"All in all, do you think things in the nation are generally headed in the right direction, or do you feel that things are off on the wrong track?" NBC Nov 1-2– 11% right direction, 76% wrong direction

"How well are things going in the country today: very well, fairly well, pretty badly or very badly?“ CNN Oct 17– 42% pretty badly, 33% very badly

73% Disapprove of how Congress is handling its job

And yet..And yet..

Few incumbents lose – 16 House (12 R, 4 D)– 2 Senate (R- NH, NC)

Partisan swing – 5 GOP Senate seats lost (NH, NC, CO, NM, VA)

OR, AK, MN undecided

– Democrat gains 20 in House

Context of Congressional Context of Congressional ElectionsElections

Single member districts Roughly equal size (650,000 souls)First Tuesday in November in even # yearsAustralian ballotMust win 2 elections

Same Place, Same VotersSame Place, Same VotersThree Maps, Three OutcomesThree Maps, Three Outcomes Basic Rules

– each square same population. – All squares in the same district must touch – R squares have a majority of Republican

voters – D squares have a majority of Democratic

voters. Each set of squares with the same color

represent a single election district

Map 1Map 1

How many Ds and Rs elected?

How many competitive elections?

R R R R RR R R R RD D D D DD D D D D

five desirable less safe, more competitive districts, where the winner of the election may be either a Republican or a Democrat

Map 2Map 2

How many Ds and Rs elected?

How many competitive elections?

three Republican and two Democratic majority districts, all safe 55 percent or better districts for incumbents of the respective parties. Note the very safe pink D district

R R R R RR R R R RD D D D DD D D D D

Map 3Map 3

How many Ds and Rs elected?

How many competitive elections?

two Republican and three Democratic majority districts, all safe 55 percent or better districts for incumbents of the respective parties:

R R R R RR R R R RD D D D DD D D D D

FloridaFlorida

Florida's 22nd District – 90 miles long – Less than 3 miles

wide. – every beach house

lining Route A1A along Florida's Gold Coast from West Palm Beach to Miami Beach

– 52% Dem in 2000, 55% R in 2002

Social & Political ContextsSocial & Political Contexts

Amazing Variation– geographic size – Population– Economic base– Ethnicity– Age– Partisanship

Incumbency Reelection Rates 1832-1996Incumbency Reelection Rates 1832-1996

0

20

40

60

80

100

1832

-40

1852

-60

1872

-80

1892

-190

0

1912

-20

1932

-40

1952

-60

1972

-80

1984

-88

% of Incumbs Seeking Reelection % of Incumbs defeated

% of Incumbs retained

IncumbencyIncumbency

93% of House incumbents are reelected– 1994, 84% of House Democrats were reelected

77% of Senate incumbents are reelected#1 question to ask for congressional

elections, Is there an incumbent?

Sources of Incumbent Sources of Incumbent advantageadvantage

Institutions are designed by members who want to get reelected.

Amazing array of resources– Free mail, trips to district, staff– Free facilities for TV and radio ads– Casework

# of Senate Staff, 1830 –1993# of Senate Staff, 1830 –1993Senate Staff

39 82280 424 590

1115

1749

2426

3554

40754138

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Senate Staff

# of Annual Trips Home

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1962 1966 1968 1973 1975 1977

Pieces of Mail in Millions

0

200

400

600

800

1000

54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92

PuzzlePuzzle

Is it the Money?Is it the Money?

Average incumbent gets 64.3% of voteFor every $100,00 spent, lose 1.17% of voteFor every $100,00 spent by party, lose

2.73% of voteincumbent House winner spends $700,00incumbent House loser spends 1,300,000

Incumbency Status and Voters' Familiarity with Incumbency Status and Voters' Familiarity with Congressional Candidates, 1980-1994Congressional Candidates, 1980-1994

46

54

4542

46 45 43

51

2126

1813

1610

15

22

3229

32

43

33

2623

36

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994% o

f re

sp

on

de

nts

wh

o c

an

re

ca

ll n

am

e

Incumbents Challengers Open Seats

Jacobsen, The Politics of Congressional Elections, 1996

Voters’ Contact with IncumbentsVoters’ Contact with Incumbents

90

15 14

63 65 61

32

0

20

40

60

80

100

An

y

Me

tP

ers

on

ally

Sa

w a

tM

ee

ting

Re

ceiv

ed

ma

il

Re

ad

inn

ew

spa

pe

r

Sa

w o

n T

V

Fa

mily

/frie

nd

ha

d c

on

tact

% o

f V

ote

rs

1990 1994

Voters’ Contact with Candidates, 1990Voters’ Contact with Candidates, 1990

92

20 19

70 6751

3829

2 312

20 167

0

20

40

60

80

100

An

y

Me

tP

ers

on

ally

Sa

w a

tM

ee

ting

Re

ceiv

ed

ma

il

Re

ad

inn

ew

spa

pe

r

Sa

w o

n T

V

Fa

mily

/frie

nd

ha

d c

on

tact

Incumbent Challenger

Voters’ Contact with Candidates, 1990Voters’ Contact with Candidates, 1990

90

15 14

63 65 61

32

52

4 3

2534 34

9

0

20

40

60

80

100

An

y

Me

tP

ers

on

ally

Sa

w a

tM

ee

ting

Re

ceiv

ed

ma

il

Re

ad

inn

ew

spa

pe

r

Sa

w o

n T

V

Fa

mily

/frie

nd

ha

d c

on

tact

Incumbent Challenger

Challengers 1990, 1994Challengers 1990, 1994

29

2 312

20 167

52

4 3

2534 34

9

0102030405060

An

y

Me

tP

ers

on

ally

Sa

w a

tM

ee

ting

Re

ceiv

ed

ma

il

Re

ad

inn

ew

spa

pe

r

Sa

w o

n T

V

Fa

mily

/frie

nd

ha

d c

on

tact

1990 1994

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

10,000 50,000 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000

Campaign Spending

% o

f V

ote

rs

Any Contact Recognize Name Incumbent Name

Things Liked about IncumbentsThings Liked about Incumbents

39

19

25

1

12

28

1722

4

23

05

1015

2025

3035

4045

Personal Experience District Service Party Ideology

1978 1994

Things Disliked about Things Disliked about IncumbentsIncumbents

40

15

97

22

28

17

5

12

35

05

1015

2025

3035

4045

Personal Experience District Service Party Ideology

1978 1994

Things Liked about ChallengersThings Liked about Challengers

58

63 4

27

35

73

13

38

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Personal Experience District Service Party Ideology

1978 1994

Voters Responses, 1994

5580

4938

2447

18 2714

56

1126

020406080

100

RecallName

Sawchallenger

on TVv

Likessomething

aboutchallenger

likessomething

aboutincumbent

dislikessomething

aboutchallenger

dislikessomething

aboutincumbent

Won Lost

Characteristics of Winning and Losing Challengers

Corporate PACs/Trade Corporate PACs/Trade Associations 60% of all PAC Associations 60% of all PAC

$, 1994$, 1994

Incumbent Dem51%

Incumben GOP34%

Noninc Dem3%

Noninc GOP12%

The Incumbent’s StrategyThe Incumbent’s Strategy

Discourage serious electoral competition– Hilary Clinton - who doesn’t she want to face!

Use casework, trips home, mailings to create perception of invulnerability

Ambitious career politicians and campaign funders are rational

Montana- McCain 50%, Baucus 73%Arkansas McCain 59%, Mark Pryor, 80%

Who does Kirsten Gillibrand want to Who does Kirsten Gillibrand want to run against?run against?

John Faso, GOP nominee for governor, 16 years state assembly

Jim Tedisco, Minority Leader of Assembly, 26 years state assembly

Sandy Treadwell, Appointed chair of New York GOP, wealth $50 million

Who is a marginal incumbentWho is a marginal incumbent

Less than 60% of vote in previous electionScandal in last termRepublican in a democratic leaning districtFirst term representative

Electoral Competition and Electoral Competition and Challenger Spending in 1994Challenger Spending in 1994

Challenger’s party vote in last House election, spending by non-incumbent house candidate

<40%, $105,00040-45%, $322,00045-49.9%, $433 ,000Open seat $580,000

Races for the US House

117

65

22 19 20

62

129

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Se

ats

House of RepresentativesHouse of Representatives

61 “competitive” races in 2000– 193 GOP incumbents won, 4 lost– 199 Dem incumbents won, 2 lost– GOP wins 20 of 25 open seats– Dems with 4 of 10 open seats

17 changes of 435

Races for the US Senate

7

31

9

2

6 7

02468

10

Sen

ate

Senate in 2000Senate in 2000

12 toss up races out of 33– GOP 13 of 18 incumbents win– Dems 10 of 11 incumbents win– GOP 0 of 1 on open seats– Dems 3 of 4 on open seats

7 changes

Quality of House Challengers

0

20

40

60

50-55 55-60 60-65 65-70 70+

Incumbent's vote in last election (%)

Form

er

Offic

ehold

ers

(%)

Expectations GameExpectations Game

Better the electoral odds, better the challenger and more money

Weak incumbents and open seats attract well funded quality challengers

Strong incumbents attract weak, poorly funded candidates

Strategic Politician HypothesisStrategic Politician Hypothesis

Best candidates, most money go to marginal incumbents, open seats

2nd tier candidates, some money goHopeless, poorly funded candidates run

against strong incumbents

Rational Targeting in 2004Rational Targeting in 2004

DCC identifies top races; direct $$ thereIn 2004,

– 33 challengers spent over $2 million – 200 spent less than $100,000– 30 House elections decided by <10%

Bad for Public?Bad for Party?

Expand the Field in 2006?Expand the Field in 2006?

30 races or a 100Campaign Spending diminishing returns

($1 million)Extra $500k 10 races

How would you vote in your congressional district if the election "were being held today?" – 52% of registered voters Dem– 37% for Republican candidates

Who would you like to see "in control of Congress after the congressional elections a year from now? – 55% Dems– 37% Republicans.

ABC News/Washington Post Poll

Strategic Politician ModelStrategic Politician Model

E le c to ra l R e su lts

Q u a lity o f C h a llen g e rs

C a lcu la tion s o f S tra te g ic p o lit ic ia ns a nd fun d e rs

N a tl P o lit ica l a n d E co no m ic C o n d it io ns

Implication candidates decide elections, not voters

CampaignsCampaigns

½ of all money is wasted, high uncertaintyWhat issues are importantLow turnout

– 35% turnout in midterm elections Who votes? seniors and partisans!

Random terror and running scared– Tom Foley, speaker of the house, 15 terms

Why do incumbents win?Why do incumbents win?

Better known (90% vs 40%Better liked (more familiar)Better funded

Why do challengers win?Why do challengers win?

Make voters aware of incumbents’ shortcomings, their own virtues via mass media

Are well fundedImplications???

NY’s 21NY’s 21stst District District

55% Bush– Gillibrand

Reforming the SystemReforming the System

Term limits– Federal level– State level

Increase competitiveness of elections– Campaign finance reform

Key Issue, how to get more people to run for office!!!

““Race to the Base”Race to the Base”

1980 60% Reagan1996 60% Clinton2004 51% Kerry

Electoral ReplacementElectoral ReplacementThe Death of the Gypsy MothThe Death of the Gypsy Moth

Marge RoukemaScott Garrett

Candidate Certification in Open PrimariesCandidate Certification in Open Primaries

216 House members, 42 senators

Declare War on RinosDeclare War on Rinos

Republican In Name Only– Arlen Specter (PA)– Lincoln Chafee (RI)– George Voinvich (OH)– Olympia Snowe (ME)

Primary Challengers for Primary Challengers for ModeratesModerates

War on Rinos– Senator Chafee (R-RI) vs Steve Laffey

Safe Electoral StrategySafe Electoral Strategy

Cater to partisan and ideological GOP base– 10 competitive races in 2004– 35 competitive races in 2006

Why Incumbents WinWhy Incumbents Win

Table 5.3, high name recognitionTable 5.7, Voters Contact with CandidatesTable 5.15

– Personal– Performance/experience– District service– Ideology/Policy

Challengers StrategyChallengers Strategy

Table 5.3 name recognitionTable 5.11, Campaign expenditures and

name recognitionTable 5.7, Voters Contact with Candidates

– Where do voters learn about challengers

Table 5.15, Things liked about challengers– What is #1?