U.S. Elections:
Americans are taught how important it is to vote and how much every vote counts.
Voting is promoted as the basis of a free and democratic society, and
individuals are repeatedly reminded that it is the responsibility of each
citizen to vote. The right to vote is considered something Americans should
cherish and not take lightly. However, do the election data support
the idea that voting makes a difference, or are most elections more or less
decided before voters ever enter the voting booth? Just how democratic are
American elections?
* *
* * *
The average reelection rate for incumbents during the past 40 years has been about 95%.
Even in 1994, the year of the so-called "Gingrich Revolution" in which Republicans gained 54 seats in the House of Representatives, fully 90% of House incumbents were reelected.
In 2000, the Center for Responsive Politics made a list of 237 seats it thought would be won by landside margins (i.e., over 20%).
-- 98% of House incumbents won reelection that year.
-- Only 1 of the 237 seats was won by less than 20%.
-- That seat was won by an 18% margin.
In 2002, the reelection rate was 88% in the Senate and 96% in the House.
In the 2004 election for the House of Representatives,
-- Over 85% of House incumbents won by landslides of more than 60%.
-- Only 7 incumbents of 399 running (2%) were not reelected.
-- Outside of Texas (where redistricting led to the defeat of four targeted Democrats) only 3 incumbents were not reelected.
-- In the remaining 49 states, the reelection rate exceeded 99%.
In 2010, the most recent election, the incumbent reelection rate was 87% for the House and 84% for the Senate.
House elections have become significantly less competitive over time:
-- In the 1950s: between 20-25% of contested House seats were decided by margins of 10 points or less.
-- 2000 - 2002: less than 3% of house seats were decided by a margin of less than 10%.
-- Reelection rates to state legislatures are, on average, even higher than that for the U.S. Congress.
-- In the final analysis, the reelection rate in the U.S. is not significantly different from the reappointment rate to such unelected legislative chambers as the National People's Congress in China and the Politburo in the former Soviet Union.
Why are reelection rates so
high in the U.S.?
While several factors may be listed, two stand out:
1. Candidate who spend the most money win 85% of elections in the U.S.
-- Incumbents outspend challengers by an average of 3-to-1.
-- On average, House incumbents outspent challengers by nearly $565,000.
-- Senate incumbents outspent their challengers by an average of $3.13 million.
-- In 2/3 of all House races in 2000, incumbents out-raised challengers by more than 10-to-1.
-- Presidential candidates spent $1.7 billion in the 2008 U.S. election campaign, more than double the amount in 2004.
-- President-elect Barack Obama spent $740.6 million in his 2008 presidential election campaign.
-- That was larger than the combined $646.7 million that Republican President George W. Bush and Democratic nominee John Kerry spent in 2004.
-- By comparison, Canada spent roughly $300 million for their entire 2008 election.
-- President Obama is expected to raise over $1 billion for his 2012 re-election campaign.
-- Obama's expected reelection expenditure will be 20 times the entire amount spent by all candidates in Parliamentary elections in Great Britain. (whose elections are limited to 6 weeks).
-- Obama's spending alone will be comparable to the amount needed to finance UK elections for the entire 21st century.
-- Since all the Republican presidential candidates combined are expected to spend about as much as Obama plans to spend, the amount of money to be spent on the 2012 presidential campaign would be sufficient to finance British elections for the next two centuries.
2. Election districts have been drawn up by politicians to assure reelection.
-- Fewer than 1 in 10 House races are decided by a margin of less than 10%, meaning less than 10% of voters have a real voice.
-- “In 90% of the country, today's congressional races were essentially decided long ago. State legislatures, eager to make seats safe for their parties, have gerrymandered district boundaries so that fewer than 40 of the nation's 435 House seats are really competitive. .” -USA Today 11/7/00
-- In other words, politicians choose the voters long before the voters choose them.
--The Pennsylvania Legislature is currently considering proportional voting in which the Electoral College vote will be divided up by congressional districts rather than being awarded by the state as a whole. This will increase the pressure on the state's dominant party (Republicans) to gerrymander districts in order to maximize its vote in presidential elections. Other states are considering similar legislation.
-- In 64 Congressional districts (14.7%), the population is so lopsidedly Democratic or Republican that only one major party's name even appears on the ballot.
-- Another 300+ seats are so configured that even when there is competition, the result is usually a landside (over 20%).
-- For all intents and purposes, over 90%
of elections to the House of Representatives are over before they even begin.
* *
* * *
