Even if President Ford manages to defeat Jimmy Carter in today's election, he will still have to contend with a heavily Democratic Congress that should appear very similar to the one he has frequently attacked during the current campaign. Of the races for 33 Senate and 435 House seats up for election, only a handful provide the Republicans with any hope of changing the Congressional balance of power and regaining any of the seats they lost in the Democratic Congressional land-slide of 1974.

Ordinarily such a landslide sweeps into office many freshman Congressmen from districts that in less volatile years are counted as "safe" for the opposition party. These Congressmen in the next election find themselves highly vulnerable when the turbulent circumstances--like Watergate and Nixon's resignation--that prompted the lanslide have subsided. However, this pattern, which held true in 1966 and 1938, may not take hold this year.

Only one of the 71 freshman Democrats elected in 1974, Representative Allan T. Howe of Utah, is currently running behind his opponent, and his political troubles stem almost entirely from a conviction on charges of soliciting a police-decoy prostitute this summer. Aside from Howe, about 20 other freshmen representatives are involved in close re-election contests, but 12 of them were leading their Republican opponents in polls taken in October.

This leaves 50 freshmen as solid favorites to retain the seats they acquired in 1974. Although fellow Democrats have described the 1974 freshman group as particularly "aggressive" and dedicated to performing the unglamorous constituent work, their expected re-election also underscores the continued importance among the electorate of the Watergate-related issues of honesty and integrity that brought them to the Hill in the first place.

The apparent Republican failure to mount effective challenges to many of the presumably most vulnerable members of the 94th Congress obviously hinders their chances to recoup the 1974 loss of 43 seats. Some observers give the GOP a chance to pick up as many as a dozen of those seats, but they also concede, often in the same sentence, that the minority party may suffer a net loss in the House.

The Senate picture is not much brighter for the Republicans. Although a half-dozen states may elect a Senator with a different party affiliation than that of the incumbent, the Democrats still might wind up with a net gain of one or two seats. The best the GOP can hope for is to break even or perhaps pick up one seat if most of the close races break in their favor.

The numerical shift anticipated for the 95th Congress may be small, but the personality of Congress when it convenes in January will differ markedly because of the retirement of many old standbys on the Hill. Both parties in the Senate are losing their leaders, Democrat Mike Mansfield of Montana and Republican Hugh Scott of Pennsylvania. In addition, such Democratic stalwarts as Philip Hart of Michigan and STuart Symington of Missouri are ending Senate careers that began in the 1950s.

Speaker of the House Carl Albert of Oklahoma is leaving after 30 years in the lower chamber, and two important and powerful House committee chairmen, Wilbur Mills of Ways and Means and Wayne Hays of House Administration resigned their posts earlier in the session.

The departure of these powerful leaders should produce some fierce struggles in January, but the election results, barring unforeseen upsets, should not significantly affect the outcome of the leadership contests. None of the major candidates for leadership posts face serious challenges, and the small number of new faces expected should reduce the often intense infighting for the support of congressional newcomers.

As with the Presidential campaign, the congressional contests have often been marked by the candidates' superficial treatment of issues. With few exceptions, policy stances have taken second place to personality. Fallout from the Watergate scandal has produced a political climate where an image of candor, honesty, and integrity is crucial. In almost every case where an incumbent appears to be in trouble with his constituency, the problems stem from charges or investigations of alleged corruption.

Where issues have played a role, candidates have echoed--with regional variations--the positions taken in the national party platforms to an unusual degree. The state of the economy, and charges of excessive spending by Congress, predominate the dialogues between most candidates, but busing and abortion are clearly the most volatile issues in many states. A large number of Senate races that either appear extremely close at present or involve important political figures warrant further examination on a state-by-state basis, as do several interesting House races.

THE EAST

Maine--Democratic Senator Edmund S. Muskie has encountered the most active challenge for his seat since he first won the position in 1958. Nevertheless, his Republican opponent, Robert A.G. Monks, has little chance of scoring an upset despite the state's serious economic woes. Monk's attempts to pin the charge of "fiscal irresponsibility" on Muskie have proven ineffective, particularly in light of the Democrat's position as chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.

New Hampshire--The state that in 1974 had the longest fight for a Senate seat in history has been spared a similar agony this year, but one close House race has generated some national interest.

J. Joseph Grandmaison, the strategist of Senator George McGovern's victory in the 1972 New Hampshire primary, is waging with some success a battle against an incumbent whom many had presumed to be unbeatable..