1 / 59

And yet..

"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

wan
Download Presentation

And yet..

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. "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

  2. 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

  3. Context of Congressional Elections • Single member districts • Roughly equal size (650,000 souls) • First Tuesday in November in even # years • Australian ballot • Must win 2 elections

  4. Same Place, Same VotersThree 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

  5. five desirable less safe, more competitive districts, where the winner of the election may be either a Republican or a Democrat Map 1 • How many Ds and Rs elected? • How many competitive elections?

  6. 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 Map 2 • How many Ds and Rs elected? • How many competitive elections?

  7. two Republican and three Democratic majority districts, all safe 55 percent or better districts for incumbents of the respective parties: Map 3 • How many Ds and Rs elected? • How many competitive elections?

  8. Florida • 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

  9. Social & Political Contexts • Amazing Variation • geographic size • Population • Economic base • Ethnicity • Age • Partisanship

  10. Incumbency Reelection Rates 1832-1996

  11. Incumbency • 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?

  12. Sources of Incumbent advantage • 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

  13. # of Senate Staff, 1830 –1993

  14. Puzzle

  15. Is it the Money? • Average incumbent gets 64.3% of vote • For every $100,00 spent, lose 1.17% of vote • For every $100,00 spent by party, lose 2.73% of vote • incumbent House winner spends $700,00 • incumbent House loser spends 1,300,000

  16. Incumbency Status and Voters' Familiarity with Congressional Candidates, 1980-1994 Jacobsen, The Politics of Congressional Elections, 1996

  17. Voters’ Contact with Incumbents

  18. Voters’ Contact with Candidates, 1990

  19. Voters’ Contact with Candidates, 1990

  20. Challengers 1990, 1994

  21. Things Liked about Incumbents

  22. Things Disliked about Incumbents

  23. Things Liked about Challengers

  24. Characteristics of Winning and Losing Challengers

  25. Corporate PACs/Trade Associations 60% of all PAC $, 1994

  26. The 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

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

  28. Who does Kirsten Gillibrand want to 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

  29. Who is a marginal incumbent • Less than 60% of vote in previous election • Scandal in last term • Republican in a democratic leaning district • First term representative

  30. Electoral Competition and Challenger Spending in 1994 • Challenger’s party vote in last House election, spending by non-incumbent house candidate • <40%, $105,000 • 40-45%, $322,000 • 45-49.9%, $433 ,000 • Open seat $580,000

  31. House 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

  32. Senate 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

  33. Expectations 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

  34. Strategic Politician Hypothesis • Best candidates, most money go to marginal incumbents, open seats • 2nd tier candidates, some money go • Hopeless, poorly funded candidates run against strong incumbents

  35. Rational Targeting in 2004 • DCC identifies top races; direct $$ there • In 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?

  36. Expand the Field in 2006? • 30 races or a 100 • Campaign Spending diminishing returns ($1 million) • Extra $500k  10 races

  37. 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

  38. Strategic Politician Model Implication candidates decide elections, not voters

  39. Campaigns • ½ of all money is wasted, high uncertainty • What issues are important • Low turnout • 35% turnout in midterm elections • Who votes? seniors and partisans! • Random terror and running scared • Tom Foley, speaker of the house, 15 terms

  40. Why do incumbents win? • Better known (90% vs 40% • Better liked (more familiar) • Better funded

  41. Why do challengers win? • Make voters aware of incumbents’ shortcomings, their own virtues via mass media • Are well funded • Implications???

  42. NY’s 21st District • 55% Bush • Gillibrand

More Related