Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Fact check: Do congressional incumbents rarely face challengers and almost always win despite low approval ratings?
January 19, 2016
By Autumn Lewien
In a Facebook post dated January 1, 2016, Ro Khanna, a Democratic candidate in California seeking election to the U.S. House of Representatives, claimed that despite Congress’ "abysmal rating," incumbents "rarely get challenged and almost never lose."
We find that Khanna’s claim is true on all three counts: low congressional approval ratings, few electoral challenges and high incumbent re-election rates. Moreover, the low rate of electoral challenges and high rate of re-election for legislators are not unique to the federal level; these trends are also prevalent in state legislative elections.
Background
Ro Khanna, a former U.S. Department of Commerce official in the Obama administration, is seeking election to the U.S. House seat in California's 17th Congressional District. This seat is currently held by incumbent Mike Honda (D), who is serving his eighth term. Khanna previously challenged Honda in the 2014 elections under California's top-two primary system, but was defeated by a margin of 2.6 percentage points.
In a Facebook post from earlier this month, Khanna linked to an article in the Santa Cruz Sentinel about the lack of electoral competitiveness for U.S. House seats in California.[1] The link was accompanied by the following statement by Khanna:
| “ | This is exactly what's wrong with our politics. Despite Congress' abysmal rating, incumbents rarely get challenged and almost never lose. The system is rigged and voters lack real choice. Our founders would be rolling in their graves to see how entrenched politicians have become. We desperately need change.[2][3] | ” |
We decided to examine Khanna’s statement, focusing on three specific points: (1) Congress’ approval rating, (2) challenges to incumbents and (3) incumbent re-election rates.
"Congress' abysmal rating"
According to the results of seven public surveys conducted over the past five weeks, we found that “abysmal” is a reasonable description of Congress’ approval ratings. On average, 12.8 percent of the American public approve of the job that Congress is doing. The approval ratings that we found range from 10 percent (recorded in an Economist/YouGov survey conducted in the first week of January) to 16 percent (recorded in a survey conducted by Monmouth University in early December).
According to Gallup, Congress’ approval ratings have been steadily declining since the turn of the century, dropping from a high of 56 percent in 2000 to a high of 20 percent in 2015. Additionally, from 1980 to the end of 1999, the average approval rating was 35.5 percent. In comparison, from 2000 to the end of 2015—excluding the time period from October 2001 to December 2002 because the events of September 11, 2001, affected public opinion of Congress—the average congressional approval rating was 26.8 percent.[4]
| Congressional Job Approval Survey Results: "Do you approve or disapprove of the job Congress is doing?" | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Survey | Date | Approve (%) | Disapprove (%) | Sample Size |
| CBS/NY Times | 1/7-10 | 15 | 75 | 1276 |
| The Economist/YouGov | 1/1-5 | 10 | 67 | 1209 |
| The Economist/YouGov | 12/18-22 | 10 | 70 | 1214 |
| PPP (D) | 12/16-17 | 13 | 78 | 1267 |
| Monmouth | 12/10-13 | 16 | 77 | 856 |
| CBS/NY Times | 12/4-8 | 15 | 74 | 1275 |
| The Economist/YouGov | 12/4-8 | 10 | 67 | 1202 |
| Gallup | 12/2-6 | 13 | 82 | 824 |
| Sources: Real Clear Politics, "Congressional Job Approval," accessed January 13, 2016 | ||||
Figure 1.
_Verbatim_(Jan_19,_2016)_-_New.png)
Incumbents "rarely get challenged"
We examined Khanna’s claim that incumbents are rarely challenged from two different perspectives: (1) the number of races in which an incumbent did not face a primary and/or a general election opponent and (2) the number of races considered "competitive" by outside experts.
In 2014, of the 387 House and Senate incumbents that sought re-election, 226—or 58.4 percent—did not face a primary challenger. This was 9.8 percentage points higher than in 2012. Furthermore, according to the Cook Political Report, as of January 8, 2016, only 33 of the 435 House seats—or 7.6 percent of the total House seats—were considered toss-up or leaning seats.[5] This number was down from January 8, 2014, when 45 seats, or 10.3 percent, were considered possible toss-ups or leaning Democratic or Republican.[6] According to Ballotpedia, 24 of the 435 House races in 2016, or 5.5 percent, will be truly competitive.
These patterns are replicated at the state level. In recent years there has been an upward trend in uncontested elections in state legislative races. In the 2014 election cycle, 34.1 percent of the incumbents seeking re-election did not face a primary or general challenger, thus effectively securing election at the time of their candidate filing. This was an increase of 8.2 percentage points from 2012 and an increase of 8 percentage points from 2010. In addition to this, a recent Ballotpedia report found that the 2014 state legislative elections saw the lowest degree of competitiveness in recent years. Indeed, in 2014, only 4.9 percent of the national population lived in a district that experienced a competitive state legislative election—defined as an election won by 5 percentage points or less.
Incumbents "almost never lose"
What about Khanna’s claim about incumbents almost never losing? Again, we found that the data backs him up.
Since 1990, House and Senate incumbents have been re-elected at average rates exceeding 93 and 87 percent, respectively.[7] In 2014, 95.1 percent of the incumbent representatives seeking re-election won—5.2 percentage points higher than the incumbent re-election rates recorded in the 2012 U.S. House elections. It is important to note that redistricting may have had an impact on the 2012 re-election rates at both the federal and state levels, as the process resulted in incumbents running against other incumbents in the same district.[8]
Figure 2.
_Verbatim_(Jan_18,_2016).png)
High incumbent re-election rates are also common at the state level. According to another Ballotpedia analysis of state legislative elections from 1972 to 2014, the incumbency win rate has not dropped below 88 percent since 1972. Furthermore, in the 2014 state legislative elections, incumbents won re-election at a rate of 96.5 percent.
Conclusion
So was Ro Khanna correct in saying that even though Congress has "abysmal ratings," incumbents "rarely get challenged" and "almost never lose"? We found that Congress does have a very low average approval rating (12.8 percent), that more than half of all incumbents seeking re-election in 2014 (58.4 percent) did not face a challenger in the primaries, and that less than 8 percent of seats up for election in 2016 are considered to be competitive. In addition to this, over recent decades, congressional incumbents at both the federal and state levels have been re-elected at average rates exceeding 85 percent. As these figures illustrate, Khanna's claim is true on all counts.
See also
Launched in October 2015 and active through October 2018, Fact Check by Ballotpedia examined claims made by elected officials, political appointees, and political candidates at the federal, state, and local levels. We evaluated claims made by politicians of all backgrounds and affiliations, subjecting them to the same objective and neutral examination process. As of 2025, Ballotpedia staff periodically review these articles to revaluate and reaffirm our conclusions. Please email us with questions, comments, or concerns about these articles. To learn more about fact-checking, click here.
Sources and Notes
- ↑ Richman, J. Santa Cruz Sentinel, "House races in California: The thrill is gone," January 1, 2016
- ↑ Facebook, "Ro Khanna for U.S. Congress," January 1, 2016
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Gallup, "Congress and the Public," accessed January 13, 2016
- ↑ The Cook Political Report, "2016 House Race Ratings for January 8, 2016," accessed January 13, 2016
- ↑ The Cook Political Report, "2014 House Race Ratings for January 8, 2014," accessed January 13, 2016
- ↑ Brookings Institution, "Vital Statistics on Congress," April 7, 2014
- ↑ Hulse, C. New York Times, "House Incumbents Face Primary Pitfalls," June 4, 2012
Contact
More from Fact Check by Ballotpedia
 January 14, 2016 |
 January 8, 2016 |
 January 7, 2016 |
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter
