House 2002 Overview

Watson Political Report ^ | 9/09/01 | Watson

[crasher]

The usual pattern in mid-term elections is for the president's party to lose seats. In fact, 1998 was the first time since the Great Depression that the president's party gained seats (the Democrats gained five). In 2002 it could happen again.

The Democrats have the same advantage the minority party always has in mid-term elections. If the electorate is in a bad mood, most of the carnage will fall on the Republican side of the aisle. But there are other reasons to believe that the GOP will at least hold its own. First, the Democrats picked up seats in 1996, 1998, and 2000. Most Republicans who survived those three cycles have the skills to survive again. Indeed, Republicans are probably actually slightly underrepresented in the House. Republicans have 222 seats (223 if you count Virgil Goode or 224 if you also count James Traficant). The best measure of a district's party affiliation is how it votes for president. With the current congressional lines, Bush carried 228 Congressional districts even though he received fewer votes than Gore.

But the lines will change with redistricting and this is the second Republican advantage. I estimate that Republicans will pick up 4 or 5 seats from redistricting. Even more importantly, redistricting is likely to protect incumbents in both parties and make many seats that were marginal in 2000 more favorable for incumbents in 2002. As one example of this, New Jersey line drawers are likely to shift Democratic voters to Rush Holt's district and Republican votes to Mike Ferguson's district. Similar shifts were made for vulnerable members in Missouri, California, and other states. The problem for Democrats is that they cannot win back the House just by holding down their losses. They need to pick up seats. Every bipartisan incumbent protection plan that passes is trouble for Dick Gephardt.

The final Republican advantage is that they have the presidency. As I mentioned earlier, the main Democratic asset in this election is that George Bush is president. If Al Gore were president, Republican control of the House would hardly be in doubt. But control of the presidency works both ways. Bush can drive press coverage, make campaign stops, raise tons of money, and help with recruitment.

In the current political environment the Democrats would have about a 10% chance of taking back the House. But anything can happen between now and election day, and most of the plausible variables work to the disadvantage of Republicans. The biggest x-factor is, of course, the economy. Still, even under the most gruesome circumstances, Republican losses are very, very unlikely to come close to Democratic losses in 1994. The Democrats could very well win back the House, but even if every conceivable break goes their way, they won't gain more than 20 seats.

With 14 months before election day, I would put the odds of the Democrats regaining control of the House at 25%. Right now, it is an even money bet which party will pick up seats.

[crasher]

Looks like we're gonna be ok in 2002... with the House anyway.

[Ed_in_LA]

It all depends on the economy.

[185JHP]

The House is important - that's where the spending starts. A lot can happen between now and next November - and Mr. Rove is on the case.

[america-rules]

"It all depends on the economy."

You're 100% correct and if it is good the GOP will clean house and gain 12-15 seats and maybe the Senate by 1 or 2 seats.

If the economy really sucks the dems will control both houses !