The worst appears to be over for Governor Spitzer — at least for now.

The extent of the governor’s involvement in the state police scandal is a mystery, but the chances of blockbuster disclosures emerging from the ongoing investigations are slim.

It’s unlikely that the district attorney of Albany County, David Soares, will determine that the governor’s office committed a crime in the course of its scheming against the Senate majority leader, Joseph Bruno.

It’s harder to predict the outcome of the New York State Ethics Commission’s inquiry. Judging by the incompetence with which the commission had conducted its “preliminary” investigation — its bizarre subpoena of a Times Union reporter doesn’t instill confidence — one shouldn’t expect much from it beyond the findings of Attorney General Cuomo’s report.

Senate Republicans are planning to convene hearings on the scandal, but they risk over-playing their hand.

The Spitzer administration made a mistake by politicizing the state police, but Mr. Bruno essentially used the executive chamber air fleet as his personal chauffeur. It’s hard to say who deserves more blame.

The longer the Republican probe drags on the more their search for truth starts to look like petty bickering. That their political guru, Roger Stone, is accused of taunting Bernard Spitzer, an 83-year-old man with Parkinson’s disease, doesn’t help their cause.

It’s an awkward moment for Mr. Spitzer. Humbled by the worst scandal of his administration, Mr. Spitzer has pledged to be less combative and reach out to lawmakers whom he has alienated. That’s not going to be easy given that Mr. Bruno intends to provoke Mr. Spitzer at every turn. The Spitzer administration sought to damage Mr. Bruno for a reason. That they failed once doesn’t mean they don’t have an incentive to try again.

Mr. Spitzer’s relationship with Mr. Bruno is beyond repair. In the spring, a détente may have been possible. Now, there’s too much bad blood. The number of personal insults, obscenities, and accusations that the two men have lobbed at each other is an embarrassment to the offices they hold.

The governor can little afford to hesitate by waiting until next year’s November elections to try to remove Mr. Bruno from power and allowing another 14 months to be wasted by childish squabbling. The gamble is too risky.

A Republican victory extending the party’s control of the Senate for another two years would destroy the governor’s chances for a productive first term. A Democratic victory could backfire on Mr. Spitzer by giving birth to a united and emboldened Legislature armed with more leverage over the governor during budget negotiations.

The more urgent concern for Mr. Spitzer then is not what to do about the Senate Republicans but what to do about Mr. Bruno. The 78-year-old Senate leader would seem to be at the peak of power, flush with the vindictive glory of Troopergate. The shaming of the governor, however, does not make for a long-term strategy.

Republicans may be patting themselves on the back for outsmarting Mr. Spitzer but one scandal does not change the demographic reality in New York: the Republican base is shrinking. They may survive 2008 but then they have to worry about 2010, 2012, and on.

Combined, the long-term trends for Republicans and the short-term needs for Mr. Spitzer are a recipe for a deal. The governor calls off his war on the party as long as he’s governor in exchange for a new Senate leader, a legislator who’s on friendly terms with Mr. Spitzer and who could bring the two sides together.

The top candidate for the job is Thomas Libous, a Republican from Binghamton who has eyed the majority leader post for a long time. Mr. Libous is one of the few Republicans in the conference who get along with Mr. Spitzer. His Web site blog features a giant photo of the two men chatting in his district. “In my role as a senior senator, we’ll be able to work together very easily with the new governor on behalf of the Southern Tier,” Mr. Libous told the Press and Sun-Bulletin in November. “Why? My constituents are also Eliot Spitzer’s constituents. We’ll have a mutual interest in helping people.”

Republicans and Mr. Spitzer both have a choice. Republicans can stick with Mr. Bruno now and live in perpetual electoral fear, or they can buy time by making peace with Mr. Spitzer.

The governor can sacrifice the next year in the hopes of a Democratic triumph in 2008 or he can forge a relationship with a party that is naturally closer to him on a number of fiscal policy issues than he is to the left-leaning Democratic conference.

Senate Republicans are a loyal bunch and would not casually betray a man who has led them ably for 13 years. The question remains: Does Mr. Bruno represent their future or their past?