GOP gains would spell change for region's U.S. senators

WASHINGTON - They're not on the ballot, but the stakes are still high on Nov. 4 for U.S. Sens. Pat Toomey, Bob Menendez, and Bob Casey.

Control of the Senate hangs in the balance, with Republicans pushing to win the chamber and change the power structure for both national policy and individual senators.

Menendez (D., N.J.) could lose his position as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Toomey (R., Pa.) could enter the Senate majority for the first time, potentially boosting his agenda just as he gears up for reelection in 2016 - but also raising the prospect of a political balancing act as more confrontational GOP colleagues gain the footing to advance their ideas, too.

Casey (D., Pa.), as well as U.S. Sen. Cory Booker (D., N.J.) - who is on the ballot, against Republican Jeff Bell - could be pushed into the minority for the first time in their Senate careers if the GOP gains the six seats it needs to take control. Vice President Biden went to the Four Seasons Hotel in Philadelphia on Friday to try to ensure that doesn't happen, raising money for his party's Senate campaigns.

Although the key races are still close enough to go either way, most analysts believe Republicans will prevail.

If they do, all four of the region's senators could soon be voting on bills with a more conservative bent, possibly forcing Democrats into more delicate decisions.

"It's better to have the gavel," said Ross Baker, a Rutgers University political scientist who has studied the Senate.

Toomey expects he would chair subcommittees of the Banking and Finance Committees, giving him added staff and the chance to lead hearings to bolster his "pro-growth" policies.

He hopes to repeal a tax on medical-device makers, make permanent tax policies that he says help businesses and the economy, and erase what he sees as onerous regulations on community banks.

More broadly, Republicans have promised to open up the Senate floor, giving rank-and-file members more chances to offer amendments after years of contending that Democrats stifled the process.

"I'll have far more opportunity to advance policies that are important to Pennsylvania," Toomey said.

His GOP colleagues will have their own ideas, though, and if more conservative Republicans steer the agenda, they could also present difficult votes for Toomey, who will need to appeal to moderate suburban voters to win reelection in 2016. "There are going to be things that Ted Cruz is going to want to do that are going to be politically damaging for Pat Toomey," said Baker, referring to the polarizing Texas senator.

Senate leaders try to protect their vulnerable members, but they may also have to give running room to the right, which will be itching for action after years of seeing proposals clear the GOP-controlled House and then stall.

"There's a lot of pent-up conservative energy which is going to manifest itself, at least early in the next session" if Republicans take control, said Richard Arenberg, a longtime Democratic Senate aide who now teaches at Brown University.

Said Toomey, "If you're not willing to take tough votes, you shouldn't run for the United States Senate."

For Democrats, the fall-off wouldn't be as steep as in the House, where the minority party is effectively powerless. Senate rules give the minority enough say to make a difference.

Toomey, for example, has at times used Senate procedures to single-handedly stall proposals he opposed - a Democratic plan on flood insurance, for example - and he rallied lawmakers to block President Obama's top civil rights nominee.

Democrats have struggled to score clear victories because the chamber requires bipartisan support to pass major bills.

"In many ways, a senator in the minority may be more influential because it's so hard to advance legislation, but it's very easy to block legislation," Baker said.

It's the difference between throwing grenades and catching them, he said, citing an old adage.

"If you're in the minority," Baker said, "it's a lot of fun throwing them."

Menendez has enjoyed one of the top privileges of the majority: a chairmanship. As leader of the Foreign Relations Committee since early 2013, he has written bills on Israel, Syria, and Iran's nuclear weapons and led high-profile hearings on the 2012 Benghazi attack.

Chairmen have "considerable power over the committees' agenda" and oversight, Arenberg said.

If Republicans win, Menendez would remain the Democrats' top voice on the panel, but U.S. Sen. Bob Corker (R., Tenn.) would lead it.

Still, the change may not be as drastic as on other committees. Menendez, a hawk, has strong relationships with Republicans on foreign affairs, and the panel is not typically as partisan as others.

For Casey and Booker (if the latter wins reelection), relatively junior among Democrats, the changes might not be as sharp.

"The most dramatic change comes at the level of leadership of the committees," Baker said.

Rank-and-file lawmakers largely support their parties' aims, with the biggest bills usually handled by senior members.

If they end up in the minority, Casey and Booker could use their powers to object, much as Toomey has, but each of them so far has focused more on conciliation than combat. "I'm going to continue to be someone that works with Republicans whether they're in the majority or not," Booker said. "The only way that it's possible to move forward in Washington right now is for people to work together."

As their party fights to hang on, though, most Democrats prefer not to talk about what they might do if they lose.

Menendez, through a spokeswoman, declined an interview request. Casey mostly talked up Democrats' chances of staying in control. "The dynamic of the place changes," Casey said, "but I don't think it really changes the work itself."

When it was pointed out that Casey has been in the majority only since joining the Senate in 2007, he said, "I plan to continue."

@JonathanTamari