WASHINGTON, D.C. — Though myriad factors will come into play in Hawaii Rep. Colleen Hanabusa’s campaign against Sen. Brian Schatz, from Hawaii’s demographics to fundraising, much of the campaign will hinge on what happens in the halls of Congress over the next several months.

And political strategists say each candidate has their advantages and pitfalls that will help drive their campaigns.

Schatz, the freshman senator who was appointed to take Sen. Daniel K. Inouye’s seat last year, has the advantage of having gotten into the Senate first to begin rebuilding the seniority and power Hawaii lost with Inouye’s death and Sen. Daniel Akaka’s retirement. Seniority is expected to be a common refrain from the Schatz camp over the next few months.

He’s also started to reap the benefits of a long Senate tradition — senators taking care of their own with hefty campaign contributions. At least one national consultant thinks a well-funded Democratic political action committee, or super PAC, could get involved in the race. And being in the majority will make it more likely that Schatz can get legislation passed, although at a time of stalemate, no one is expecting him to be able to trumpet major bills on the stump.

Though Hanabusa is in the minority in the GOP-controlled House, the analysts in D.C. and Hawaii say she too has her advantages. One is a seat on the Armed Services Committee, where she’ll likely be in the spotlight talking about one of Hawaii’s most critical issues — defense spending. She’ll also have no shortage of Republican proposals to publicly bash in order to win points with Democratic constituents at home.

It’s only been a couple of days since Hanabusa formally entered the race, but some of those themes have already come into play and will likely be part of the drumbeat of campaigning for the next several months.

One subplot of the coming campaign will be who can best help Hawaii recover from the loss of two senior senators.

Though it went unnoticed in Hawaii, Schatz’s campaign received a small boost a couple of weeks ago when Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota announced his retirement.

Johnson’s departure brings to eight the number of departing senators, which means that Schatz will rise in the Senate pecking order. As a Schatz senior campaign advisor pointed out, if Schatz stays in office, he will have risen in his first year to at least 76th in the seniority list. A couple of the senators — Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. — are leaving the Commerce, Science & Transportation committee on which Schatz sits. Hanabusa, on the other hand, would start at the back of the line and Hawaii would be starting over.

The ability of the 40-year-old Schatz to rack up seniority over the years appeared to be a factor in some of the union endorsements he’s received, although none specifically mentioned age.

“Sen. Schatz has the passion and energy to be a very strong voice for the State of Hawaii for many years to come,” said Brian Ahakuelo, an official with International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1260 in announcing the union’s endorsement of Schatz.

However, Hanabusa in an interview with Civil Beat last week, downplayed the significance of seniority, saying “seniority in itself doesn’t give you some sort of magic key.”

And, though she is 62, Hanabusa said there’s no guarantee “that because someone is younger, they will stay longer.”

Instead, Hanabusa, who rose to become Hawaii’s Senate president, will likely be pushing the idea that she’s the one who has the legislative “skill set,” as she put it, to best serve in the Senate.

Hanabusa Would Benefit From Armed Services Position

Carlos E. Juarez, chairman of Hawaii Pacific University’s Department of Social Services and a former aide to then-California Sen. Alan Cranston, said Hanabusa’s position on the Armed Services Committee will be a showcase for her.

“It helps her to affirm and support the role of the military in Hawaii, which after all, is our second largest industry. In the end, it’s about protecting jobs for her constituents, so having a seat on Armed Services gives her a critical role in discussions and debates about military affairs,” Juarez said.

An example came last month when she urged Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel at a hearing of the committee to avoid making sequestration budget cuts that would lead to furloughs of civilian workers.

Also in April, her office released a letter she and a Republican member of the committee, Arizona Rep. Trent Franks, wrote pushing for funding of the Aegis missile defense system. The system is part of President Barack Obama’s budget proposal and would be slated to be complete and operational at the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai in 2014.

Though Schatz has racked up an impressive array of labor endorsements in the early going, Hanabusa’s stance on defense funding helped win the endorsement last week of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers. The union represents thousands of workers at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, Naval Facilities Hawaii, Naval Facilities Pacific, Defense Logistics Agency Document Services and Command Navy Region.

The union cited the Hagel hearing, saying, “Hanabusa has stood strong in support of American workers, particularly the workers at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard.”

Though being in the Republican House will make it difficult for the Democratic Hanabusa to get much passed, defense spending is one area where she has natural allies with Republicans and where she could have a voice, said Jennifer Duffy, senior editor for the Cook Political Report and former spokeswoman for the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee.

In the Republican House, Hanabusa has worked across the aisle, breaking with Democrats more than any other member of the delegation, primarily in supporting defense spending.

The image of her fighting for defense money could also have a symbolic meaning for voters as well, said John P. Hart, chairman of HPU’s communications department.

“It will remind voters of the late Senator Inouye’s support of Hawaii through military appropriations and also remind them that he wished her to be his successor,” he said.

Other advantages of being in the minority, political observers said, will include the opportunity to rail against unpopular Republican proposals to Hawaii’s Democratic voters.

It would even out the difficulties she’ll have in passing legislation, said Nathan Gonzales, a deputy editor with the national Rothenberg Political Report.

“When votes are used in the context of a campaign, the legislation doesn’t have to be successful,” eh said. “You don’t have to be on the winning side. It’s enough to say you voted against something — even though your side lost.”

In the last couple of months, Hanabusa has sent out releases highlighting her votes against Republican proposals to continue a pay freeze on federal workers, and against a measure that would consolidate and freeze funding for workforce and training programs that help disabled veterans, and women, children and workers with disabilities.

A more subtle example of the benefits of being in the minority came in March when Hanabusa voted against a temporary budget bill, known as a continuing resolution. The measure, needed to keep the government running, eased sequestration cuts for defense but still called for cuts in other areas, as well as defense. Schatz on the other hand voted for the temporary spending bill, despite the cuts, reasoning it was necessary to prevent a government shutdown.

A vote to shut down the federal government was a much easier one for Hanabusa. The bill was assured of passage in the GOP House and House Democratic leadership did not “whip” their members into voting for the measure.

It was a different story in the Senate, where Democratic leaders anxious to avoid another potential shut down did push members, including Schatz, to vote for the bill. Schatz at the time said the measure was not ideal but it was needed to keep government going.

Nevertheless, it is one of the few contrasts thus far in Hanabusa’s and Schatz’ voting records. While not naming Schatz, Hanabusa has repeatedly brought up the sequestration cuts. She said in a statement explaining her vote against the continuing resolution, “under this measure, sequestration could still cause 22 furlough days for our almost 20,000 civilian defense workers in Hawaii, resulting in real losses of $138 million in compensation; each worker faces an average pay cut of $7,000 over the last five months of the fiscal year.

“In addition to the negative impact on our local economy, I believe this is too much to ask of our civilian workers, who have already sacrificed so much.”

After Congress granted the Federal Aviation Administration budget flexibility to avoid furloughs for air traffic controllers, she said, “This is another disturbing example of how sequestration impacts our constituents, our economy, our federal agencies and workforce.”

Larry J. Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, which publishes the Crystal Ball national political newsletter, said being in the minority means you can cast votes that benefit your political standing.

And, Sabato said, there’s another advantage. “Given the party regimentation in the House, there rarely is a close vote, so if you miss some votes because of campaigning back in the Aloha State, you can say, ‘I checked and my side told me my vote was not needed.’ You can never do that in the Senate. Every vote matters almost all the time, one way or the other.”

But it could be difficult for Hanabusa to get much traction for her stance against sequestration. Hanabusa voted in 2011 for the federal Budget Control Act which required the automatic sequestration cuts if a debt-reduction supercommittee failed to come up with an agreement — which it did not. Hanabusa at the time said she was voting for it begrudgingly because the process could provide a means through the subcommittee to do away with the Bush tax cuts on the rich.

Ultimately, the analysts said Hanabusa’s position in the minority will not greatly hurt her, particularly because it’s unlikely Schatz will rack up huge legislative wins on his side.

Schatz Could Benefit From Position On Powerful Committee

Political analysts said Schatz will be helped by his position as a member of the committees on Commerce, Science and Transportation, Energy and Natural Resources and Indian Affairs. He is also chair of the Subcommittee on Water and Power.

As a subcommittee chair, Schatz will have the ability to hold hearings to highlight issues that will play well back home, HPU’s Juarez said, “He can showcase Hawaii’s potential in renewable energy and help to showcase green technology, a popular issue in the State.”

Duffy said he’ll also be helped out by the Senate tradition of helping out incumbents, even in a primary against another Democrat. “What I have noticed over time is that leadership does everything it can to help newcomers, especially the ones facing tough races,” she said.

The help includes “finding them bills to put their name to, take credit for,” she said.

Indeed, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee endorsed Schatz even while Hanabusa was still making up her mind about whether to run for senator or for governor. Despite Hanabusa’s ties to Inouye, including an endorsement from his widow, many of the late senator’s friends have helped Schatz.

Some Similar Support Yet Some Differences

Campaign finance reports show the Searchlight Leadership Fund, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s leadership PAC, gave Schatz the $5,000 limit for the primary, as did Prairie PAC, Sen. Richard Durbin’s leadership PAC.

In addition, Duffy said while the DSCC may not run attack ads against Hanabusa, she wouldn’t be surprised if the Senate Majority PAC, a super PAC dedicated to electing Democrats to the Senate, unleashes ads against Hanabusa.

On the other hand, Hanabusa may also have significant national help, which would set up a battle in Hawaii between two of the Democrats biggest political groups.

A spokeswoman for Emily’s List told Civil Beat last week, it’s “likely” the PAC devoted to electing women to Congress will back Hanabusa. The group, which has been Hanabusa’s biggest supporter in federal races, also spent $7.7 million last year nationally in independent campaign expenditures, about $6 million aimed at running ads against candidates, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Hanabusa alluded to the importance of the women’s vote in her interview with Civil Beat, saying that women might say: “If we have an opportunity to vote someone that we believe is qualified, maybe more qualified, why shouldn’t we be able to do that. Why is age a factor?”

She has highlighted women’s issues at times, co-sponsoring the Paycheck Fairness Act, which seeks to eliminate the salary inequality between men and women.

Not willing to concede the women’s vote to Hanabusa, Schatz has made it a point to highlight his own support of women’s issues in Congress, penning an op-ed for the Hawaii Reporter about his vote for the passage of the Violence Against Women Act.

In addition to the direct financial help his campaign committee has received from Senate leadership, Schatz’s coffers also stands to benefit from the Commerce committee assignment.

Indeed, a Sunlight Foundation study in April found that Armed Services was only the eighth most lucrative House committee in terms of drawing campaign contributions. Though it did not do a study of Senate committees, the Sunlight Foundation found the House Energy and Commerce Committee was the third most lucrative committee.

“Foreign relations may be more prestigious, but in terms of money, commerce has banks, transportation, energy, all that stuff,” Duffy said.

Money is an important factor for Schatz, who racked up an early fundraising advantage over Hanabusa. Polls, including Hanabusa’s internal poll, show Schatz is viewed favorably by voters but with not much name recognition. Money would get his name out to people.

Schatz War Chest Boosted By Special Interests

Among the interest groups with business before the committee is the cruise line industry. Its donated to Schatz already and that could put him in a difficult position later this year.

According to campaign finance records, the industry group, the Cruise Lines International Association PAC, has given Schatz $1,000. The Holland America PAC has given another $1,500. Princess Cruises has also given $1,500.

However, committee chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W. Va., has said one of the committee’s priorities will be “reviewing whether existing cruise line industry regulations sufficiently protect passengers and the environment.”

Rockefeller also lashed out at the cruise industry after February’s incident when an engine fire on a Carnival Triumph ship reportedly left passengers with overflowing toilets and limited food. He called the incident “just the latest example in a long string of serious and troubling incidents involving cruise ships.”

“Safety must be the number one priority in any transportation industry,” Rockefeller said. “It is time that the cruise line industry – which earns more than $25 billion a year – pays for the costs they impose on the government since it’s the Coast Guard that comes to the rescue every single time something goes wrong on a cruise ship.”

In addition to industry campaign donations, Schatz may be pushed to be at odds with Rockefeller because of the importance of the cruise industry to Hawaii. A study by the Hawaii Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism showed that in 2003 the cruise industry meant $381.1 million for the state, and was responsible in 2004 for 7,569 jobs.

The recent House battle over the Cyber Information Sharing and Protection Act, which was headed for the Senate Commerce committee, also appeared to add to Schatz’s campaign coffers. Interests identified by the Sunlight Foundation as supporters of the bill, including Google and the American Bankers Association, gave Schatz $16,000, according to FEC records.

The bill would give businesses and the federal government greater ability to enhance the nation’s cyber security. Supporters spent heavily on lobbying for the measure, but ultimately did little. While it passed the House, it is expected to die in the Senate.

Despite the contributions, Schatz has come out against the measure, tweeting, “Just reviewed CISPA; I can’t back it due to insufficient privacy protections. We must move a bill to stop cyber attacks but not this one.”

The issue is another contrast with Hanabusa, who was was among 248 House members who voted to approve the measure. She said in a statement that the bill was necessary for security and the privacy concerns had been addressed.

She said in a statement, “It’s simply beyond argument that the Internet has become a powerful and pervasive part of our everyday lives, driving not only personal communication but also commerce and the workings of government. It is vital that we recognize that cyberthreats have the potential to affect everyone who uses the Internet.”

“The legislation establishes strong use limitations for any shared data,” Hanabusa said. “The information must be used for a cybersecurity purpose or the protection of national security. It cannot be used for regulatory purposes and the government cannot put it to any other use. Given the nature of the threat and the potentially devastating effects of a serious cyberattack, these are reasonable and effective limitations.”

To Hart, though, what happens in Congress won’t matter much unless Hanabusa can raise more money, perhaps with the support of Inouye’s former supporters. “Running for Senate is expensive,” he said, noting Ed Case was badly outraised by Sen. Mazie Hirono.

“Properly financed, she is an effective campaigner, can be a good debater and the race would be competitive,” Hart said.