican base. They are definitely going to show up at the polls.''

He noted that Boxer is ahead in polls of all registered voters, but behind when the polls only register the opinions of likely voters.

Indeed, if turnout is low, around 33 percent, Republicans fare better because their supporters are more likely to go to the polls, according to a recent poll taken by CBS and The New York Times.

If turnout is normal, around 39 percent, the two parties are in a statistical dead heat.

And if turnout goes up to about 47 percent - which would defy the downward trend in voting - it would put Democrats ahead.

They already have lost some voters, once-loyal supporters now disillusioned enough by the scandal that they probably won't vote Democratic - like Sue Kim, 31, a cancer scientist at the University of California, San Francisco.

``I would have voted Democratic under normal circumstances, but with Clinton's problems, and all the Democrats siding with him and barely criticizing him, I've changed my mind,'' said Kim, who hasn't decided how she will vote, if at all.

And they still have to reach wavering voters like Helene Bereskin, 18, a waitress in Moline, Kan.,who was excited about casting her first vote - until the scandal erupted.

``I'm on the edge about whether I should vote or not,'' she said. ``There's been so much of the Clinton scandal and no attention to issues. No one is paying attention to the important stuff. All the issues that should be discussed are being ignored.''

Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster, said Democrats will have to get working people like Bereskin to vote if they have any chance of picking up seats.

``It's not the soccer moms who will decide this election,'' Lake said. ``It's the waitress moms who will decide this election and they'll decide by whether or not they turn out to vote on election day.''