Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.

Annual Congressional Competitiveness Report, 2018

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Ballotpedia-Elections-Portal-Masthead-Image-icons.png
Ballotpedia Election Coverage Badge.png

2018 Federal Election Analysis
All federal elections
Special elections • List of candidates • Incumbents who did not run for re-election • Incumbents defeated • New members elected • Incumbent win rates • Margin of victory analysis • Congressional Competitiveness Report, 2018 • Change in state delegations • Closest elections • Officials seeking other offices • Noteworthy third party candidates • Prediction markets • Battleground polls • Fundraising
U.S. Senate elections
Battlegrounds • Control of the U.S. Senate • States with U.S. Senate and gubernatorial elections
U.S. House elections
Battlegrounds • Control of the U.S. House • Districts won by the opposite party presidential candidate • Elections without major party competition
State election analysis
Local election analysis
All election results

Updated October 11, 2018

Ballotpedia’s 2018 study of competitiveness in congressional elections found that 12.9% of incumbent U.S. Representatives and Senators would not be on the 2018 general election ballot. This was higher than the three previous election cycles: 2016 (7.0%), 2014 (10.3%), and 2012 (11.3%).

Our study also found that the number of U.S. House races with only one major party candidate (meaning a Democrat or a Republican did not run) was lower in 2018 (41 races) than 2016 (61 races) and 2014 (76 races).

Key sections of analysis on this page include:

HIGHLIGHTS
  • Of the U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators who could have been eligible to run for re-election in 2018, 58 of them (12.9 percent) either decided not to do so or were defeated in a partisan primary before reaching the general election.
  • In those 58 open seats where an incumbent either decided not to seek re-election or was defeated in a primary before the general election, there were 16 races where the incumbent's district overlapped at least one pivot county (a county that voted twice to elect President Obama in 2008 and 2012, but then switched to supporting President Trump for 2016).
  • In 22 races, the incumbent chose instead to run for a statewide office or (in one case) for U.S. president. One of every 10 U.S. House races nationwide in 2018 features just one major party candidate participating in the general election.

    • Defining competitiveness

    An election is considered more competitive when the incumbent officeholder is not a candidate for re-election in the general election. This analysis examines both the degree of competitiveness, relative to past election years, and factors that may or may not have contributed to the degree of competitiveness in the current year.

    The advantage an incumbent holds over a challenger in a given election is frequently cited in political theory and its impetus frequently debated. For example, data compiled by OpenSecrets.org shows the re-election rate for incumbents in the U.S. House of Representatives has been 85 percent or higher for each of the 27 two-year election cycles that occurred between 1964 and 2016; and that from 2006-2016 the re-election rate averaged 92.5 percent.

    Incumbents who did not seek re-election in 2018

    There were 449 incumbents in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives who could have been eligible to run for re-election in 2018, and 58 (12.9 percent) either decided not to do so or were defeated in a partisan primary before reaching the general election. This includes 3 of 33 U.S. Senators (9.1 percent) and 55 of 416 U.S. Representatives (13.2 percent).

    (Note: 19 of 435 U.S. House races must be excluded from this analysis for reasons described at the end of the report.)

    The reasons for the 58 open seats are as follows:

    • Defeated in primaries: 3 open seats[1]
    Three open seats for the U.S. House were created when incumbents attempted to win re-election, but were defeated in their party primary and thus did not advance to the general election. The three U.S. Representatives were Michael Capuano (D-Mass.), Robert Pittenger (R-N.C.), and Mark Sanford (R-S.C.). (This does not include Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.), who was defeated in the Democratic primary in New York's 14th Congressional District but appeared on the general election ballot through fusion voting.)
    • Ran for other offices in 2018: 22 open seats
    • Retirements and resignations: 31 open seats
      • Republicans: 24 Republican incumbents (21 in the U.S. House and 3 in the U.S. Senate) announced they would not seek re-election, including Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (Wis.), and U.S. Senators Jeff Flake (Ariz.), Bob Corker (Tenn.), and Orrin Hatch (Utah).
      • Democrats: 7 Democratic U.S. House incumbents announced they would not seek re-election.
    • Miscellaneous: 2 open seats
      • U.S. Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) resigned on December 5, 2017, amid sexual harassment allegations. His decision to resign nearly a year before the general election created an open seat with neither an incumbent nor a sitting lawmaker.
      • U.S. Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.) resigned on April 23, 2018, after accepting an appointment to become the NASA administrator. His decision to resign before the general election created an open seat with neither an incumbent nor a sitting lawmaker.

    Comparison with incumbent departures in previous years

    The table below presents the number of U.S. House and U.S. Senate incumbents who did not seek re-election from 2012 to 2018:

    Outgoing members of Congress, 2012-2018
    Year Chamber Democrats not seeking re-election Republicans not seeking re-election Total not seeking re-election
    2018
    U.S. Senate 0 3 3 (9.1% of total)
    U.S. House 19 36 55 (13.2% of total)
    Total 19 39 58 (12.9% of total)
    2016
    U.S. Senate 3 2 5 (14.7% of total)
    U.S. House 8 20 28 (6.4% of total)
    Total 11 22 33 (7.0% of total)
    2014
    U.S. Senate 5 2 7 (21.2% of total)
    U.S. House 16 25 41 (9.4% of total)
    Total 21 27 48 (10.3% of total)
    2012
    U.S. Senate 6 3 10[2] (30.3% of total)
    U.S. House 23 20 43 (9.9% of total)
    Total 29 23 53 (11.3% of total)

    Races without major party competition

    See also: U.S. House elections without a Democratic or Republican candidate, 2018

    When a candidate from only one of either the Democratic or Republican parties runs for a congressional office the seat is all but guaranteed to be won by that party. In 2018, 42 of 435 U.S. House races (9.7 percent) did not feature major party competition.

    Comparison with one-party races in previous years

    See also: U.S. House elections without a Democratic or Republican candidate, 1920-2018

    The table below presents the number of U.S. House with only major party candidate from 2014 to 2018:

    U.S. House races with one major party candidate, 2014-2018
    Year House races without a Democrat House races without a Republican Total House races with one major party candidate
    2018 4 39 43
    2016 27 34 61
    2014 36 40 76

    Influence of presidential elections on incumbent departures

    Competitiveness in U.S. House and U.S. Senate races can be affected by a recent U.S. presidential contest that alters the previously-assumed balance of power between the two major parties in a state. A federal lawmaker elected as a Republican during a non-presidential year may soon find him or herself in a district or state that voted much more strongly for the Democratic presidential candidate, or vice versa, and the prospect of facing a tougher partisan climate may make him or her less likely to seek re-election.

    (Note: 19 of 435 U.S. House races must be excluded from this analysis for reasons described at the end of the report.)

    Nine of the 58 open seats for the U.S. House and U.S. Senate in 2018 (15.5 percent) featured an incumbent from a state or district that was won by the presidential candidate of the other party in 2016.

    In four cases the seat is open because the incumbent chose to run for statewide office, and in each case, the statewide office likely offers more favorable partisan voters than the incumbent’s congressional district.

    • U.S. Rep. Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) chose to run for Arizona’s U.S. Senate seat. President Trump carried Arizona by 3.5 percentage points in 2016. McSally’s 2nd Congressional District is one of 25 Republican-held seats that also voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
    • U.S. Rep. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) chose to run for governor of Nevada. President Trump carried Rosen’s 3rd Congressional District by 1.0 percentage point in 2016, while Rosen won his race by a similar margin of 1.2 percentage points. Democrat Hillary Clinton won Nevada by 2.4 percentage points.
    • U.S. Rep. Tim Walz (D-Minn.) chose to run for governor of Minnesota. President Trump decisively won Walz’s 1st Congressional District by 15 percentage points, while Walz defeated his Republican rival by less than 1 percentage point. Democrat Hillary Clinton carried the state of Minnesota by 1.5 percentage points.
    • U.S. Rep. Rick Nolan (D-Minn.) chose to run for lieutenant governor of Minnesota. President Trump won Nolan’s 8th Congressional District by 15 points, while Nolan defeated his Republican rival by less than 1 percentage point. Democrat Hillary Clinton carried the state of Minnesota by 1.5 percentage points.

    In five cases the seat is open because the incumbent chose to retire or otherwise not seek re-election.

    • Hillary Clinton won the district represented by U.S. Rep Edward Royce (R-Calif.) by 8.6 percentage points.
    • Hillary Clinton won the district represented by U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) by 7.5 percentage points.
    • Hillary Clinton won the district represented by U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) by 19.6 percentage points.
    • Hillary Clinton won the district represented by U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Wash.) by 3.0 percentage points.
    • Donald Trump won the district represented by U.S. Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D-N.H.) by 1.6 percentage points.

    Comparison with 2012 presidential election and retirements in 2014 midterms

    In 2012, the most recent presidential election before 2016, there were 26 districts that split their vote between presidential and House candidates from different parties. Seventeen voted for Barack Obama (D) and a Republican House member, and nine voted for Mitt Romney (R) and a Democratic House member.[3]

    Four incumbents representing split districts retired ahead of the 2014 midterms:

    Influence of pivot counties on incumbent departures

    The number of open seats in congressional races may also increase due to the existence of a pivot county within the district.

    Ballotpedia identified 206 counties that voted for Donald Trump (R) in 2016 after voting for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012. The raw data for this study was provided by Dave Leip of Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections in July 2017. Collectively, Trump won these pivot counties by more than 580,000 votes, and had an average margin of victory of 11.45 percent.

    Of the 58 incumbents who either decided not to run for re-election or were defeated in a partisan primary before reaching the general election, 16 (27.6 percent) represented districts that overlapped with at least one pivot county after 2016. The departure of Republican incumbents accounted for 12 of these 16 open seats.

    U.S. House races excluded from analysis

    In some of the analysis above only 416 of 435 U.S. House races are considered. The other 19 U.S. House seats must be excluded from the sample for the following reasons:

    • Pennsylvania maps redrawn: On February 19, 2018, having already ruled the state’s congressional redistricting map to be an illegal partisan gerrymander, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court adopted a remedial map for all of the state’s 18 U.S. House seats, and ordered it to be used for the 2018 election. These are now different districts with different political boundaries than those that existed during the 2016 election, so each of these seats cannot be said to have a true incumbent relative to the prior election, and none of the current U.S. Representatives who ran for these seats— what would otherwise be the incumbents— ran for the same districts they currently represent.
    • U.S. Rep. Louise Slaughter (D) of New York’s 25th Congressional District, died on March 16, 2018, while still in office. This seat is excluded from the competitiveness analysis because there is no incumbent, and Rep. Slaughter did not vacate the office by choice or through defeat in a primary.

    The report also does not include special elections that took place in 2018.

    See also

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ The total does not include Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.), who was defeated in the Democratic primary in New York's 14th Congressional District but appeared on the general election ballot through fusion voting.
    2. ↑ Figure includes Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.).
    3. ↑ Pew Research Center, "Split-ticket districts, once common, are now rare," August 8, 2016
    v • e
    2017-2018 Elections to the United States Congress
    Senate by StateCongressLogo.png
    House by State
    Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming
    Election information
    Super PACs/Organizations
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Annual_Congressional_Competitiveness_Report,_2018&oldid=9030389"