View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
2014 Before and Beyond
CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS
Reading last week Lowi Chpt 12, (Interest Groups) Part of Chpt 9 (274-300) Ellis & Nelson Chpt 5
Reading this week
Lowi Chpt 10 (Elections) Lowi Chpt 5 (Congress)
EXAM NEXT MONDAY (NOV 10TH)
Voting and Elections
Q: what affects how people decide? Q: how do we interpret the meaning of elections
results? Q: What might happen tomorrow 90%+ of incumbents in US House will win Dems will lose seats
VOTING & ELECTIONS
Conventional wisdom (overstated)
voters deliberate Debates, follow media
vote based on candidate not party
Commercials, ads...
FACTORS AFFECTING THE VOTE DECISION
Partisanship
store of political information long term socialization to politics what if no party label on ballot?
FACTORS AFFECTING THE VOTE DECISION
Incumbency
name recognition incumbents have self-promotion advantage the devil you know vs. devil you don’t know incumbents get 90% of PAC $$ few “credible” challengers
FACTORS AFFECTING THE VOTE DECISION
Economic conditions (the Issue)
a form of issue voting reward incumbents when times are good punish incumbents when times are bad this assumes folks know economic conditions this assume folks know who to blame
FACTORS AFFECTING THE VOTE DECISION
Economic conditions (the Issue)
Prospective voting
Retrospective voting
FACTORS AFFECTING THE VOTE DECISION
Candidate traits
Background Views Demographics Personality
FACTORS AFFECTING THE VOTE DECISION
Campaigns
Compare presidential campaign to congressional Few people exposed to congressional campaigns
Few competitive races Little / no spending in most districts
Limited media attention if not competitive
FACTORS AFFECTING THE VOTE DECISION
1) Why does president’s party lose seats in midterms?
2) Why does party with most votes not have most seats
3) Why is Congress so polarized?
4) What effects of all that campaign spending?
5) How can Congress have 10% approval, and 95% re-election rate?
CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION PUZZLES
2/3 of people won’t vote in this election
Nearly (90%+) all incumbents will get re-elected
The opposition party (Republicans) will gain seats
House, 2014 Dem loss will be less than ‘normal’ Senate -> probably a Rep majority (2014 - 6 = 2008)
WHAT WE’VE KNOWN FOR YEARS
Today, 2014
435 seats in US House, all up for reelection
234 Republican 201 Democratic
MIDTERM ELECTION
Reagan 1982 GOP lost 26 seats
4.6% swing against
Clinton 1994
Dems lost 54 seats 5.3% swing against
Obama 2010
Dems lost 63 seats 8.3% swing against
How many House seats will Democrats lose?
why was 1994, 2010 such a wipeout for Dems? 1994 GOP trend 2010 surge & decline
WHY DOES THE PRESIDENT’S PARTY LOSE HOUSE SEATS IN MIDTERMS
Seat Gain/Loss For President's Party in US House
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
19
30
19
32
19
34
19
36
19
38
19
40
19
42
19
44
19
46
19
48
19
50
19
52
19
54
19
56
19
58
19
60
19
62
19
64
19
66
19
68
19
70
19
72
19
74
19
76
19
78
19
80
19
82
19
84
19
86
19
88
19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
Surge and Decline: President’s party gain ‘on year,’ Lose in midterm. Avg= 24 seat loss in midterm
It Takes Seats to Lose Seats: 2010 looks like 1994, 1974, 1946, 1938…. (but worse)
Why surge and decline?
Presidential elections MUCH higher turnout
Voters mobilized by presidential elections stay home 2 years later
2014 -> ?? 2012 ->58% 130 million 2010 ->40% 88 million 2008 ->62% 133 million 2006 ->40% 86 million 2004 ->60% 124 million 2002 ->40% 80 million 2000 ->54% 107 million 1998 ->38% 75 million
Not many voters changing their votes…it’s who shows up 50 million who voted in 2012 will stay home tomorrow
2010 MIDTERM
2012 Dems
48.8% votes 46.2% seats
GOP
47.6% votes 54.8% seats
1.3 million fewer votes
Single Member Districts
Not that simple Dems have inefficient
distribution of seats
Some candidates run unopposed
HOW COME PARTY WITH MOST VOTES DOESN’T HAVE MOST SEATS?
Single-member winner take all
Plurality elections do not translate votes into seats well
Even if just 2 parties
HOW COME PARTY WITH MOST VOTES DOESN’T HAVE MOST SEATS?
Swing against the Democrats will be _____ % votes
Swing against the Democrats will be _____ # seats
Average loss for president’s party in 2nd term 24 seats More safe one-party districts mean it takes a larger swing
in votes to move seats 1% swing against party = about 6 seats
SO, TOMORROW US HOUSE
Democrats and Republicans farther apart now than… ever (since Civil War) Why?
Does this reflect polarization of public opinion?
Do congressional election results represent us?
Or something else?
POLARIZATION IN CONGRESS
POLARIZATION, US HOUSE (FLOOR VOTING)
MORE POLARIZED THAN EVER (FLOOR VOTING)
NO MORE (GOP) MODERATES IN HOUSE
Rare for a d is t r i c t to sp l i t Dem for one of f i ce , GOP for another Greater par ty l ine vot ing (un i ty ) in Congress Pres ident ’s par ty more power i f cont ro l Congress Less gets done i f d iv ided government
SYMPTOMS
$4 billion spent in just a few states/districts
GOP now Senate majority GOP gains in House + 12 (?)
Pot, minimum wage, gun
control
LAST NIGHT
Electoral Institutions
Primary elections
Gerrymandering
Campaign finance rules
Behavioral
Public opinion / partisanship We want it, so elect it
Media
And….sorting
POLARIZATION IN CONGRESS: USUAL SUSPECTS
Most Democrats vote one way
Most Republicans vote the other way
Discipline stronger than ever
Why? Are elections producing like-minded partisans?
What effects on public?
POLARIZATION -> PARTY DISCIPLINE
PARTY UNITY / DISCIPLINE
Primary election logic Closed = extreme
voters November choices
reflect this Open = moderates
Blanket / top two = ??
This guy would never
win a closed GOP primary in California ->
POLARIZATION: PRIMARIES?
Evidence Hard to tell Gerber & Morton, Open = representatives more like
median voter (cross-sectional) Others say not much effect
Changes in rules do not correspond with increased polarization
But who votes in primaries?
POLARIZATION: PRIMARIES?
General Election Risky for nominees to move to center partisan promises in primaries
Choices for independents in November reflect primary selections of polarized partisans
Primaries centrifugal force
POLARIZATION: PRIMARIES?
Logic Partisan legislators +
GIS = safe seats One party gerrymanders Bi-partisan gerrymanders
Safe seat = rewards extremist candidates
Safe seat = No fear of defeat in election
POLARIZATION: GERRYMANDERING
It isn't easy to gerrymander
Try this at home:
Dave’s Redistricting app. 2.2 How many competitive seats can we carve out out
Washington State? Preserving communities of interest Contiguous No bizarre shapes Equal population
POLARIZATION: GERRYMANDERING
COMMISSION WA MAP, 2012 (6-4)
1 Lyn/Bel 54% D 2 Sno/SJ 59% D 3 SW WA 48% D* 4 Ea WA 38% D* 5 Ea WA 44% D*
6 Oly Pn 56% D 7 Sea 79% D 8 E King E, 49.7 D* 9 King, Prc 68% D 10 Prc Oly 56% D
6 Dems, 4 GOP 3 ‘marginal’ seats * = GOP seat
COMMISSION MAP (2012 #S = % OBAMA)
GERRYMANDERED WA MAP (9-1)
1 Sea 1 70% D 2 Oly Pn 53% D 3 Bhm/Evt 56% D 4 ‘Yak’ 55% D 5 E. Wa 38% D*
6 Rivers 52% D 7 Sea 2 60% D 8 Sea/Wen 58% D 9 Sea/Lev 75% D 10 Oly/Van 53% D
9 Dem, 1 GOP 3 marginal districts
MY MAP
Evidence
Look at Massachusetts 9 districts, all Dem GOP governors, Senator
Or Texas, Florida, Illinois...
GERRYMANDERING
Evidence There are fewer competitive House districts Less than 10% of 435
States legislatures with non-partisan plans might be slightly less polarized
POLARIZATION: GERRYMANDERING
BUT: US Senate is polarizing too
Senate not districted Look at GOP & Dem Senators from same state
2 reps from same House seat extremely different ‘Swing’ district send extreme reps too
POLARIZATION: GERRYMANDERING
FLORIDA: NELSON & RUBIO
77th most conservative 17th most conservative
IOWA: HARKIN & GRASSLEY/ERNST
74th most conservative Grassley 11th most conservative
MONTANA: WALSH/TESTER & DAINES
53rd most conservative
Baucus was 55th
This guy will be in top 25
North Dakota Heidi Heitkamp D
50th most conservative
John Hoeven R 30th most conservative
Nevada (21st & 79th), Ohio (85th & 28th ),
South Dakota Tim Johnson D
70th most conservative
John Thune R 17th most conservative
NOT GERRYMANDERING
Have things changed in districting practices to explain change in polarization?
If anything, more non-partisan commissions
Problem of geography Increasingly hard to gerrymander US House even if
you try
POLARIZATION: GERRYMANDERING
Follow the money
Massive increases (even before Citizen’s United)
Donors are polarized
POLARIZATION: CAMPAIGN FINANCE
Fewer places to spend money See gerrymandering
More money than ever for negative ads See WA 42nd State Senate race
In the few districts left that are competitive Competitive should = centrists
POLARIZATION: CAMPAIGN FINANCE
Post 1970s, Interest group activity FEC & PACs independent expenditures Candidates, issue groups replacing old parties TV costs Nominations, issue ads
Post 2000s, Billionaires, etc. playing games
POLARIZATION: CAMPAIGN FINANCE
‘Extreme’ voices given disproportionate influence in candidate selection, recruitment
Consider Connecticut, 2006 (or any year)
Nancy Johnson (4th least conservative GOP -> $7.6m) Lost Rob Simmons, (5th least conservative GOP ->$5.6m) Lost Chris Shays, (9th least conservative GOP ->$6.8m) 6k votes, lost in
’08
POLARIZATION: CAMPAIGN FINANCE
EFFECTS OF THE ADS?
Awareness of Congress up
Less approval of Congress
Candidate’s ideology seen as extreme
Members of Congress & candidates seen as having no integrity
Campaign spending -> people see Congress as corrupt
Part of the problem is us Voters who show up are partisans
Primaries, gerrymandering Also part of problem
Money, media & partisan sorting Larger part of the problem
SO, WHY SO MUCH POLARIZATION?
What goals?
What is broken that needs fixing?
ELECTORAL REFORMS
Primaries
Top Two Open
Closed
ELECTORAL REFORMS
Non partisan redistricting
California model
Washington model
Texas model
ELECTORAL REFORMS
Term Limits
Proportional representation
Campaign finance
ELECTORAL REFORMS
Discharge petition
Filibuster
CONGRESSIONAL REFORMS
Recommended