Difference between revisions of "U.S. House battleground districts, 2014"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Text replace - "''OpenSecrets.org'', "" to "''OpenSecrets'', "")
Line 2: Line 2:
 
'''By [mailto:sarah.rosier@ballotpedia.org Sarah Rosier] and the [mailto:congress@ballotpedia.org Congress team]'''<br>
 
'''By [mailto:sarah.rosier@ballotpedia.org Sarah Rosier] and the [mailto:congress@ballotpedia.org Congress team]'''<br>
  
With the emergence of a [[United_States_budget_debate,_2013|government shutdown]] and the endless news coverage of the troubled [[Healthcare.gov_website_rollout|Healthcare.gov website]], voters are understandably ready to accept the narrative pushed by politicians, pundits and political organizations that 2014’s midterm election cycle will be particularly '''competitive'''.
+
With a recent [[United_States_budget_debate,_2013|government shutdown]] and the endless news coverage of the troubled [[Healthcare.gov_website_rollout|Healthcare.gov website]], voters are understandably ready to accept the narrative pushed by politicians, pundits and political organizations that 2014’s midterm election cycle is shaping up to be particularly '''competitive'''.
  
 
This narrative of “record numbers of tight races,” however, is not unique to 2014.  
 
This narrative of “record numbers of tight races,” however, is not unique to 2014.  

Revision as of 16:46, 22 April 2014

Portal:Congress

By Sarah Rosier and the Congress team

With a recent government shutdown and the endless news coverage of the troubled Healthcare.gov website, voters are understandably ready to accept the narrative pushed by politicians, pundits and political organizations that 2014’s midterm election cycle is shaping up to be particularly competitive.

This narrative of “record numbers of tight races,” however, is not unique to 2014.

Every year, those who have a vested interest in creating electoral buzz, whether it be for viewership, readership, or fundraising, issue long lists of battleground districts. They release scores of candidate endorsements and start fundraising campaigns for hundreds of House candidates. But when the voting booth closes and the election results are tallied, we see the real trend that strengthens with every new election: incumbency is king and gerrymandering has left only a few handfuls of districts truly competitive. The rest is just noise, and Ballotpedia is here to help you filter through it.

See The 27 "Most Competitive Districts in 2014"
The purple districts on the Census district map are those found to be competitive in Ballotpedia's study.

Key terms

Margin of victory (MOV) Moneymaker districts
Margin of victory (MOV) is the measure of the winner's percentage of the vote won in an election (in this case, a House race) minus the runner-up candidate’s percentage of the vote. A district that is labeled as competitive prior to the election, but post-election analysis showed they were not competitive (MOV of 10 percentage points and higher). These districts, often because of the competitive label, raise more money for the campaigns than other districts.

Existing coverage

BallotpediaExclusives.png

In 2012, $3,664,141,430 was spent on congressional races, close to $1 billion more than on the presidential race. The average amount the winner of a House of Representatives election spent was $1,567,293. The average loser in a general election spent $688,632. This means that the average House race in 2012 cost general election candidates $2,128,629. However, these numbers skyrocket when a campaign is labeled competitive.[1]

The Cook Political Report, edited and published by Charlie Cook, is one of the most respected race rankings, and one we use as a data point for Ballotpedia. Cook classified 85 districts as competitive, or as having the possibility to become competitive, in their last projections before the election. Despite the high number of races that fell under these labels, only 30 races had a margin of victory (MOV) of less than five percent in 2012.[2]

Although Cook is used here as a barometer for outside battleground ratings, we could have easily applied this example to Sabato's Crystal Ball, FairVote Monopoly Politics or the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, as seen in the final section of this report where we compare 2014 coverage.

Considering the amount of money spent and focus given to House elections, Ballotpedia desires to provide readers with an aggregation of third party rankings, previous election data and other relevant factors that will provide a more targeted and specific set of districts to watch for during the lead up to the 2014 election.

Below, a comparison is made to both the most expensive House races, the resulting MOV and also the final Cook projection compared to the MOVs.

Political spending versus results

Below are the most expensive House general elections in 2012, according to an OpenSecrets.org study:[3]

Most expensive races vs. margin of victory
Race Amount raised Amount spent 2012 MOV
Florida's 18th Congressional District $24,111,384 $22,951,644 0.6%
Ohio's 8th Congressional District** $22,024,288 $21,197,801 98.4%
Minnesota's 6th Congressional District $17,305,918 $14,225,615 0.8%
California's 33rd Congressional District $9,879,844 $10,645,394 8%
Virginia's 7th Congressional District** $8,448,263 $8,278,564 17%
California's 30th Congressional District $7,886,785 $11,944,794 20.6%
Colorado's 7th Congressional District $7,814,798 $7,820,465 13.5%
Illinois' 10th Congressional District $7,612,934 $7,572,654 1.2%
Illinois' 8th Congressional District $7,320,575 $7,203,706 9.4%
Wisconsin's 1st Congressional District** $7,260,389 $8,901,322 11.5%

**Two of these races were re-election bids by House Republican leadership, John Boehner and Eric Cantor, and one was former vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan's campaign for re-election.


This means that only three of the most expensive House races in 2012 were decided by an MOV of five percent or less.

Projections versus results

On November 5, 2012, the day before the 2012 general election, Cook released their final list of 85 competitive districts. The competitive districts were sorted by six categories: "Likely," "Lean" and "Toss Up" predictions for both Democratic and Republican gains.[4]

Of these competitive districts, 56 had an MOV of five percentage points or above. Of those 56, 29 districts would not have made a competitive MOV cut for Ballotpedia's study, with the winner having led the closest competitor by 10 or more percentage points in 2012. This means 34% of Cook's competitive districts were not actually competitive.

2012 moneymaker districts

What is a "moneymaker district?"

As previously stated, the average House general election cost candidates $2,128,629 in 2012.

What happens when a district that truly is not competitive is classified by the media as competitive?

The cost skyrockets. As outlined below, the 29 least competitive districts on Cook's competitive ratings, cost a total of $39,640,616 more than 29 districts spending the average 2012 election costs ($2,128,629) would have cost.

Why?

Media attention. When pundits, political organizations or analysts classify a district as competitive, other outlets begin adding that to the coverage of the race.

An example of this was seen in Maryland's 6th District.

The 6th District was heavily redistricted making a win for Rep. Roscoe Bartlett almost statistically impossible. The redistricting process changed the registered partisan breakdown by 59.69%. It left a 29.44% advantage for Democrats in party registration over Republicans.

Despite this, the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), Cook and others still considered the election between Bartlett and Rep. John Delaney to be competitive as of April 2012. After April 2012, the district was still highlighted under their "Competitive Races" headline, but as a "Likely D" race. This attention led to an expensive campaign. Between Barlett and Delaney, the 6th District candidates spent $5,786,640. This was $3,658,011 more than an average 2012 House campaign.

In the end, Delaney won by an extremely comfortable, and non-competitive, MOV of 20.9 percentage points.

The true cost of moneymakers

  • Moneymaker districts: The 29 districts listed in this chart were considered competitive by Cook, but post-election analysis showed they were not competitive (MOV of 10 percentage points and higher).
Cost differential between the moneymaker districts and the average cost of a 2012 House campaign
Districts Party prior to elec. Cook PVI MOV Cost of 2012 election Difference from avg. cost
CA-47 Democratic Party D+5 D+13.2 $2,589,871 +$461,242
FL-09 Republican Party D+4 D+25 $4,782,973 +$2,654,344
IA-01 Democratic Party D+5 D+15.3 $3,738,165 +$1,609,536
IA-02 Democratic Party D+4 D+13.1 $2,512,269 +$383,640
MD-06 Republican Party D+2 D+20.9 $5,786,640 +$3,658,011
NY-25 Republican Party D+5 D+14.4 $3,917,121 +$1,788,492
CA-24 Republican Party D+3 D+10.2 $5,191,080 +$3,062,451
CA-41 Republican Party D+3 D+18 $2,788,415 +$659,786
CO-07 Democratic Party D+3 D+12.7 $7,820,466 +$5,691,837
FL-26 New district R+4 D+10.6 $1,778,880 -$349,749
CA-09 Democratic Party D+2 D+11.2 $5,691,934 +$3,563,305
RI-01 Democratic Party D+14 D+12.2 $3,893,267 +$1,764,638
IL-11 Republican Party D+5 D+17.2 $6,767,995 +$4,639,366
TN-04 Republican Party R+13 R+11.6 $1,967,129 -$161,500
CO-03 Republican Party R+4 R+12 $4,178,209 +$2,049,580
IN-08 Republican Party R+8 R+10.3 $2,368,687 +$240,058
PA-08 Republican Party D+1 R+13.2 $4,029,335 +$1,900,706
WI-07 Republican Party EVEN R+12.3 $3,881,665 +$1,753,036
AR-04 Democratic Party R+9 R+22.8 $2,192,907 +$64,278
CA-21 Republican Party R+3 R+15.6 $1,280,867 -$847,762
MT-AL Republican Party R+7 R+10.6 $3,012,612 +$883,983
NC-11 Democratic Party R+12 R+14.8 $1,818,838 -$309,791
NC-13 Democratic Party R+9 R+13.6 $1,691,856 -$436,773
ND-AL Republican Party R+10 R+13.2 $2,310,930 +$182,301
OH-07 Republican Party R+5 R+12.8 $2,253,069 +$124,440
OK-02 Democratic Party R+14 R+19 $2,882,044 +$753,415
PA-06 Republican Party R+1 R+14.2 $3,439,974 +$1,311,345
SD-AL Republican Party R+9 R+14.8 $3,667,781 +$1,539,152
WI-08 Republican Party R+2 R+11.9 $3,135,878 +$1,007,249
Total difference between money maker district costs and 2012 average district cost $39,640,616

$39,640,616 better spent

Although many will argue that political spending in general is unnecessary, even just factoring in the excess cost of moneymaker districts is staggering. As shown above, the difference in cost between moneymaker districts and the average cost of a House elections in 2012 tops $39 million. Here's what $39 million could have bought!

*3,223 families of four could have been fed for a year.[5]
Glass of milk on tablecloth.jpg
*1,554 wells in Africa could have been built to service schools and medical clinics.[6]
Flickr - usaid.africa - Water pump provided by USAID (7).jpg

*A Boys & Girls Club in Whatcom County, WA, could have been funded for full-time operation for 66 years.[7]
Boysgirlsclub.jpg


*Educational costs for 1,350 DC Public Schools students would have been covered for a year.
Testtakingstudent.jpg


*Five of Robert Pattinson's Los Angeles homes could have been purchased, with enough left over to buy 43,600 copies of Twilight on DVD.[8]
Robert Pattinson May 2011.jpg

*Kayne West could have purchased 31 rings similar to Kim Kardashian's new bling.[9]
Diamond (PSF).png

Ballotpedia's five criteria for “most competitive”

A district must have met one or more of the following criteria:

1. If a district had all six quantifiable predictions/results highlighted (Cook, Fairvote, MOV, 2012 presidential, 2008 presidential, and incumbent years in office) and four were of the most competitive nature, purple, they automatically made the cut.

Nineteen districts fit in this category.

2. The district would be considered competitive if it had all six quantifiable predictions/results highlighted (Cook, Fairvote, MOV, 2012 presidential, 2008 presidential and incumbent years in office) with three of the highlighted factors being most competitive (purple) and two being intermediate competitive (orange). The district must also have a “special factor” (high outside spending, redistricting) to be added to the most competitive list.

Two districts fit into this category.

3. Anomalies: This includes Republicans or Democrats in a district that otherwise trends heavily toward the other party. The district must also have some other qualifying factor, such as an MOV of ten percent or less, an incumbent who has served less than ten years or a competitive 2014 candidate. Both Utah's 4th Congressional District and North Carolina's 7th Congressional District were examples of this before Reps. Jim Matheson and Mike McIntyre announced their retirements.

One district fits into this category.

4. Presidential differences: A district that may not have all the categories highlighted, but has voted for the other party in the most recent presidential election and the numbers are tight for the incumbent (redistricting was also factored in here).

One district was considered “Most Competitive” based only on this factor.

5. Recent effects of redistricting: This is relevant to three districts (IL-12, IL-13 and MN-08). Redistricting in the past three years has caused these districts to be extremely tight and have the opportunity for a very close midterm election (the first midterm cycle these new districts will be going through).

Three districts were pushed into the most competitive list because of this, just missing meeting the other criteria listed above.


The 27 "Most Competitive Districts in 2014"

Color Key
Color Cook Partisan Voting Index Fairvote (Projected D%) Margin of Victory (MOV) 2012 Presidential MOV % % 2008 Presidential MOV % Incumbent years in office
Purple- most competitive Even; R or D 0-4 45.1% - 54.9% 0-4.9 0-4.9 0-4.9 0 - 4
Orange- very competitive R or D 5-7 42.1% - 45.0%; 55% - 57.9% 5.0-7.9 5.0-7.9 5.0-7.9 5 - 7
Green- competitive R or D 8-10 40.0% - 42.0%; 58% - 60% 8.0-10.00 8.0-10.00 8.0-10.00 8 - 10
House winners labeled this color indicate the party of the House winner being different from the party of the presidential winner of the district in 2012
Districts labeled this color indicate the districts that were pushed into most competitive based on heavily redrawn congressional districts
Most competitive districts for 2014 elections
Congressional district Battleground label Cook PVI Fairvote (Projected D%) Margin of Victory (MOV) in 2012 2012 Presidential MOV % 2008 Presidential MOV % Incumbent years in office 2012 House winner Campaign contributions difference Cost per vote for winner in 2012
Arizona's 1st Battleground D R+4 48% 3.6 -2.5 -3.2 0 Democratic 61.38% $19.13
Arizona's 2nd Battleground D R+3 50.9% 0.8 -1.5 -0.9 0 Democratic 65.57% $18.85
Arizona's 9th Battleground D R+1 51% 4.1 ✓4.5 ✓3.9 0 Democratic 64.44% $17.78
California's 7th Battleground D EVEN 51.4% 3.4 ✓4 ✓5 0 Democratic 57.34% $25.72
California's 21st Battleground R D+2 50.9% 15.5 ✓11.1 ✓6 0 Republican 91.39% $19.59
California's 36th Battleground D R+1 51.2% 5.9 ✓3.2 ✓3 0 Democratic 46.67% $17.94
California's 52nd Battleground D D+2 52.3% 2.4 ✓6.4 ✓12 0 Democratic 62.23% $28.93
Colorado's 6th Battleground R D+1 45.1% 2 ✓5.1 ✓8.7 4 Republican 66.81% $20.99
Florida's 18th Battleground D R+3 47.7% 0.6 -4.1 ✓3.1 0 Democratic 19.70% $28.58
Florida's 26th Battleground D R+1 53.1% 10.6 ✓6.7 -0.4 0 Democratic 69.59% $10.28
Illinois' 12th Battleground D EVEN 50.1% 8.9 ✓1.5 ✓11.1 0 Democratic 46.64% $7.52
Illinois' 13th Battleground R EVEN 47.2% 0.3 -0.3 ✓11 0 Republican 51.38% $10.22
Michigan's 1st Battleground R R+5 45.1% 0.5 -8.3 ✓1.3 2 Republican 59.74% $13.30
Minnesota's 8th Battleground D D+1 52.4% 8.9 ✓5.5 ✓8.6 0 Democratic 34.52% $6.52
Nevada's 3rd Battleground R EVEN 44.2% 7.5 ✓0.8 ✓8.9 2 Republican 61.24% $17.66
New Hampshire's 1st Battleground D R+1 50.4% 3.8 ✓1.6 ✓6.4 0 Democratic 47.47% $10.02
New Jersey's 2nd Battleground R D+1 40.2% 17.4 ✓8.1 ✓7.7 18 Republican 96.60% $9.40
New Jersey's 3rd Battleground R R+1 44.8% 8.9 ✓4.6 ✓3.4 2 Republican 66.17% $11.94
New York's 1st Battleground D R+2 51.3% 4.6 ✓0.5 ✓3 10 Democratic 54.54% $18.81
New York's 11th Battleground R R+2 46.1% 5 ✓4.3 -3 2 Republican 70.91% $21.96
New York's 18th Battleground D EVEN 51.5% 3.7 ✓4.3 ✓5 0 Democratic 40.94% $15.69
New York's 21st Battleground D EVEN 51.5% 1.9 ✓6.1 ✓5 4 Democratic 50.05% $15.54
New York's 23rd Battleground R R+3 45.6% 3.6 -1.2 ✓1 3 Republican 71.76% $15.31
Texas' 23rd Battleground D R+3 48.7% 4.8 -2.6 ✓1 0 Democratic 39.93% $18.65
Virginia's 2nd Battleground R R+2 43.4% 7.7 ✓1.5 ✓1.7 2 Republican 54.38% $14.42
West Virginia's 3rd Battleground D R+14 50.4% 7.1 -32.2 -13.4 20 Democratic 69.55% $13.26
  • Cook's PVI is Cook Political Report's Partisan Voter Index.[10]
  • FairVote's %D is FairVote.org's 2014 congressional election projections.[11]
According to our study, only 16 states will have one or more competitive districts in 2014.
  • Both the 2012 and 2008 presidential MOV have either "✓" or "-" before the number. The "✓" indicates the district went in favor of the winner, in both years this was President Obama. The "-" indicates the district favored the Republican who lost in each election, Romney in 2012 and McCain in 2008.

Will the battlegrounds change?

Ballotpedia's team will carefully monitor all districts to see if a factor, such as an incumbent retiring, causes the district to become competitive. Barring large factors such as a retirement or death, our competitive list will remain static. Any changes will be recorded below.

October 2013

Florida's 13th Congressional District

This district was not on our most competitive list until late October 2013. The late Rep. Bill Young consistently received high MOVs (15.1% points in 2012) and enjoyed a 42 year incumbency. However, with the announcement of his retirement and, subsequently, his passing, the race became competitive due to the recent presidential election results and the gradual change in make-up of the district.

December 2013

Utah's 4th Congressional District

Utah's 4th District was considered by nearly all pundits and political enthusiasts as one of the most competitive races for the 2014 elections. However, when Rep. Jim Matheson announced his retirement on December 17, 2013, the district swung into safe Republican territory. Matheson, first elected to the House in 2000, won a razor thing re-election in 2012 (he won by 768 votes) and was facing a more and more Republican constituency (Mitt Romney won the district by an MOV of 37 percentage points).

Competitive-percent.jpg

January 2014

North Carolina's 7th Congressional District

Similar to Utah's 4th Congressional District, North Carolina's 7th District was considered one of the most competitive districts in the country. Rep. Mike McIntyre narrowly won re-election in 2012. Only 654 votes separated McIntyre from David Rouzer (R). McIntyre was facing a possible re-match against Rouzer in 2014 in a district that has become more conservative each year. His retirement at the end of this term all but guarantees a Republican pick-up of the seat.

How will this shape our coverage?

With a targeted focus of these 27 districts heading into 2014, the Ballotpedia team will provide readers with comprehensive information on these elections, above and beyond our normal election coverage. This will include a compilation of media attention, outside spending, issues affecting the campaign and thorough profiles on candidates.

Beginning in January, Ballotpedia will release one in-depth look at each competitive district every week.

However, for the 406 districts that did not receive a competitive label, you will still see the same coverage you expect from Ballotpedia.

District profiles

After each state's filing deadline, the Congress team will create an in-depth profile of the candidates that have declared their candidacy and a brief summary of the race. The profiles will be listed below.

Our goals for this study

  • Ballotpedia hopes this study allows you, as a reader and voter, to focus your resources (whether it be your time or your money) on the truly competitive districts.
  • We hope that our readers will look past the hype and be able to quickly and effectively determine what districts are deserving of attention.

Other initial 2014 predictions and targets

Cook Political Report

As of September 2014, Cook Political Report had 76 districts labeled as competitive.

     Likely Democratic
     Lean Democratic
     D Tossup

     R Tossup
     Lean Republican
     Likely Republican

Cook Political Report Race Rating -- 2014 U.S. House Competitive Districts
Month Likely D Lean D D Tossup R Tossup Lean R Likely R Total D Total R Total Competitive races
August 8, 2013[12] 14 16 8 1 11 17 28 29 57
September 5, 2013[13] 14 15 9 1 11 17 38 29 67
October 21, 2013[14] 14 15 9 1 11 17 36 34 70
October 30, 2013[15] 12 15 10 2 16 16 37 34 71
December 18, 2013[16] 14 14 10 4 15 15 38 34 72
January 7, 2014[17] 14 15 10 4 16 16 39 36 75
January 15, 2014[18] 14 14 11 4 16 18 39 38 77
February 13, 2014[19] 14 13 11 4 16 18 38 38 76
March 13, 2014[20] 15 13 11 3 16 18 39 37 76
April 4, 2014[21] 15 13 11 3 17 19 39 39 78
June 26, 2014[22] 16 14 11 2 16 18 41 36 77
August 8, 2014[23] 15 13 13 3 9 17 41 29 70

Sabato's Crystal Ball

As of September 2014, Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball projections labeled 66 races as competitive.

     Likely Democratic
     Lean Democratic
     D Tossup

     R Tossup
     Lean Republican
     Likely Republican

Sabato's Crystal Ball Race Rating -- U.S. House
Month Likely D Lean D D Tossup R Tossup Lean R Likely R Total D Total R Total Competitive races
October 23, 2013[24] 7 20 5 3 15 12 32 30 62
December 17, 2013[25] 8 19 5 6 14 14 32 34 66
January 7, 2014[26] 8 19 5 7 14 14 32 35 67
March 12, 2014[27] 10 15 7 5 14 15 32 34 66
March 31, 2014[28] 10 15 7 5 15 16 32 36 68
August 6, 2014[29] 9 13 10 3 11 16 32 30 62


FairVote's Monopoly Politics 2014

According to the 2014 national house election projections, there are:[30]

  • 201 Safe Republican districts
  • 18 Likely Republican districts
  • 21 Tossup districts
  • 15 Likely Democratic districts
  • 151 Safe Democratic districts

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee

Between their Frontline Program, designed to help vulnerable incumbents win re-elections, and their Jumpstart Program, which provides early support to candidates in competitive districts, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has targeted 42 races with their resources, as of September 2014.

See also

References

  1. OpenSecrets, "The Money Behind the Elections," accessed October 15, 2013
  2. The Cook Political Report, "2012 HOUSE RACE RATINGS FOR NOVEMBER 5, 2012," November 5, 2012
  3. OpenSecrets, "Most Expensive Races," accessed October 28, 2013
  4. Cook Political, "2012 HOUSE RACE RATINGS FOR NOVEMBER 5, 2012," accessed October 31, 2013
  5. USDA, "Official USDA Food Plans: Cost of Food at Home at Four Levels, U.S. Average, January 2012," accessed November 5, 2013
  6. The Water Project, "COMMON QUESTIONS ABOUT FUNDING A WELL / WATER PROJECT," accessed November 5, 2013
  7. Whatcom Clubs.org, "Expansion Policies," accessed November 5, 2013
  8. Realtor.com, "Robert Pattinson Lists ‘Twilight’ Love Nest," accessed November 5, 2013
  9. MTV, "Kim Kardashian's $1.25 Million Engagement Ring?" accessed November 5, 2013
  10. The Cook Political Report, "Introducing the 2014 Cook Political Report Partisan Voter Index," accessed November 5, 2013
  11. FairVote, "FairVote Releases Projections for the 2014 Congressional Elections," accessed November 5, 2013
  12. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed August 9, 2013
  13. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed September 18, 2013
  14. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed October 21, 2013
  15. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed October 30, 2013
  16. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed December 18, 2013
  17. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed January 7, 2014
  18. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed January 15, 2014
  19. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed February 14, 2014
  20. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed March 13, 2014
  21. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed April 4, 2014
  22. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed August 14, 2014
  23. Cook Political Report, "2014 HOUSE RACE RATINGS," accessed August 14, 2014
  24. Sabato's Crystal Ball, "2014 House Ratings," accessed on November 5, 2013
  25. Sabato's Crystal Ball, "2014 House Ratings," accessed on December 17, 2013
  26. Sabato's Crystal Ball, "2014 House Ratings," accessed on January 7, 2014
  27. Sabato's Crystal Ball, "2014 House Ratings," accessed on March 12, 2014
  28. Sabato's Crystal Ball, "2014 House Ratings," accessed on March 31, 2014
  29. Sabato's Crystal Ball, "2014 House Ratings," August 6, 2014
  30. FairVote.org, "Monopoly Politics 2014," accessed November 5, 2013