"All in all, do you think things in the nation are generally headed in the right direction, or do...
-
Upload
katarina-malloy -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of "All in all, do you think things in the nation are generally headed in the right direction, or do...
"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?