Showing posts with label incumbency advantage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label incumbency advantage. Show all posts

Thursday, October 27, 2016

From the Washington Post: How incumbency, not gerrymandering, may protect the Republican House majority

While the chances that Democrats win the majority of House seats has increased, it's still unlikely./

Here's analysis.

- Click here for the story.

As we enter the final stretch of the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump’s struggles have led to speculation about serious consequences for House and Senate Republicans. Some are even suggesting that control of the House is up for grabs.
The counterargument, however, is that House Republicans are protected by the Republican-led gerrymandering after the 2010 Census. As the story goes, this redistricting simultaneously increased the size of the Republican House majority and made those districts incredibly safe for the GOP legislators who represent them.
But how much is gerrymandering really helping House Republicans? My analysis suggests only a little bit. Incumbency appears to be the more important factor.

Wednesday, October 19, 2016

From the Austin American Statesman: Why only 1 Texas congressional race is competitive

Texas does gerrymandering right.

And despite all this talk of kicking the bums out, it seems we are completely happy with the bum we have.

- Click here for the article.

Texas has 36 congressional districts, second only to California, but only one seat appears to be competitive heading into early voting next week — District 23, a vast West Texas seat that has switched between Republican and Democratic hands in each of the last three elections.
Elsewhere, 23 Republicans and 10 Democrats are likely to win re-election, by dint of gerrymandering and the power of incumbency. Only two Texas districts are open seats — District 15, a predominantly Hispanic and Democratic-leaning district in South Texas, and District 19, a largely rural and heavily Republican district in parts of West Texas and the Panhandle where no Democrat is on the ballot.
In Central Texas, all six members of Congress who represent a slice of Austin are sitting on large war chests but running light campaigns. Each Austin incumbent had more than $200,000 on hand as of Sept. 30, with Democrat Lloyd Doggett topping the list with more than $3 million on hand. No challenger in those races has more than $30,000, and many have no money on hand.
“We know for a fact incumbency is powerful,” said Chad Long, an associate professor of political science at St. Edward’s University. “It’s the single most powerful predictor of congressional elections, even more than the money. If you have an incumbent in the election, you pretty much know who’s going to win.”
According to Long, a district is considered competitive when the winning candidate garners no more than 55 percent of the vote. Under this definition, only two of the six U.S. House members representing the Austin area have ever experienced a competitive race — Doggett and Republican Michael McCaul.

Thursday, March 3, 2016

From the Texas Tribune: Analysis: A Good Election Night to Be a Texas Incumbent

We never really throw the bums out.

- Click here for the article.

The status quo in Texas politics had a super Super Tuesday.
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz — a hell-raiser, but a Texas hell-raiser — beat the hell-raiser from New York. Cruz ran as an outsider for Senate four years ago but now is positioning himself as the Republican establishment’s last hope to beat Donald Trump.
No congressional incumbent who wanted another term was defeated, in spite of some pre-election hype that probably helped raise some money and might have spurred some Texans to vote.
Three incumbents seeking re-election to the Texas Supreme Court held their ground against serious challengers. Two judges on the state’s highest criminal court emerged from their primaries unscathed.
No state senator who sought another term was defeated. Those races weren’t even close.
Only four incumbents in the 150-member Texas House lost their seats. Three more will live or die, politically speaking, in May runoffs.
All in all, it was almost boring. For incumbents, boring is good.
Imagine the alternative. In the latest University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll, 67 percent of Texas voters said they have an unfavorable view of Congress, while an anemic 12 percent said the legislators in Washington are doing good work. They passed on the chance to do something about it, however, opting instead to send their current representatives back to D.C.

Friday, November 19, 2010

86% of Incumbents Were Relected This Year

So much for throwing the bums out. Although the figure is generally higher -- in the upper 90s -- a high percentage of members of the House of Representatives were keep in office by their constituents. It could be, of course, that the mood was there and more should have been defeated, but incumbents were protected by representing gerrymandered districts that are so heavily skewed toward either party that incumbents can hardly ever be defeated. We discussed this in class -- see the post below -- when we noted that none of our area House members were defeated.

Sunday, November 14, 2010

The Gerrymandered Texas Senate and the Threats to the Senate's 2/3rds Rule

Rick Casey comments on what he calls the most stable job in Texas politics: Texas State Senator.

There is one Texas elected body that is so stable that it offered a safe harbor for Democrats even in the political monsoon that blew on Tuesday.

Is this good news for the Democrats? Not hardly, as we shall see. The body is the state Senate.

Consider this: While Democrats lost 21 seats in the 150-member Texas House of Representatives and most likely three veteran congressmen, the 31-member Texas Senate had 12 Democrats and 19 Republicans before the election and will have exactly the same margin after the new Legislature is sworn in next January. And only two are newcomers, one Democrat and one Republican having stepped down voluntarily.

But while Democrats are safe in body, its districts have been designed so that they underrepresent Democrats in the state -- as is the case with most other offices in the state. Republicans, who control the districting process, accomplish this feat by packing Democrats into fewer seats than they might otherwise occupy, but Democratic incumbents are hardly likely to complain because this makes their seats more secure.

Even with this small number of seats, Democrats -- and the minority party in general -- has been able to leverage this small number of seats into a type of veto power since as long as they are at least one-third of the Senate, they can block legislation from going through the floor. From the Legislative Refrence Library:

For almost half a century, blocker bills have routinely been placed at the top of the Senate's Daily Calendar, which in effect forces a suspension of the regular order of business on every bill. Blocker bills are bills that are introduced and passed out of committee as early as possible in a legislative session in order that they may occupy the first positions on the calendar. They are not intended to be worthy of serious consideration or passage. The sole purpose of a blocker bill is to ensure that at least two-thirds of the membership have an interest in debating a measure before it can come to the floor. Bills that do not enjoy substantial support cannot make it past the blocker bill.

Though it has been set aside on rare occasions, this practice -- known as the "two-thirds rule" -- has been an honored tradition in the Senate. Among other things, it is generally acknowledged that the Senate's two-thirds rule fosters civility, a willingness to compromise, and a spirit of bipartisanship.


Republican Senators have argued that this rule undermines democracy -- and certainly their agenda -- and have made efforts to remove it in the past. Similar efforts are underway currently.

- In Defense of the Two Thirds Rule.
- Bill Hobby comments on the rule.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

2010 Election Results

Here are a few links with last week's election results.

It's worth noting that despite the fact that Republicans did so well in U.S. House races, all area representatives were comfortably reelected. The 2003 gerrymandering seems to have been well done. Republicans did make significant gains in the Texas House though.

From the Houston Chronicle:
- Houston area representatives and state senators.
- Statewide races.
- Harris County results.
- Brazoria County results.
- Galveston County results.

Results from the Texas Secretary of State's office.

From The Hill
- New Members Guide.