U.S. House race enters homestretch

We’re just about at the end of the great congressional race that wasn’t.

On Tuesday, those who haven’t voted by absentee ballot go to the polls to decide who will go to Washington to replace former Rep. Chris Cox.

We won’t count all those who won’t vote at all. But their absence may turn out to be a bit historic. More on that in a second.

At this point, it seems pretty assured that state Sen. John Campbell will win the race, largely by his smart political maneuver of being a Republican.

What will be interesting to see is how much of the vote he gets. In 2004, Cox got 65% of the vote in a race with three candidates.

I wonder if Campbell will even get 50%.

The spoiler, of course, is going to be American Independent Party candidate Jim Gilchrist, the man behind an anti-illegal-immigration group called the Minuteman Project. He surprised many during this election’s primary by getting almost 15% of the vote in a crowded field that included a second well-known Republican other than Campbell. At that point, there was talk that Gilchrist could turn Tuesday’s general election into a real race, largely by pressing Campbell on immigration issues.

Well, Gilchrist has pushed but he hasn’t made much headway. The best support for that statement? President Bush’s speech on Monday in which he promised more efforts to stop illegal immigration but in concert with a guest worker program that would allow illegal immigrants to apply for temporary work permits.

This speech has been spun as a compromise between those in the Republican party who rely on immigrant workers and those who think its important to stop illegal immigration. But I think it signals something else.

After the primary, Gilchrist’s run was seen as a preview of just how important a political issue illegal immigration might be in 2006. The fact that Gilchrist doesn’t seem to be putting in a serious challenge to Campbell, after all, suggests the issue isn’t as central as some thought. And Bush at best compromising on the issue seems further proof that Republicans aren’t scared to take on anti-illegal-immigration activists.

Gilchrist, though, could still help deny Campbell a majority of the vote. Here’s a guess:

Democratic turnout remains low, as it was in the primary, and Democrat Steve Young gets about 20% of the vote, rather than the party’s typical low 30%. Libertarian Bruce Cohen and Green Party candidate Béa Tiritilli combine for maybe 3%. Gilchrist, then, needs to pull in a little more than a quarter of the vote and Campbell suddenly dips below 50%. This becomes a sure thing if Democrats come out to vote in usual numbers, which they didn’t in the primary.

Potentially more interesting than Campbell going to Washington without a majority -- given a guy named Bill Clinton managed to do that 13 years ago -- is whether he might go to Washington with the fewest votes of any member of Congress.

The House districts, remember, are divided up by population, so there’s about an equal pool of voters in each. And in 2004, in the neighborhood of 200,000 votes was about an average victory. I can find several winners around 100,000, with the lowest being Democrat Jim Costa of California, at 61,005. Orange County’s own Loretta Sanchez, also a Democrat, garnered just 65,684.

Campbell and fellow Republican Marilyn Brewer combined for about 56,000 in the primary. So there’s something to watch for.

Two other things to watch for.

The Pilot this week is running profiles of the Congressional candidates. I hope they’ll help you be informed when you cast your ballot.

And on our Forum page today is a new feature, Copilot, in which we’re giving critics of the paper an opportunity to voice their concerns about what we print.

* S.J. CAHN is the editor. He may be reached at (714) 966-4607 or by e-mail at s.j.cahn@latimes.com.

20051201ipny9okn(LA)