Pennsylvania's 1st Congressional District election, 2018

Elections in Pennsylvania, 2018

• General election: Nov. 6
• Voter registration deadline: Oct. 9
• Early voting: N/A
• Absentee voting deadline: Nov. 2

• Online registration: Yes
• Same-day registration: No
• Voter ID: No
• Poll times: 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.

---

On the ballot: U.S. Senate • U.S. House • Congressional special elections • Governor • State executive offices • State Senate • State House • Special state legislative • Local ballot measures • Democratic primaries • Republican primaries

2020 → ← 2016
Pennsylvania's 1st Congressional District
Democratic primary Republican primary General election
Election details
Filing deadline: March 20, 2018
Primary: May 15, 2018 General: November 6, 2018
How to vote
Poll times: 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Voting in Pennsylvania
Race ratings
Cook Partisan Voter Index (2018): R+1 Cook Political Report: Toss-up Inside Elections: Toss-up Sabato's Crystal Ball: Toss-up
Ballotpedia analysis
U.S. Senate battlegrounds U.S. House battlegrounds Federal and state primary competitiveness Ballotpedia's Election Analysis Hub, 2018
See also
Pennsylvania's 1st Congressional District U.S. Senate • 1st • 2nd • 3rd • 4th • 5th • 6th • 7th • 8th • 9th • 10th • 11th • 12th • 13th • 14th • 15th • 16th • 17th • 18th • 7th (special) • 15th (special) • 18th (special) Pennsylvania elections, 2018 U.S. Congress elections, 2018 U.S. Senate elections, 2018 U.S. House elections, 2018 Alabama U.S. House racesAlaska U.S. House racesArizona U.S. House racesArkansas U.S. House racesCalifornia U.S. House racesColorado U.S. House racesConnecticut U.S. House racesDelaware U.S. House racesFlorida U.S. House racesGeorgia U.S. House racesHawaii U.S. House racesIdaho U.S. House racesIllinois U.S. House racesIndiana U.S. House racesIowa U.S. House racesKansas U.S. House racesKentucky U.S. House racesLouisiana U.S. House racesMaine U.S. House racesMaryland U.S. House racesMassachusetts U.S. House racesMichigan U.S. House racesMinnesota U.S. House racesMississippi U.S. House racesMissouri U.S. House racesMontana U.S. House racesNebraska U.S. House racesNevada U.S. House racesNew Hampshire U.S. House racesNew Jersey U.S. House racesNew Mexico U.S. House racesNew York U.S. House racesNorth Carolina U.S. House racesNorth Dakota U.S. House racesOhio U.S. House racesOklahoma U.S. House racesOregon U.S. House racesPennsylvania U.S. House racesRhode Island U.S. House racesSouth Carolina U.S. House racesSouth Dakota U.S. House racesTennessee U.S. House racesTexas U.S. House racesUtah U.S. House racesVermont U.S. House racesVirginia U.S. House racesWashington U.S. House racesWest Virginia U.S. House racesWisconsin U.S. House racesWyoming U.S. House racesSubmit

U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R) defeated Scott Wallace (D) in the 2018 general election for Pennsylvania's 1st Congressional District.

All 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives were up for election in 2018. The Democratic Party gained a net total of 40 seats, winning control of the chamber. This race was identified as a 2018 battleground that might have affected partisan control of the U.S. House in the 116th Congress. Heading into the election, the Republican Party was in the majority holding 235 seats to Democrats' 193 seats, with seven vacant seats. Democrats needed to win 23 GOP-held seats in 2018 to win control of the House. From 1918 to 2016, the president’s party lost an average of 29 seats in midterm elections.

After the court-ordered redrawing of the Pennsylvania congressional map in February 2018, the new 1st Congressional District contained a majority of the old 8th District, which Fitzpatrick represented prior to the redrawing, and portions of the old 7th and 13th Districts. The new 1st District backed Hillary Clinton by 2 percentage points in 2016, while Donald Trump won the old 8th District by 0.2 percentage points. The new 1st District was one of 25 Republican-held districts up in 2018 that voted for Clinton. Heading into the election, forecasters called the race a toss-up.

For more information about the Democratic primary, click here.
For more information about the Republican primary, click here.

Candidates and election results

General election

General election for U.S. House Pennsylvania District 1

Incumbent Brian Fitzpatrick defeated Scott Wallace in the general election for U.S. House Pennsylvania District 1 on November 6, 2018.

		Candidate	%	Votes
✔		Brian Fitzpatrick (R)	51.3	169,053
		Scott Wallace (D)	48.7	160,745

---

	Incumbents are bolded and underlined. The results have been certified. Source	Total votes: 329,798
= candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Withdrawn or disqualified candidates

• Steve Scheetz (L)

Democratic primary election

Democratic primary for U.S. House Pennsylvania District 1

Scott Wallace defeated Rachel Reddick and Steve Bacher in the Democratic primary for U.S. House Pennsylvania District 1 on May 15, 2018.

		Candidate	%	Votes
✔		Scott Wallace	56.5	27,676
		Rachel Reddick	35.3	17,313
		Steve Bacher	8.2	4,014

---

	There were no incumbents in this race. The results have been certified.	Total votes: 49,003
= candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Republican primary election

Republican primary for U.S. House Pennsylvania District 1

Incumbent Brian Fitzpatrick defeated Dean Malik in the Republican primary for U.S. House Pennsylvania District 1 on May 15, 2018.

		Candidate	%	Votes
✔		Brian Fitzpatrick	67.0	31,394
		Dean Malik	33.0	15,461

---

	Incumbents are bolded and underlined. The results have been certified.	Total votes: 46,855
= candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Candidate profiles

See also: Editorial approach to writing about key campaign messages

Brian Fitzpatrick, U.S. representative from PA-8

Party: Republican

Incumbent: No

Political office: United States House of Representatives (8th Congressional District, assume office: 2017)

Biography: Fitzpatrick received his bachelor's degree from Penn State University and his J.D. from the Dickinson School of Law. Prior to that, he served in the FBI and was a special assistant United States Attorney.

Key messages

• Fitzpatrick said he was an independent congressman and highlighted his support from labor unions like the AFL-CIO, which traditionally support Democrats.

• Fitzpatrick said he wanted to keep families safe, pointing to his work on policies to combat terrorism and opioid abuse as well as his career as an FBI agent and prosecutor.

• Fitzpatrick said he wanted to use government to help people who play by the rules. He contrasted this image with Wallace, who he described as a dishonest and eccentric billionaire who cheated on his taxes.

Scott Wallace, charitable foundation director

Party: Democratic

Incumbent: No

Political office: None

Biography: Wallace was born in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. His grandfather was former U.S. Vice President Henry Wallace, who served under Franklin Roosevelt from 1941 to 1945. Wallace received his bachelor's degree from Haverford College and his J.D. from Villanova Law School. He worked as a staffer for the United States Senate and then in the nonprofit sector. He later managed the Wallace Global Fund alongside his wife Christy, a former U.S. diplomat.

Key messages

• Wallace highlighted his opposition to President Donald Trump and said he would stand up to Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress on behalf of his constituents.

• Wallace emphasized that he grew up in Bucks County and highlighted his management of the Wallace Global Fund, which he said was helping lead campaigns to address climate change and empower impoverished people across the world.

• Wallace tied Fitzpatrick to special interest groups and corporations. He highlighted Fitzpatrick's support for the 2017 tax bill, which Wallace said benefitted corporations at the expense of the middle class, and emphasized that he did not accept corporate contributions.

Results of 2018 redistricting

On February 19, 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court adopted a new congressional district map after ruling that the original map constituted an illegal partisan gerrymander. District locations and numbers were changed by the new map. Candidates on this page were listed under Pennsylvania’s new districts, which were used in the 2018 congressional elections. Click here for more information about the ruling.

The chart below compares this new district with the old district that was the most geographically similar to it.

Old district	Prior incumbent	Prior 2016 presidential result	New 2016 presidential result
8th District	Brian Fitzpatrick (R)	R+0.2	D+2.0

Not sure which district you're in? Find out here.

Click the box below to see how the new congressional districts compare to the ones in place before the redrawing.

Changes in Pennsylvania's congressional districts
New district	Prior district	Prior 2016 presidential result	New 2016 presidential result	Prior incumbent
1st District	8th District	R+0.2	D+2.0	Brian Fitzpatrick (R)
2nd District	13th District	D+33.6	D+48.0	Brendan Boyle (D)
3rd District	2nd District	D+82.8	D+83.9	Dwight Evans (D)
4th District	13th District	D+33.6	D+19.4	None
5th District	7th District	D+2.3	D+28.2	Pat Meehan (R)
6th District	6th District	D+0.6	D+9.3	Ryan Costello (R)
7th District	15th District	R+7.6	D+1.1	Charlie Dent (R)
8th District	17th District	R+10.1	R+9.5	Matt Cartwright (D)
9th District	17th District	R+10.1	R+34.0	None
10th District	4th District	R+21.5	R+8.9	Scott Perry (R)
11th District	16th District	R+6.8	R+25.8	Lloyd Smucker (R)
12th District	10th District	R+36.0	R+36.5	Tom Marino (R)
13th District	9th District	R+42.5	R+45.5	Bill Shuster (R)
14th District	18th District	R+19.6	R+29.0	Conor Lamb (D)
15th District	5th District	R+28.8	R+43.4	Glenn Thompson (R)
16th District	3rd District	R+26.1	R+19.9	Mike Kelly (R)
17th District	12th District	R+20.8	R+2.5	Keith Rothfus (R)
18th District	14th District	D+35.5	D+26.8	Mike Doyle (D)
Source: Daily Kos

Click here to read more about the 2018 redistricting

Redistricting after the 2010 census See also: Redistricting in Pennsylvania after the 2010 census Congressional redistricting, 2010 Following the 2010 United States Census, Pennsylvania lost one congressional seat. At the time of redistricting, Republicans held the governorship and both chambers of the Pennsylvania General Assembly. On December 20, 2011, the state legislature approved a congressional redistricting plan, which was signed into law by Governor Tom Corbett on December 22, 2011. On January 10, 2018, a three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania issued a 2-1 ruling finding that Pennsylvania's congressional district map had not been subject to unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering. Judges Edward G. Smith and Patty Shwartz comprised the majority, with Judge Michael Baylson dissenting. Smith wrote the following in his memorandum opinion: “ Through this lawsuit, Plaintiffs seek a sea change in redistricting. They are forthright about this intention: they desire a judicial mandate that Art I, § 4, of the Constitution prohibits any political or partisan considerations in redistricting. Plaintiffs' ambitious theory suffers from three fatal flaws. First, the Framers provided a check on state power within the text of the Elections Clause, but it is a political one—action by Congress. ... Second, the Elections Clause offers no judicially enforceable limit on political considerations in redistricting. ... Third, Plaintiffs' Elections Clause claim is an unjustifiable attempt to skirt existing Supreme Court precedent. ” —Judge Edward G. Smith Baylson wrote the following in his dissent: “ Gerrymandering is a wrong in search of a remedy. This case is brought under the Elections Clause of Article I of the United States Constitution, which is a novel legal claim, asserting the 2011 map redistricting Pennsylvania's congressional districts was in violation of the United States Constitution. ... Plaintiffs have proven their claim by clear and convincing evidence, which is the appropriate burden of proof. ” —Judge Michael Baylson League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania See also: League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania On December 29, 2017, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania issued its "Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law" in League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, a case dealing with alleged partisan gerrymandering of the state's congressional district plan. State Democrats alleged that Pennsylvania's congressional district plan, which was drawn by a Republican-controlled state legislature, gave an unfair advantage to Republicans over Democrats in violation of state and federal law. Judge Kevin Brobson penned the document, which is not itself a binding legal decision. Brobson wrote the following: “ While Petitioners characterize the level of partisanship evident in the 2011 Plan as 'excessive' and 'unfair,' Petitioners have not articulated a judicially manageable standard by which this Court can discern whether the 2011 Plan crosses the line between permissible partisan considerations and unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering under the Pennsylvania Constitution. ... A lot can and has been said about the 2011 Plan, much of which is unflattering and yet justified. Petitioners, however, have failed to meet their burden of proving that the 2011 Plan, as a piece of legislation, clearly, plainly, and palpably violates the Pennsylvania Constitution. For the judiciary, this should be the end of the inquiry. ” —Judge P. Kevin Brobson Suzanne Almeida, the executive director of the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, said, "While we are disappointed that Judge Brobson did not find that the existing state of Pennsylvania law was violated by the 2011 partisan gerrymander, we are encouraged by the strong findings of fact in our favor and look forward to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s ultimate decision in the case." Drew Compton, an aide to state Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati (R), said, "Even though it's not always a flattering process, [Brobson] found [the map] to be constitutional on all grounds." According to The Philadelphia Inquirer, "the state Supreme Court can take Brobson's conclusions into account but will ultimately make its own ruling." The high court heard oral argument in the case on January 17, 2018. On January 22, 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued an order striking down the state's congressional district map, finding that the map "clearly, plainly and palpably violates the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania." The order set the following deadlines for revising the district map: February 9, 2018: Deadline for the state legislature to submit a remedial district plan to the governor February 15, 2018: Deadline for the governor to submit a remedial plan to the state supreme court February 19, 2018: "The Executive Branch Respondents are advised to anticipate that a congressional districting plan will be available by February 19, 2018, and are directed to take all measures, including adjusting the election calendar if necessary, to ensure that the May 15, 2018 primary election takes place as scheduled under that remedial districting plan." The order noted that the court would adopt a remedial plan on its own if the state legislature and governor did not submit a plan. The order indicated that a full opinion would be forthcoming. On January 25, 2018, state Republicans requested that the Supreme Court of the United States stay the state supreme court's ruling pending an appeal. Attorneys for Republicans argued that the state supreme court overstepped its authority in striking down Pennsylvania's congressional district plan: "This is not simply a question of a state supreme court interpreting its state constitution, but a state supreme court usurping that state legislature's authority expressly granted under Article I, § 4." David Gersch, an attorney for the voters who initially brought the lawsuit challenging the congressional district plan, said that Republicans were making inconsistent arguments, having claimed in a separate lawsuit that the matter should be addressed by state-level authorities: "Now that they have lost in the highest court of the commonwealth, the legislators turn around and say the exact opposite." On January 29, 2018, Associate Justice Samuel Alito requested a response to this request from the other parties involved in the suit by 4:00 on February 2, 2018. On February 5, 2018, the Supreme Court denied Republicans' request for a stay. On January 26, 2018, the state supreme court issued an order appointing Nate Persily, a Stanford University law professor, "to assist the court in adopting, if necessary, a remedial congressional redistricting plan." The court ordered state lawmakers to turn over digital files containing information on the state's current congressional district boundaries by January 31, 2018. On January 31, 2018, attorneys for Pennsylvania State Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati (R) submitted a letter to the court indicating that Scarnati would not furnish the court with the requested data: "In light of the unconstitutionality of the Court's Orders and the Court's plain intent to usurp the General Assembly's constitutionally delegated role of drafting Pennsylvania's congressional districting plan, Senator Scarnati will not be turning over any data identified in the Court's Orders." The letter also included a footnote indicating that Scarnati did not possess the requested data. According to The Philadelphia Inquirer, an attorney for the Pennsylvania General Assembly, in a separate letter, said, "The General Assembly and its Legislative Data Processing Center do not maintain ESRI shapefiles that contain current boundaries of all Pennsylvania municipalities and precincts." On February 7, 2018, the state supreme court released the majority opinion explaining its January 22, 2018, order in League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The majority opinion was penned by Justice Debra Todd and read, in part, as follows: “ In sum, we conclude that the evidence detailed above and the remaining evidence of the record as a whole demonstrates that Petitioners have established that the 2011 Plan subordinates the traditional redistricting criteria in service of achieving unfair partisan advantage, and, thus, violates the Free and Equal Elections Clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Such a plan, aimed at achieving unfair partisan gain, undermines voters’ ability to exercise their right to vote in free and 'equal' elections if the term is to be interpreted in any credible way. An election corrupted by extensive, sophisticated gerrymandering and partisan dilution of votes is not 'free and equal.' In such circumstances, a 'power, civil or military,' to wit, the General Assembly, has in fact 'interfere[d] to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.' ” —Debra Todd Chief Justice Thomas Saylor penned a dissenting opinion that read, in part, as follows: “ In summary, I believe that: the present exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction was improvident; this Court’s review would benefit from anticipated guidance from the Supreme Court of the United States; awaiting such guidance is particularly appropriate given the delay, until 2017, of Petitioners’ challenge to a 2011 redistricting plan; and the appropriate litmus for judicial review of redistricting should take into account the inherently political character of the work of the General Assembly, to which the task of redistricting has been assigned by the United States Constitution. ” —Thomas Saylor Justice Sallie Mundy joined Saylor's dissent and penned a separate dissent. Justice Max Baer filed an opinion that concurred in part and dissented in part with the court's majority opinion. On February 9, 2018, Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati (R) and House Speaker Mike Turzai (R) filed a remedial congressional district plan with Governor Tom Wolf (D). The pair issued a joint statement announcing the plan: "The Republican Legislative Leaders in the House and Senate have agreed to a Congressional District Map that complies fully with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's order and opinion." Senate Minority Leader Jay Costa (D) and House Minority Leader Frank Dermody (D) issued a joint statement that same day denouncing the map: "The Republican leadership in both chambers blocked this process, refused to negotiate, and have now submitted a map directly to [the governor's] office that we have not even seen." J. J. Abbott, a spokesman for Wolf, said, "While the court's order did not appear to allow for two individuals to draw a map on behalf of the entire General Assembly, Gov. Wolf will review Speaker Turzai and President Scarnati's submission in consultation with the experts retained by the administration to determine his next course of action." On February 13, 2018, Governor Tom Wolf (D) announced that he would not submit the remedial congressional district plan drafted by Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati (R) and House Speaker Mike Turzai (R) to the state supreme court. In a press release, Wolf said, "The analysis by my team shows that, like the 2011 map, the map submitted to my office by Republican leaders is still a gerrymander. Their map clearly seeks to benefit one political party, which is the essence of why the court found the current map to be unconstitutional." On February 15, 2018, the deadline set by the state supreme court, parties to the suit and state political leaders submitted their proposals to the court. Wolf, Lieutenant Governor Mike Stack (D), House Democrats, Senate Democrats, the petitioners in the suit, and the intervenors all submitted proposals. These are linked below: Governor Tom Wolf's proposal Lieutenant Governor Mike Stack's proposal Senate Democrats' proposal House Democrats' proposal Petitioners' proposal (i.e., League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, et al.) Intervenors' proposal (i.e., a group of Republican candidates, party officials, and activists) On February 19, 2018, the state supreme court voted 4-3 to adopt the remedial congressional plan drafted by Nate Persily. District locations and numbers differ between the two maps. The map adopted by the state supreme court split 13 counties; the 2011 map split 28 counties. Had the 2018 map been in place during the 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump (R) would have won 10 districts and Hillary Clinton (D) would have won eight. In 2016, at which time the 2011 map was in place, Trump carried 12 districts to Clinton's six. The full text of the court's ruling, including map images, can be accessed here. Justices Debra Todd, Christine Donohue, Kevin M. Dougherty, and David N. Wecht formed the court's majority. The majority opinion read, in part, as follows: “ This Court recognized that the primary responsibility for drawing congressional districts rested squarely with the legislature, but we also acknowledged that, in the eventuality of the General Assembly not submitting a plan to the Governor, or the Governor not approving the General Assembly’s plan within the time specified, it would fall to this Court expeditiously to adopt a plan based upon the evidentiary record developed in the Commonwealth Court. ... The Remedial Plan is superior or comparable to all plans submitted by the parties, the intervenors, and amici, by whichever Census-provided definition one employs. ... The compactness of the plan is superior or comparable to the other submissions[.] ... Finally, no district has more than a one-person difference in population from any other district, and, therefore, the Remedial Plan achieves the constitutional guarantee of one person, one vote. ” Chief Justice Thomas Saylor filed a dissenting opinion, which read, in part, as follows: “ The latest round includes: the submission, within the past few days, of more than a dozen sophisticated redistricting plans; the lack of an opportunity for critical evaluation by all of the parties; the adoption of a judicially created redistricting plan apparently upon advice from a political scientist who has not submitted a report as of record nor appeared as a witness in any court proceeding in this case; and the absence of an adversarial hearing to resolve factual controversies arising in the present remedial phase of this litigation. In these circumstances, the displacement to the judiciary of the political responsibility for redistricting -- which is assigned to the General Assembly by the United States Constitution -- appears to me to be unprecedented. ” Justices Sallie Mundy and Max Baer also penned individual dissents. In its order, the court set the primary election filing period for congressional candidates to begin on February 27, 2018, and to end on March 20, 2018. By contrast, the filing period for candidates for other offices, such as governor and United States senator, began on February 13, 2018, and ended on March 6, 2018. Pennsylvania Democrats applauded the remedial map. David Landau, Delaware County Democratic Party chairman, said, "[The remedial map] remedies the outrageous gerrymander of 2011, and that's the important thing, that the gerrymander be over. All that zigging and zagging is gone, and it makes Delaware County a competitive seat now." Meanwhile, Republicans were critical of the map and the process that led to its adoption. Mark Harris, a Republican campaign consultant, said, "It's a straight Democratic gerrymander by a Democratic Supreme Court to help Democrats." Republicans indicated that they planned to challenge the validity of the remedial map in federal court. According to The Washington Post, Drew Compton, an attorney for Senate Republicans, said that "a separation of powers case will form the essence of the GOP's argument." On February 27, 2018, Turzai and Scarnati petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States for a stay of the state supreme court's order pending appeal. The petition was filed with Associate Justice Samuel Alito, who reviews emergency appeals from Pennsylvania. Attorneys for Turzai and Scarnati wrote the following in their petition: “ By promulgating mandatory criteria the General Assembly could not anticipate in 2011, and that are found nowhere in the Pennsylvania Constitution, withholding guidance as to how to achieve compliance with Pennsylvania law until two days before the court's imposed deadline to enact a new plan, creating a proportional-representation criterion that is practically impossible to implement, and imposing a remedial plan that had been in the works all along, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ensured that its desired plan to draft the new map would be successful. This court of action cannot square with either the plain text of the U.S. Constitution's Elections Clause, which delegates redistricting authority to 'the Legislature' of each state, or with this Court's interpretive precedent, which holds that '[r]edistricting involves lawmaking in its essential features and most important aspect.' ” On March 19, 2018, the Supreme Court issued an order declining to intervene in the case. There were no noted dissents in the order. On March 20, 2018, Rep. Cris Dush (R) introduced the following impeachment resolutions against the four justices who signed onto the state supreme court's ruling in League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania: House Resolution 766 (calling for the impeachment of Justice David N. Wecht) House Resolution 767 (calling for the impeachment of Justice Debra McCloskey Todd) House Resolution 768 (calling for the impeachment of Justice Christine Donohue) House Resolution 769 (calling for the impeachment of Justice Kevin M. Dougherty) Dush argued that these four justices, all Democrats, exceeded their authority by imposing a new district map, an action that, Dush argued, is the prerogative of the legislative and executive branches. In a memorandum accompanying the impeachment resolutions, Dush said, "[The court's action] overrides the express legislative and executive authority, found in Article IV, Section 15 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, concerning the Governor’s veto authority and the General Assembly’s subsequent authority to override such veto. ... [The justices] who signed this order that blatantly and clearly contradicts the plain language of the Pennsylvania Constitution, engaged in misbehavior in office." Eleven other Republicans signed on as co-sponsors of the impeachment resolutions. House Minority Leader Frank Dermody (D) argued that the impeachment efforts constituted an unfounded attack on the judiciary. Dermody said, "It’s an attack on the independence of every judge in our state, one of the bedrock principles of our democracy. If pursued, this would be a clear and present danger to the administration of justice in Pennsylvania." Chief Justice Thomas Saylor said the following in a statement: "Threats of impeachment directed against Justices because of their decision in a particular case are an attack upon an independent judiciary, which is an essential component of our constitutional plan of government." On May 29, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States dismissed Agre v. Wolf, a separate suit alleging unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering in the state's congressional district map, as moot. Corman v. Torres On February 22, 2018, Pennsylvania State Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman (R), Senate State Government Committee Chairman Mike Folmer (R), and Republican congressmen Lou Barletta, Ryan Costello, Mike Kelly, Tom Marino, Scott Perry, Keith Rothfus, Lloyd Smucker, and Glenn Thompson filed suit in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, seeking an injunction against implementation of the state supreme court's remedial congressional district plan. The plaintiffs alleged that the state supreme court, in adopting a remedial map, violated the Elections Clause of the United States Constitution by usurping the redistricting authority granted by the Constitution to state legislatures. The plaintiffs requested that a three-judge panel of the court be convened to consider the case. On February 23, 2018, this request was granted; judges Kent Jordan, Christopher Conner, and Jerome Simandle were appointed to the panel. That same day, the court denied the plaintiffs' request for a temporary injunction and set an expedited schedule for review. Oral arguments in the case were heard on March 9, 2018. On March 19, 2018, the three-judge panel ruled unanimously to dismiss the complaint. The panel's opinion read, in part, as follows: “ We hold that the federal Elections Clause violations that the Plaintiffs allege are not the Plaintiffs‟ to assert. Because fundamental principles of constitutional standing and judicial restraint prohibit us from exercising jurisdiction, we have no authority to take any action other than to dismiss the Plaintiffs‟ verified complaint. Moreover, the deficiencies identified herein are legal rather than factual in nature. Accordingly, we conclude that leave to amend would be futile. For the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiffs‟ verified complaint will be dismissed, and Plaintiffs‟ motion for preliminary injunction will be denied. ”

Polls

See also: Ballotpedia's approach to covering polls

Pennsylvania's 1st Congressional District, general election
Poll	Poll sponsor	Scott Wallace (D)	Brian Fitzpatrick (R)	Undecided/Other	Margin of error	Sample size
Siena College (October 26-29, 2018)	New York Times	46%	47%	7%	+/-4.7	502
Siena College (October 11-14, 2018)	New York Times	50%	43%	7%	+/-4.6	570
Public Opinion Strategies (October 2-4, 2018)	Fitzpatrick campaign and the NRCC	42%	50%	8%	+/-4.9	400
Monmouth University (likely voters) (September 27-October 1, 2018)	N/A	46%	50%	4%	+/-7.4	353
Monmouth University (likely voters) (May 31-June 3, 2018)	N/A	47%	48%	5%	+/-8.7	451
AVERAGES		46.2%	47.6%	6.2%	+/-6.06	455.2
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Campaign contributions

The chart below contains data from financial reports submitted to the Federal Election Commission.

Name	Party	Receipts*	Disbursements**	Cash on hand	Date
Brian Fitzpatrick	Republican Party	$3,445,060	$3,474,194	$116,635	As of December 31, 2018
Scott Wallace	Democratic Party	$14,181,197	$13,544,540	$636,656	As of December 31, 2018
Source: Federal Elections Commission, "Campaign finance data," 2018. This product uses the openFEC API but is not endorsed or certified by the Federal Election Commission (FEC). * According to the FEC, "Receipts are anything of value (money, goods, services or property) received by a political committee." ** According to the FEC, a disbursement "is a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit or gift of money or anything of value to influence a federal election," plus other kinds of payments not made to influence a federal election.

Satellite spending

Satellite spending, commonly referred to as outside spending, describes political spending not controlled by candidates or their campaigns; that is, any political expenditures made by groups or individuals that are not directly affiliated with a candidate. This includes spending by political party committees, super PACs, trade associations, and 501(c)(4) nonprofit groups.

This section lists satellite spending in this race reported by news outlets in alphabetical order. If you are aware of spending that should be included, please email us.

• The Congressional Leadership Fund had spent $430,000 supporting Fitzpatrick as of September 5.

• Defending Main Street Super PAC
  • The group disclosed $150,000 in spending opposing Scott Wallace on October 15.
  • The group had spent $123,000 supporting Fitzpatrick as of September 17.

• The Environmental Defense Action Fund spent $30,000 supporting Fitzpatrick on September 7.

• The National Republican Congressional Committee had spent $575,000 opposing Wallace as of September 12.

• NextGen Climate Action had spent $68,000 supporting Wallace as of August 20.

• No Labels had spent $110,000 supporting Fitzpatrick as of September 14.

• Planned Parenthood (PP)
  • PP disclosed another $734,000 in spending on digital ads opposing Fitzpatrick on October 29.
  • PP disclosed $730,000 in spending on digital ads opposing Fitzpatrick on October 23.
  • PP disclosed $312,000 in spending on digital ads opposing Fitzpatrick on October 19.

• The Republican Jewish Coalition spent $530,000 on a television and digital ad opposing Wallace in June 2018.

Race ratings

See also: Race rating definitions and methods

Ballotpedia provides race ratings from four outlets: The Cook Political Report, Inside Elections, Sabato's Crystal Ball, and DDHQ/The Hill. Each race rating indicates if one party is perceived to have an advantage in the race and, if so, the degree of advantage:

• Safe and Solid ratings indicate that one party has a clear edge and the race is not competitive.
• Likely ratings indicate that one party has a clear edge, but an upset is possible.
• Lean ratings indicate that one party has a small edge, but the race is competitive.
• Toss-up ratings indicate that neither party has an advantage.

Race ratings are informed by a number of factors, including polling, candidate quality, and election result history in the race's district or state.

Race ratings: Pennsylvania's 1st Congressional District election, 2018
Race tracker	Race ratings
	October 30, 2018	October 23, 2018	October 16, 2018	October 9, 2018
The Cook Political Report	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up
Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up
Larry J. Sabato's Crystal Ball	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up
Note: Ballotpedia updates external race ratings every two weeks throughout the election season.

District analysis

See also: The Cook Political Report's Partisan Voter Index

See also: FiveThirtyEight's elasticity scores

The 2017 Cook Partisan Voter Index for this district was R+1, meaning that in the previous two presidential elections, this district's results were 1 percentage point more Republican than the national average. This made Pennsylvania's 1st Congressional District the 233rd most Republican nationally.

FiveThirtyEight's September 2018 elasticity score for states and congressional districts measured "how sensitive it is to changes in the national political environment." This district's elasticity score was 1.02. This means that for every 1 point the national political mood moved toward a party, the district was expected to move 1.02 points toward that party.

Noteworthy endorsements

See also: Ballotpedia: Our approach to covering endorsements

This section lists noteworthy endorsements issued in this election, including those made by high-profile individuals and organizations, cross-party endorsements, and endorsements made by newspaper editorial boards. It also includes a bulleted list of links to official lists of endorsements for any candidates who published that information on their campaign websites. Please note that this list is not exhaustive. If you are aware of endorsements that should be included, please click here.

• Brian Fitzpatrick

• Scott Wallace

Noteworthy general election endorsements
Endorsement	Wallace (D)	Fitzpatrick (R)
Individuals
Former President Barack Obama (D)	✔
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg	✔
Organizations
Pennsylvania AFL-CIO		✔
Everytown for Gun Safety		✔
Giffords		✔
Democratic Jewish Outreach of Pennsylvania	✔

Timeline

• October 29, 2018: Planned Parenthood disclosed another $734,000 in spending on digital ads opposing Fitzpatrick.
• October 29, 2018: A New York Times/Siena College poll showed Fitzpatrick with 47 percent and Wallace with 46 percent. The margin of error was 4.7 percentage points.
• October 23, 2018: Planned Parenthood disclosed $730,000 in spending on digital ads opposing Fitzpatrick.
• October 21, 2018: The candidates met in a debate at Congregation Tifereth Israel in Bensalem. Read more below.
• October 19, 2018: The candidates met in a debate at Delaware Valley University. Read more below.
• October 19, 2018: Planned Parenthood disclosed $312,000 in spending on digital ads opposing Fitzpatrick.
• October 15, 2018: The Defending Main Street Super PAC spent $150,000 opposing Wallace.
• October 15, 2018: A Siena College/New York Times poll showed Wallace leading Fitzpatrick 50-43. The margin of error was 4.6 percentage points.
• October 9, 2018: Everytown for Gun Safety endorsed Brian Fitzpatrick.
• October 3, 2018: Monmouth University released a poll showing Fitzpatrick leading Wallace 50-46 in a likely voter model. The margin of error was 7.4 percentage points.
• October 1, 2018: Former President Barack Obama (D) endorsed Scott Wallace.
• September 12, 2018: The National Republican Congressional Committee spent $560,000 opposing Scott Wallace.
• September 5, 2018: The Congressional Leadership Fund spent $410,000 opposing Scott Wallace.
• June 20, 2018: The Pennsylvania AFL-CIO endorsed Fitzpatrick, making him the only Republican congressional candidate they endorsed in the state.

Campaign advertisements

This section shows advertisements released in this race. Ads released by campaigns and, if applicable, satellite groups are embedded or linked below. If you are aware of advertisements that should be included, please email us.

Scott Wallace

Support

"Orange" - Wallace campaign ad, released October 12, 2018

"Safe" - Wallace campaign ad, released September 19, 2018

"Pocket Facts" - Wallace campaign ad, released June 26, 2018

Oppose

"Pennsylvania Families" - CLF PAC ad, released October 24, 2018

"Debt" - CLF PAC ad, released October 17, 2018

"Silenced Forever" - Defending Main Street ad, released October 15, 2018

"Fabric" - NRCC ad, released October 9, 2018

"Mocking Scott" - NRCC ad, released September 25, 2018

"Uncle Phil" - Fitzpatrick campaign ad, released September 19, 2018

"Irresponsible" - NRCC ad, released September 12, 2018

"Tax Deadbeat" - Fitzpatrick campaign ad, released September 1, 2018

"Rich" - CLF ad, released August 29, 2018

"Opposing Victims" - Fitzpatrick campaign ad, released July 31, 2018

"Too Dangerous" - Fitzpatrick campaign ad, released July 16, 2018

Brian Fitzpatrick

Support

"Championing the fight against the opioid crisis" - Fitzpatrick campaign ad, released September 14, 2018

"Championing the fight against the opioid crisis" - Fitzpatrick campaign ad, released September 4, 2018

"AFL-CIO Endorses Brian Fitzpatrick" - Fitzpatrick campaign ad, released June 21, 2018

Oppose

"Independent" - Wallace ad, released October 12, 2018

"Trillions" - Wallace ad, released September 17, 2018

"Pumping Iron" - Wallace ad, released August 29, 2018

"Tax Facts" - Not One Penny ad, released March 28, 2018

Debates and forums

Oct. 21 debate

Wallace and Fitzpatrick met in a debate at Congregation Tifereth Israel in Bensalem. News outlets covered Wallace's use of an expletive during the debate.

Oct. 19 candidate forum

Wallace and Fitzpatrick met in a debate at Delaware Valley University hosted by the Central Bucks Chamber of Commerce and the Bucks County League of Women Voters.

Read a roundup of the debate from the Montgomery News-Herald and a roundup from The Intelligencer.

"Wallace and Fitzpatrick at League of Women Voters Forum" - October 19, 2018

Oct. 14 debate

Wallace and Fitzpatrick met in a debate at Shir Ami.

Read a roundup of the debate from the Jewish Exponent.

Campaign themes

Brian Fitzpatrick

Fitzpatrick’s campaign website stated the following:

“	Proven Leadership for Our Communities Focused on Solutions No more finger pointing. Now more than ever, we need real leadership that focuses on finding solutions and getting things done. That is the attitude I have brought to Congress, as it reflects the values of our community. Our nation faces critical challenges. The key to rising to the challenges before us is to focus on priorities like keeping our families safe and putting the American Dream back on track. Protecting Our Families: Author of the INTERDICT Act signed into law by the President, providing greater resources to law enforcement to stop the flow of deadly fentanyl from Mexico into communities such as our own. Supports giving federal, state and local law enforcement all of the tools necessary to keep us safe. Securing the border through a physical barrier, aerial surveillance, enhanced human intelligence program, and the formation of a Federal agent / National Guard Task Force. Supported tougher penalties for repeat illegal immigration offenders and illegal immigrants who are members of a criminal gang. Vice Chair of the Bipartisan Heroin Task Force: Brian Fitzpatrick is a nationally-recognized, award-winning leader in uniting families, communities, law enforcement, and healthcare providers to fight back against the scourge of addiction. Protecting those who protect us by supporting tougher penalties for those who target our first responders and proposing expanded benefits for the children of our heroic fallen law enforcement officers. Supported tougher sanctions on North Korea to cut off the flow of money to this state sponsor of terrorism and human rights violator. Supported tougher sanctions on Iran’s illegal ballistic missile program as well as standing up to Iranian aggression targeting Israel and all of our allies in the Middle East. Led the charge to defend against next generation cyber threats which may wreak havoc on our security and economy. A leading advocate for securing critical transportation infrastructure from acts of terrorism. Opposed one-sided resolutions targeting our ally Israel at the United Nations as well as supported efforts to achieve justice for American victims of Palestinian terrorism. Opportunity for All: Supported a simpler, fairer tax code. Across our communities, small businesses are already hiring more while their workers receive bonuses and higher take-home pay. Supports policies that put American manufacturing at the forefront of our economy, as it creates family sustaining careers and true wealth for our nation. Puts American workers first by reforming unfair trade deals that put the American worker at a disadvantage through no fault of their own. Supported a continuous review and the repeal of outdated federal regulations holding back local small businesses and their employees. A leader in the fight for vocational education & apprenticeships to prepare workers right here at home for the careers of the future. A leader of bipartisan initiatives to reduce the cost of college as well as college debt through increased transparency and interest-free loans. On his first day in office, Brian Fitzpatrick proposed a comprehensive government reform plan challenging the career politicians in Washington Supports term limits for all Members of Congress. Not only proposed “No Budget, No Pay” legislation so legislators who fail to pass a budget on time do not get paid, but lived up to the standard, returning his pay for the period of a government shutdown. Supports abolishing Congressional pensions. Supports establishing single issue voting to end the cynical process of filling bills up with non-related items. In favor of forcing the bureaucrats to defend every taxpayer dollar they spend by enacting “zero-based” budgeting. Supports a Balanced-Budget Amendment to our Constitution to end the limitless borrowing which is crippling our future. In favor of ending the Federal government’s duplication of agencies and programs, a practice that costs our economy billions of dollars. Supports bolstering and empowering the Office of Inspectors General (OIGs) to aggressively investigate and prosecute all instances of Fraud, Waste and Abuse in federal agencies, which costs taxpayers billions annually. Defends our veterans right to see the physicians of their choice, as opposed to being hand strung to an inconvenient and impractical VA system. Protecting Medicare & Social Security: “Like you, my parents worked a lifetime to earn their Medicare and Social Security. Some politicians seek to cut these programs. I will fight to protect and strengthen these programs for all of our seniors.” A Health Care System That Works for Everyone: With skyrocketing costs and thousands uninsured locally, Obamacare is failing. Every man, woman, and child should have affordable health insurance. Author of RIGHT TO TRY legislation like that supported by the President in the State of the Union, that would give those suffering from a terminal disease the chance to try potentially lifesaving treatments. Stood Up for Women and Women’s Health, calling for doubling women’s health funding at the National Institutes of Health in order to expand services and accessibility at women’s health clinics. Supported greater research into potential cures for life-threatening diseases as well as raising awareness of risk factors for breast cancer. Supported tort reforms to drive down the cost of healthcare. Voted to Repeal the bureaucratic Independent Payment Advisory Boards established by Obamacare Sponsored legislation to maintain the safety of medical devices Spoke out to defend Medicare Advantage benefits for seniors.	”
—Brian Fitzpatrick’s campaign website (2018)

Scott Wallace

Wallace’s campaign website stated the following:

“	Climate Change Donald Trump is so desperate to ignore science that he’s banned parts of the government from using words like “climate change,” and he’s perpetuated the dangerous lie that climate change is a hoax by the Chinese. Climate change is real, it is dangerous, and we ignore it at our own peril. For the past fifteen years, the charitable organization Christy and I have run has become a leader in the fight against climate change. We’ve worked to empower grassroots movements to raise awareness and fight climate change, and to hasten the transition to a prosperous clean-energy future, with jobs, economic opportunity, and a healthier planet for all. Instead of leaders like Trump who say that climate change is a “con job,” we need representatives who will embrace the clean-energy future. The only “con job” when it comes to climate change is Donald Trump. He lies about the science and hires climate-deniers like Scott Pruitt to sabotage the Environmental Protection Agency, so he can keep protecting oil and coal special interests at the expense of our kids’ future. Here’s where I stand: We need to reinstate the Paris climate treaty and the Clean Power Plan. Restore the EPA’s power to regulate climate pollution. Change our system of tax incentives to move away from carbon-based fuels toward renewable energy. Climate change is not just a crisis, but an opportunity to create millions of new jobs and protect our planet. But we have to commit to the fight, and we have to stand up to the truth-deniers like Donald Trump. It’s time to stop dragging our feet when it comes to finding real solutions to combat climate change. Good Government I will introduce legislation to require that any candidate for President must disclose their tax returns. Any person elected President must immediately divest from profit-making business enterprises which may present a conflict of interest or violate the Emoluments Clauses of the U.S. Constitution, and he or she must place all assets into a blind trust managed by an independent trustee, who cannot be a relative of the President. The same requirements for divestment and blind-trust will apply to presidential appointees, even ones who are not the daughter and son-in-law of the President. No President should be permitted to use their office for personal gain, whether in multi-million-dollar payments to the President’s office buildings, hotels, golf courses, country clubs, or any other scheme. The American people deserve to know that the decisions made by the country’s leaders are driven exclusively by the common good, never by personal financial gain or self-protection. Guns Deadly military assault rifles are being used to slaughter kids in schools and worshipers in church. Donald Trump takes $30 million in campaign contributions from the NRA, and promises he will “never, ever” let them down. And does absolutely nothing to restrict assault weapons. His proposal to arm teachers will only make things worse. Saying the solution to guns in schools is MORE guns in schools is like saying the solution to lung cancer is cigarettes. In Congress, I’ll take on Donald Trump and the NRA. Here’s what I’ll push for: Ban assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, bump stocks and silencers. Background checks on EVERY gun purchase, closing the loopholes for gun shows, internet sales and transfers to a “friend” or family. Hold gun manufacturers to the same legal standard as every other industry whose products negligently cause death – from cigarettes to cars to oil wells. Congress ridiculously granted gun manufacturers immunity in 2005, at the urging of the NRA. I’m also proud to say that my campaign has been given the Moms Demand Action Gun Sense Candidate distinction. When I’m in Congress, we will fight for the common sense gun safety reforms that millions of Americans are demanding. Health care Every year, your health care bill keeps going up. But health insurance and drug companies are some of the most profitable businesses in America — and some of the most influential in Congress. And their profits come out of your pocket. Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress would make things worse. They’re trying to throw millions of Americans off of their health care, cut Medicaid and Medicare, and eliminate protections for those with pre-existing conditions. Their plan would even make older Americans pay more for care. Here’s how I will protect health care: In Congress, I’ll stand up to Donald Trump and his Republican buddies in Congress. They’ve already decimated Obamacare by starving it of funding and killing the individual mandate, driving up premiums for everybody. I say it’s time for Medicare for All. My wife Christy and I are now on Medicare, and believe me, it’s great! Despite Republican scare tactics, there’s no government bureaucrat between us and our doctor. The only change for us has been – zero bills to pay when we leave the doctor’s office! Medicaid is a lifeline to millions of Americans with disabilities, those who live in poverty, children, and seniors in nursing homes. We must protect it, and work to preserve and expand the Medicaid expansion that was a part of the Affordable Care Act. We must fight to preserve the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP. Its funding is a no-brainer, and must never again be made a political football. Prescription drug prices in America are the highest in the world, because the government is legislatively prohibited from negotiating lower prices. This must change. I believe health policy should be driven by what’s good for the American people, not for the pharmaceutical companies or the health insurance lobby. Immigration We are a nation of immigrants. Most of us came here from somewhere else. Historically we have celebrated our nation’s diversity, but today, many want to close the door and turn away those who seek the same opportunities that we’ve been afforded. Donald Trump’s fear-mongering and racist rhetoric about immigrants is shameful and un-American. We do need sensible laws to regulate immigration, but Trump’s proposed border wall is offensive and impractical. And deporting all 11 million undocumented immigrants living, raising families, and contributing to the economy of America is absolutely not an option. President Eisenhower tried mass deportations in the 1950s, and it was a disaster, with human rights abuses, legal due process violations, and a black eye on America’s global reputation. Congress must ensure that families are reunited, and prevent our immigration system from ever again being used to inflict such pointless trauma on children. I do not support abolishing ICE. The problem is not the agency, but the inhumane policies foisted upon it by the Trump administration. We must restore the pathway to legal status for Dreamers, the hundreds of thousands of immigrants who were brought to America as children by their parents. Nine out of 10 Americans support reinstating Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). It is unconscionable that Trump dismantled it, and that Congress has not yet acted to restore it. Ultimately, Congress must enact comprehensive immigration reform that includes not just sensible immigration controls, but also a pathway to legal status for the millions of undocumented residents who have been tax-paying, law-abiding, productively engaged members of American society. It was a difficult multi-year process the last time Congress enacted comprehensive immigration reform, in 1986 – I know, because I was working for the chair of the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, Senator Alan Simpson – and everybody had to give a little, but the result was solid bipartisan consensus. I know we can do it again, if we act in good faith, based on real facts, and the best interest of the nation. International Relations Don’t allow Donald Trump to decimate the budget for diplomacy. As his Defense Secretary, James Mattis, once said: “If you don’t fund the state department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition…” Trump has no idea what diplomacy does. He only understands brute force, and only admires brutal autocrats. And as a wise person once said: if all you’ve got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Our job in Congress must be to prevent conflict, not stoke it. And service members and their families are the first to get this. Preventing it means not only smart and careful diplomacy to recognize the warning signs and negotiate de-escalation and nonviolent resolution, but also looking further upstream to the root causes of conflict. Two fundamental drivers of conflict are population growth and climate change – issues which my wife, Christy, and I have spent decades working to mitigate. Adding another billion people to the planet, while allowing climate change to flood vast swaths of low-lying land, from Miami to Manhattan to Bangladesh – or to ruin vast arable lands with drought, fire and deforestation – is a recipe for mass migration, refugees, political upheaval, competition for scarce life-sustaining resources, and ultimately violent conflict. The most important things we can do to avoid conflict and global war is to intelligently manage these twin pressures of unchecked population growth and climate-driven devastation. When it comes to matters of war and peace, I would introduce legislation putting teeth in the Constitution’s mandate that only Congress has the power to declare war. It would specifically prohibit any person in the nuclear chain of command from implementing a nuclear-launch order from the President in the absence of an explicit congressional authorization and would establish a process for rapid congressional review. This would allow the dedicated public servants in the nuclear chain of command to refuse to implement an unlawful order from the President without fear of punishment from their Commander in Chief. THE U.S.-ISRAEL RELATIONSHIP America has had a unique relationship with the state of Israel from its very creation. I’m proud of, and deeply influenced by, my grandfather’s leading role in the establishment of the state of Israel. When he was Vice President, he pushed Franklin Roosevelt – unsuccessfully – to publicly endorse a Jewish homeland. As a key cabinet member under Harry Truman, he pushed a skeptical Truman on the issue of Israeli statehood. And after leaving the cabinet and running for president himself, he played a leading role in the establishment of the United Nations, under whose aegis the state of Israel was created, setting the stage for Truman’s recognition of it. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and a key ally in an unstable region. She is a pivotal trading partner and a key strategic ally against terrorism and weapons proliferation. It is a universal truth that cooperation in the areas of defense and counter-terrorism have enhanced the security of both nations, but the U.S.-Israel relationship is also built on an unshakable commitment to shared democratic values and interests. This relationship has personal importance to me; I have numerous cousins who are Israeli citizens or dual U.S./Israeli citizens with a deep commitment to long-term peace in the region. If elected to Congress, I am committed to working to further enhance our relationship with Israel and working with my colleagues to support that shared goal. FOREIGN AID I am proud that the U.S. has consistently stood with Israel over the past seven decades, providing billions of dollars in bilateral aid annually and championing regional negotiations for peace and stability. As Israel’s strongest and most dependable ally, the U.S. has a special obligation to provide bilateral assistance. A significant portion of the annual aid that Israel receives from the U.S. is reinvested in the U.S. economy through the creation of jobs and joint research and development projects. The technology and knowledge that is gained from these investments are invaluable to the counterterrorism and security of both Israel and the United States. I am committed to continuing this partnership and support. That means helping to maintain Israel’s qualitative military edge in the region, continuing implementation of the 2016 memorandum of understanding on security assistance, and continuing that conversation as necessary. I also support direct assistance to the Palestinian Authority, for collaboration with Israel on security in the West Bank, as has been successful in the recent past; we can be strong, smart and humanitarian at the same time. Additionally, I believe the United Nations has a supportive role to play and an ability to assist in defending Israel’s safety and security. MILITARY SECURITY & COUNTER TERRORISM Israel unequivocally has the right to defend itself and keep its people safe against threats from both military aggression and terrorism. That is the most fundamental and sacred responsibility of any free nation, and the right of any free people. America has a special obligation to help safeguard Israel’s security, and continuing to do so is in our mutual best interest. Hamas continues to use Gaza as a launchpad for attacks and Hezbollah continues to threaten Israel with rockets and terrorists from Lebanon and elsewhere. I will support U.S. aid for immediate threats to Israel’s national security, with missile defense systems like Iron Dome, David’s Sling, and Arrow II and III, joint military exercises, strategic planning, counter-terrorism cooperation and information-sharing, collaboration between our intelligence agencies, and maintaining a U.S. military presence and radar protection for Israeli security. We must also support continued collaboration between Palestinian and Israeli officials responsible for the security of the West Bank. But it is clear to me that, ultimately, the best protection for the people of Israel is a negotiated two-state solution allowing Israel and Palestine to live peacefully side-by-side. TWO-STATE SOLUTION I see no alternative to a two-state solution. The U.S. is in a unique position of leverage to bring together Israeli and Palestinian leaders, as Jimmy Carter did with the leaders of Israel and Egypt, and Bill Clinton did between Israel and Jordan, and Israel and the PLO. The status quo is unstable and becoming more polarized, with Hamas on the rise and the Palestinian Authority fading. I support a peace process arising from direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians, because long-term peace requires more than just physical border security. Israel has to be recognized as a Jewish democratic state alongside a non-militarized Palestinian state. The United States certainly has a role to play but it should be facilitation of a peace process, not setting pre-conditions. The continued construction of settlements does complicate the prospects for negotiating secure and stable borders. THE CAPITAL OF ISRAEL Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel for three millennia, approved by Congress as the site of the U.S. Embassy more than two decades ago. What’s unfortunate is the way the Trump administration executed the move, precipitously, politically, using the occasion to stoke partisan and evangelical divisions in the U.S. and violent conflict in Israel, rather than as a component or marker of broader peace negotiations. BDS I firmly oppose the BDS movement, which is hostile to Israel and incompatible with any balanced approach to a two-state solution. I expressly disavow the BDS grants which were made in the past by my family’s foundation, the Wallace Global Fund. They were made at the initiative of another board member, from discretionary grant funds not controlled by me. I am unequivocally pro-Israel, pro-peace and pro-democracy. IRAN SECURITY THREATS The Iran nuclear deal – the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – was an imperfect and time-limited cure for Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but I believe it offered the best possible opportunity to slow down Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons. I view the Administration’s recent decision to violate our commitment and withdraw from the JCPOA as precipitous and dangerous. Iran’s destabilizing behavior goes beyond nuclear activity. Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and a broader threat to regional security and instability. I would prefer to have strengthened and expanded upon the existing nuclear deal by including ballistic missiles and addressing Iran’s non-nuclear aggression in the region. A nuclear-armed Iran is unacceptable, and a diplomatic outcome remains the best and most enduring solution. Jobs The march of time and technology has always transformed America, our economy, and the type of jobs we create. Horse-and-buggy gave way to cars. Whale-oil gave way to electricity. The internet, and our new information-based economy, is transforming everything. Let’s embrace it. And lead the way in the 21st Century. Our energy future is clean, and green. Transforming our energy infrastructure from digging up and burning dirty carbon-based fuels to the clean renewable energy of the future will create millions of new, good-paying jobs – in areas like solar, wind, and making buildings more energy efficient through improvements like better insulation and smart thermostats. If we invest wisely, America can not only can solve our planet’s climate emergency but transform industry and strengthen our economy. A critical part of sustainable jobs is building a clearer, cheaper pathway to employable skills for young people. Not every kid needs or wants a four-year liberal arts education, with hundreds of thousands of dollars of accompanying student debt. Here in Bucks County, we have three terrific vocational-technical schools, offering instruction in emerging new sectors like renewable energy and computer technology, which can launch a good-paying career without the debt. Low-cost community college, like the great Bucks County Community College, can also let students graduate with marketable skills and without crushing debt. One of my proudest accomplishments as a nonprofit lawyer is working several years to pass federal legislation to pay off $60,000 in college debt for students who commit to a career as a low-paid prosecutor or public defender, and now I want to help every single student in America graduate without debt. Another key component of strengthening our economy is ensuring that no one who works full-time is living in poverty, which is why I support increasing the minimum wage to a living wage of $15 per hour. Raising the minimum wage will lift millions of families out of poverty and help close the widening income inequality gap, particularly for workers of color. I also know that economic security means more than just having a good job now; we have to protect the promise of a secure retirement in the future. Our workers have earned it. That is why I will fight to protect and expand Social Security. Our economic future lies in a well-trained workforce and matching that workforce to the needs of industry. LGBTQ Rights I am a proud and faithful ally in the battle to protect the civil rights of every Pennsylvanian and American regardless of who they love or who they are. The LGBTQ community has suffered from senseless acts of violence, employment discrimination, poverty, restricted access to health care, and threats to marriage equality. It saddens me that even now, in the 21st century, people are facing discrimination based simply on their sexual orientation or gender identity, and that there is no federal or Pennsylvania law that protects LGBTQ people from this discrimination. That needs to change now. While we’ve made great strides, we still have a long road ahead of us. On my to-do list: Enact the Equality Act to prohibit discrimination or segregation in employment, housing, credit, education, and federally funded programs. It is critically important to address discriminatory practices in schools that put LGBTQ youth at risk. Amend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act so that it cannot be misused to justify discrimination on the pretext of religion. Oversight and accountability for the Trump administration’s attacks on the rights of transgender people. Support legislation banning the Gay and Trans “Panic” Defense, which is a legal defense that excuses violence based on bigotry and ignorance against the LGBTQ community. Support legislation to study and address the particular barriers encountered by LGBTQ people of color, in areas such as education, employment, economic insecurity and criminal justice. I’ve been endorsed by the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ civil-rights organization, and Equality PAC and I know that with those endorsements comes great responsibility, which I do not take lightly. It’s time that America becomes a real leader in the protection of rights for all individuals. All Americans deserve the same opportunities and the same level of dignity. Money in Politics Special interest money pollutes everything that politicians do in Washington. More than a century ago, when Republican Teddy Roosevelt was President, Congress recognized the obvious corruption wrought by corporate money in politics, and passed the Tillman Act, completely prohibiting corporations from giving money to political candidates or parties. But in 2010, a tone-deaf Supreme Court ruled exactly opposite, in the notorious Citizens United case, allowing corporations to spend unlimited amounts influencing elections. One giant step backward. In a perfect world, Americans would rise in unison to demand a constitutional amendment to override Citizens United: when it comes to elections, corporations are not people, and money is not speech, and Congress should be able to impose reasonable limits on the timing and amount of campaign fundraising and spending. But the reality is that amending the Constitution is extraordinarily difficult – requiring supermajorities in both Houses of Congress and among the state legislatures. A very heavy lift. But that doesn’t mean it’s not worth trying, at the very least to educate and mobilize people. In the meantime, we can: Pass a law mandating that corporations disclose all their political spending. The Supreme Court in Citizens United blithely assumed transparency, but Congress refused to enact it. Transparency will empower the people to reward or punish corporations for their political spending. Ultimately, corporations will have to scale back, realizing that ANY political spending will alienate half their customer base. Public financing, with a higher match rate for low-dollar contributions – for example, contributions under $100 will be matched 6-to-1. Or the voucher system implemented in many cities across the country, where voters get, say, $200 in government vouchers and can allocate them as they wish among different political campaigns. Shift the power from corporations to the people. Mandate the Securities Exchange Commission to require all corporations to disclose their political spending, the same way they are already required to disclose the compensation they pay their CEO’s. Unlike practically every Republican candidate in the country, I refuse to take money from corporate PACs or lobbyists. I will personally match every dollar contributed to my campaign by a person within this district. I will be nobody’s Congressman but your own. You will never have to scratch your head wondering if that vote I cast was for my corporate benefactors, or for the people of this great district. Opioids I have spent a lot of my legal career working on issues of criminal justice. The question is – if America has only five percent of the world’s population, why do we have 25 percent of the world’s prisoners? Are Americans really five times more crime-prone than the rest of the world? Or are we just making bad policy choices that devastate families, leave major problems like drug addiction and mental illness unaddressed, and cheat good law-abiding citizens by pretending that prison will break the cycle of crime and recidivism and make us all safer? My career has been devoted to breaking the cycle. Every prosecutor, every judge, every public defender knows that every unaddressed problem of addiction, mental illness, homelessness or PTSD is an invitation to more recidivism. I served years on the board of the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, where judges, prosecutors and public defenders came together to make sure that criminal-case outcomes were focused on addiction and recidivism prevention. And I’ve worked on numerous projects for the U.S. Department of Justice exploring ways that judges, prosecutors and public defenders can collaborate on constructive crime-prevention case resolutions. Of course, law enforcement tools are essential in going after big-time drug dealers. But if there’s one thing we’ve learned from our expensive failures in the drug war, it’s that law enforcement can’t do it alone. What about the addicts who sell small quantities to support their own habit? Treatment holds greater promise of breaking the cycle of drugs, crime and recidivism – that is, greater benefit to public safety, at lower cost. In the face of all this experience, Donald Trump and congressional Republicans are returning to their long-standing favorites for addressing drugs: more law enforcement, prison, and even executions. We must be smarter than this. Opioids, as legal prescription drugs, also present a special challenge. Unlike illegal drugs, there are huge opportunities for regulation and training via the pharmaceutical industry and the medical profession. And an ounce of prevention, education and treatment is worth a pound of punishment. Redistricting Reform My parents raised me to believe that in a democracy, voters get to choose their politicians. It is shocking that instead, today, politicians get to choose their voters. Every ten years, legislators can design bizarre maps that slice and dice the electorate, to preserve their own partisan advantage. We end up with districts that look like “Goofy kicking Donald Duck,” as one district in Pennsylvania has been described. Republicans in Pennsylvania are so good at gerrymandering that they were able to capture three-quarters of the state’s seats in Congress, while winning barely half of the votes. Fortunately, this scheme was invalidated by our Pennsylvania Supreme Court and just recently confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. Now voters are blessed with nonpartisan maps, where the actual will of the people determines their legislative representation. And what is the reaction of Pennsylvania Republicans? Incredibly, they are moving to impeach the state judges who found their blatant gerrymandering in violation of the state constitution. I suppose the lesson is: if the ref catches you committing a foul, fire the ref. We need a nonpartisan redistricting process at both the state and federal level. I will commit to carry the battle in Congress for fair federal congressional districts. This is not a partisan issue. It is equally wrong, whether done by Republicans or Democrats. The people must rule, not the politicians. Women’s Rights I spent my childhood watching my parents – who both served terms as president of Planned Parenthood of Bucks County – fight to promote reproductive rights for women and girls here in Pennsylvania. That shaped my career, and also the man I am today. As a young lawyer, I worked for the Philadelphia Women’s Law Project on a successful challenge to Pennsylvania’s restrictive anti-choice law. Fifteen years ago, my wife, Christy, and I inherited my family’s foundation, the Wallace Global Fund, an international nonprofit organization dedicated to family planning and abortion rights worldwide. Christy and I have rededicated the foundation more broadly to advancing women’s rights, fighting against harmful patriarchal practices like child marriage and female genital mutilation, promoting women’s economic empowerment through access to microenterprise loans, educating investors about the value of investing in women-run businesses, and promoting access to family planning and girls’ education — which is critical to ensuring that women have agency over their own bodies and can participate fully in society. As your representative in Congress, I will rely on my decades of experience as a zealous advocate for the rights of women and girls to implement meaningful policy solutions that will improve the lives of women and families right here in the first district. Equal Pay for Equal Work: Women still earn around 80 cents to a man’s dollar for the same work, and the statistics are even worse for women of color. Instead of rolling back equal pay protections, like Donald Trump did last year, I will work to ensure that women are compensated fairly. It’s not just the right thing to do; it makes economic sense. If women were paid fairly, the American economy would see more than $500 billion in additional economic activity and millions of families would be lifted out of poverty. Reproductive Rights: The rights of women to make their own reproductive healthcare decisions is constantly under attack. Through my decades of work as an advocate for global family planning services, and as a proud parent myself, I know how important it is to protect the rights of women and families to make their own healthcare decisions. As your representative in Congress, I will support the full funding of Planned Parenthood for family planning and reproductive health services, and I will fight against dangerous, restrictive laws that impede on the ability of women and their doctors to make the best choices. It’s on Us: We must actively work to end rape culture and combat sexual violence and harassment everywhere — in the workplace, on college campuses, in the military, and even in the halls of Congress and the White House. I will work with leaders in all levels of government to ensure adequate resources to combat sexual assault and stronger protections for survivors of sexual violence. What I won’t do is protect perpetrators of sexual harassment or sexual violence — no matter their position, their politics, or their past. It is outrageous that Paul Ryan and this Congress have allowed taxpayer dollars to be used to make secret payments to settle claims of sexual harassment against Members of Congress. And it is ridiculous that after so many women have accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct, our Republican Congress and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick cannot muster the courage to condemn his behavior, let alone take any action. Supporting Working Families: Out of 41 industrialized nations around the world, the United States is the only one that does not guarantee paid parental leave. We also have millions of workers who are faced with impossible decisions each day: go to work sick; leave a sick loved one home alone; or risk losing their job. This has to change, but first, our leaders and our priorities must change. Instead of spending trillions on tax cuts for the rich, I will work to implement common-sense solutions that support working families, such as paid parental leave, expanded sick and family medical leave, and policies that make childcare more affordable. When we empower women and families with policies like this, we are empowering our next generation of leaders and ensuring that they have the right to self-determination in this world. This is powerfully resonant with me because of my parents’ passion and because of my own daughters. The voters of Pennsylvania’s First Congressional District deserve a Representative who is a lifelong progressive Democrat, with decades of experience actually working for women’s rights and empowerment. As I learned in Quaker meeting, “Let your life speak.”	”
—Scott Wallace’s campaign website (2018)

Social media

Twitter accounts

Tweets by Scott Wallace Tweets by Brian Fitzpatrick

Facebook accounts

Click the icons below to visit the candidates' Facebook pages.

Scott Wallace

Brian Fitzpatrick

Republican district won by Hillary Clinton

See also: U.S. House districts represented by a Republican and won by Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Split-ticket districts in the 2016 presidential and U.S. House elections

This district was one of 25 Republican-held U.S. House districts that Hillary Clinton (D) won in the 2016 presidential election. Nearly all were expected to be among the House's most competitive elections in 2018.

Click on the table below to see the full list of districts.

2018 election results in Republican-held U.S. House districts won by Hillary Clinton in 2016
District	Incumbent	2018 winner	2018 margin	2016 presidential margin	2012 presidential margin
Arizona's 2nd	Martha McSally	Ann Kirkpatrick	D+9.5	Clinton+4.9	Romney+1.5
California's 10th	Jeff Denham	Josh Harder	D+2.6	Clinton+3.0	Obama+3.6
California's 21st	David Valadao	TJ Cox	D+0.8	Clinton+15.5	Obama+11.1
California's 25th	Steve Knight	Katie Hill	D+6.4	Clinton+6.7	Romney+1.9
California's 39th	Ed Royce	Gil Cisneros	D+1.4	Clinton+8.6	Romney+3.7
California's 45th	Mimi Walters	Katie Porter	D+1.6	Clinton+5.4	Romney+11.8
California's 48th	Dana Rohrabacher	Harley Rouda	D+5.8	Clinton+1.7	Romney+11.7
California's 49th	Darrell Issa	Mike Levin	D+7.4	Clinton+7.5	Romney+6.7
Colorado's 6th	Mike Coffman	Jason Crow	D+11.2	Clinton+8.9	Obama+5.1
Florida's 26th	Carlos Curbelo	Debbie Mucarsel-Powell	D+1.8	Clinton+16.1	Obama+11.5
Florida's 27th	Ileana Ros-Lehtinen	Donna Shalala	D+6.0	Clinton+19.7	Obama+6.7
Illinois' 6th	Peter Roskam	Sean Casten	D+5.6	Clinton+7.0	Romney+8.2
Kansas' 3rd	Kevin Yoder	Sharice Davids	D+9.1	Clinton+1.2	Romney+9.5
Minnesota's 3rd	Erik Paulsen	Dean Phillips	D+11.4	Clinton+9.4	Obama+0.8
New Jersey's 7th	Leonard Lance	Tom Malinowski	D+4.7	Clinton+1.1	Romney+6.2
New York's 24th	John Katko	John Katko	R+6.3	Clinton+3.6	Obama+15.9
Pennsylvania's 1st	Brian Fitzpatrick	Brian Fitzpatrick	R+2.6	Clinton+2.0	Obama+2.6
Pennsylvania's 5th	Pat Meehan	Mary Gay Scanlon	D+30.2	Clinton+28.2	Obama+27.7
Pennsylvania's 6th	Ryan Costello	Chrissy Houlahan	D+17.6	Clinton+9.3	Obama+3.2
Pennsylvania's 7th	Charlie Dent	Susan Wild	D+11.3	Clinton+1.1	Obama+7.0
Texas' 7th	John Culberson	Lizzie Pannill Fletcher	D+5.0	Clinton+1.4	Romney+21.3
Texas' 23rd	Will Hurd	Will Hurd	R+0.5	Clinton+3.4	Romney+2.6
Texas' 32nd	Pete Sessions	Colin Allred	D+6.3	Clinton+1.9	Romney+15.5
Virginia's 10th	Barbara Comstock	Jennifer Wexton	D+12.4	Clinton+10.0	Romney+1.6
Washington's 8th	David Reichert	Kim Schrier	D+6.2	Clinton+3.0	Obama+1.6

Click here to see the 13 Democratic-held U.S. House districts that Donald Trump (R) won.

Click here to see an overview of all split-ticket districts in the 2016 presidential and U.S. House elections..

Pivot Counties

See also: Pivot Counties by state

Three of 67 Pennsylvania counties—4.5 percent—are pivot counties. These are counties that voted for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012 and for Donald Trump (R) in 2016. Altogether, the nation had 206 pivot counties, with most being concentrated in upper midwestern and northeastern states.

Counties won by Trump in 2016 and Obama in 2012 and 2008
County	Trump margin of victory in 2016	Obama margin of victory in 2012	Obama margin of victory in 2008
Erie County, Pennsylvania	1.56%	16.03%	19.88%
Luzerne County, Pennsylvania	19.31%	4.81%	8.41%
Northampton County, Pennsylvania	3.78%	4.71%	12.30%

In the 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump (R) won Pennsylvania with 48.2 percent of the vote. Hillary Clinton (D) received 47.5 percent. In presidential elections between 1900 and 2016, Pennsylvania cast votes for the winning presidential candidate 76.7 percent of the time. In that same time frame, Pennsylvania supported Republican candidates for president more often than Democratic candidates, 53.3 to 43.3 percent. The state, however, favored Democrats in every presidential election between 2000 and 2012, but voted Republican in 2016.

Presidential results by legislative district

The following table details results of the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections by state House districts in Pennsylvania. Click [show] to expand the table. The "Obama," "Romney," "Clinton," and "Trump" columns describe the percent of the vote each presidential candidate received in the district. The "2012 Margin" and "2016 Margin" columns describe the margin of victory between the two presidential candidates in those years. The "Party Control" column notes which party held that seat heading into the 2018 general election. Data on the results of the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections broken down by state legislative districts was compiled by Daily Kos.

In 2012, Barack Obama (D) won 89 out of 203 state House districts in Pennsylvania with an average margin of victory of 37.4 points. In 2016, Hillary Clinton (D) won 84 out of 203 state House districts in Pennsylvania with an average margin of victory of 37.3 points. Clinton won 19 districts controlled by Republicans heading into the 2018 elections.

In 2012, Mitt Romney (R) won 114 out of 203 state House districts in Pennsylvania with an average margin of victory of 20 points. In 2016, Donald Trump (R) won 119 out of 203 state House districts in Pennsylvania with an average margin of victory of 28.2 points. Trump won 17 districts controlled by Democrats heading into the 2018 elections.

2016 Presidential Results by state House District '
District	Obama	Romney	2012 Margin	Clinton	Trump	2016 Margin	Party Control
1	74.23%	24.51%	D+49.7	62.96%	33.11%	D+29.8	D
2	64.16%	34.60%	D+29.6	54.43%	40.91%	D+13.5	D
3	52.42%	46.30%	D+6.1	45.74%	49.76%	R+4	D
4	47.98%	50.56%	R+2.6	34.90%	60.52%	R+25.6	R
5	39.20%	59.23%	R+20	30.95%	64.64%	R+33.7	R
6	41.46%	56.84%	R+15.4	33.98%	61.68%	R+27.7	R
7	58.14%	40.56%	D+17.6	44.84%	51.68%	R+6.8	D
8	31.90%	66.60%	R+34.7	24.28%	71.25%	R+47	R
9	47.63%	51.12%	R+3.5	36.69%	60.36%	R+23.7	D
10	45.01%	53.45%	R+8.4	35.93%	59.86%	R+23.9	R
11	34.69%	63.96%	R+29.3	28.50%	66.88%	R+38.4	R
12	29.48%	69.55%	R+40.1	31.88%	64.41%	R+32.5	R
13	43.63%	55.27%	R+11.6	42.73%	53.04%	R+10.3	R
14	38.01%	60.67%	R+22.7	32.28%	64.15%	R+31.9	R
15	37.23%	61.54%	R+24.3	31.00%	65.48%	R+34.5	R
16	53.92%	44.73%	D+9.2	46.00%	50.52%	R+4.5	D
17	42.32%	56.30%	R+14	29.47%	66.56%	R+37.1	R
18	57.88%	40.91%	D+17	52.85%	44.12%	D+8.7	R
19	86.11%	12.84%	D+73.3	83.38%	13.65%	D+69.7	D
20	61.01%	37.46%	D+23.6	60.52%	34.84%	D+25.7	D
21	57.83%	40.46%	D+17.4	59.05%	36.62%	D+22.4	D
22	76.43%	22.64%	D+53.8	72.60%	24.54%	D+48.1	D
23	73.62%	24.04%	D+49.6	80.06%	16.36%	D+63.7	D
24	90.72%	8.31%	D+82.4	90.51%	7.00%	D+83.5	D
25	51.85%	47.12%	D+4.7	50.07%	46.87%	D+3.2	D
26	45.47%	53.34%	R+7.9	43.50%	52.49%	R+9	R
27	63.70%	34.87%	D+28.8	60.79%	35.34%	D+25.5	D
28	36.63%	62.52%	R+25.9	43.46%	52.61%	R+9.2	R
29	45.87%	53.06%	R+7.2	46.10%	50.52%	R+4.4	R
30	40.91%	58.24%	R+17.3	44.48%	51.61%	R+7.1	R
31	50.76%	48.04%	D+2.7	55.20%	41.17%	D+14	D
32	60.05%	38.99%	D+21.1	59.16%	37.83%	D+21.3	D
33	49.03%	49.75%	R+0.7	45.55%	50.80%	R+5.3	D
34	68.62%	30.16%	D+38.5	68.78%	28.17%	D+40.6	D
35	63.94%	35.20%	D+28.7	57.89%	39.41%	D+18.5	D
36	60.88%	37.46%	D+23.4	56.42%	39.30%	D+17.1	D
37	28.95%	69.66%	R+40.7	26.19%	69.00%	R+42.8	R
38	50.42%	48.41%	D+2	46.28%	50.58%	R+4.3	D
39	40.59%	58.52%	R+17.9	36.49%	60.37%	R+23.9	R
40	36.83%	62.34%	R+25.5	41.12%	55.57%	R+14.4	R
41	42.46%	56.09%	R+13.6	41.74%	53.32%	R+11.6	R
42	55.31%	43.47%	D+11.8	60.20%	35.63%	D+24.6	D
43	36.53%	62.17%	R+25.6	36.27%	58.57%	R+22.3	R
44	41.51%	57.51%	R+16	43.16%	53.29%	R+10.1	R
45	51.33%	47.58%	D+3.7	49.81%	46.66%	D+3.2	D
46	44.33%	54.63%	R+10.3	39.68%	56.72%	R+17	R
47	40.06%	58.68%	R+18.6	34.74%	60.75%	R+26	R
48	45.49%	53.23%	R+7.7	40.70%	55.39%	R+14.7	D
49	49.95%	48.61%	D+1.3	37.74%	58.75%	R+21	R
50	46.33%	52.50%	R+6.2	33.66%	63.80%	R+30.1	D
51	41.10%	57.87%	R+16.8	30.84%	66.70%	R+35.9	R
52	40.85%	57.93%	R+17.1	30.15%	67.36%	R+37.2	R
53	48.81%	49.75%	R+0.9	48.69%	46.74%	D+2	R
54	36.11%	62.89%	R+26.8	34.91%	61.80%	R+26.9	R
55	39.89%	58.83%	R+18.9	31.43%	65.24%	R+33.8	D
56	34.08%	64.90%	R+30.8	31.32%	65.45%	R+34.1	R
57	36.37%	62.35%	R+26	33.60%	62.73%	R+29.1	R
58	43.41%	55.41%	R+12	34.02%	63.22%	R+29.2	R
59	31.93%	66.81%	R+34.9	26.42%	70.50%	R+44.1	R
60	30.82%	67.77%	R+37	24.08%	72.85%	R+48.8	R
61	51.45%	47.61%	D+3.8	56.68%	39.73%	D+16.9	R
62	43.10%	55.21%	R+12.1	34.47%	61.69%	R+27.2	R
63	29.59%	68.69%	R+39.1	22.17%	74.25%	R+52.1	R
64	34.96%	63.20%	R+28.2	26.01%	69.72%	R+43.7	R
65	39.55%	58.80%	R+19.3	27.22%	68.57%	R+41.4	R
66	27.05%	71.53%	R+44.5	18.49%	78.42%	R+59.9	R
67	32.35%	65.98%	R+33.6	22.32%	74.12%	R+51.8	R
68	31.27%	66.99%	R+35.7	20.98%	74.62%	R+53.6	R
69	25.99%	72.68%	R+46.7	18.90%	78.57%	R+59.7	R
70	63.08%	35.97%	D+27.1	63.15%	33.72%	D+29.4	D
71	42.84%	55.39%	R+12.5	34.58%	62.24%	R+27.7	D
72	37.01%	61.10%	R+24.1	26.49%	70.36%	R+43.9	D
73	38.10%	60.27%	R+22.2	24.79%	72.19%	R+47.4	R
74	62.76%	36.10%	D+26.7	60.37%	35.55%	D+24.8	R
75	36.38%	62.06%	R+25.7	24.79%	71.59%	R+46.8	R
76	39.88%	58.53%	R+18.6	29.08%	67.03%	R+37.9	D
77	59.83%	37.36%	D+22.5	60.78%	33.56%	D+27.2	D
78	22.54%	76.40%	R+53.9	16.03%	81.71%	R+65.7	R
79	39.22%	59.27%	R+20	30.70%	65.55%	R+34.9	R
80	26.47%	72.45%	R+46	20.96%	76.10%	R+55.1	R
81	35.33%	63.30%	R+28	30.25%	66.04%	R+35.8	R
82	26.74%	72.05%	R+45.3	19.62%	77.01%	R+57.4	R
83	38.82%	59.70%	R+20.9	32.82%	62.88%	R+30.1	R
84	26.66%	72.04%	R+45.4	18.99%	77.66%	R+58.7	R
85	35.45%	62.97%	R+27.5	31.55%	64.64%	R+33.1	R
86	33.17%	65.18%	R+32	25.57%	69.93%	R+44.4	R
87	41.20%	57.38%	R+16.2	41.82%	53.91%	R+12.1	R
88	41.23%	57.13%	R+15.9	41.39%	53.53%	R+12.1	R
89	34.19%	64.52%	R+30.3	29.92%	66.31%	R+36.4	R
90	28.09%	70.61%	R+42.5	22.85%	73.48%	R+50.6	R
91	37.65%	60.93%	R+23.3	32.20%	63.86%	R+31.7	R
92	31.91%	66.77%	R+34.9	28.03%	67.52%	R+39.5	R
93	34.53%	63.91%	R+29.4	31.05%	64.67%	R+33.6	R
94	35.78%	62.70%	R+26.9	28.86%	66.88%	R+38	R
95	65.14%	33.21%	D+31.9	61.43%	33.92%	D+27.5	D
96	74.86%	23.26%	D+51.6	73.28%	21.55%	D+51.7	D
97	40.15%	58.50%	R+18.4	42.36%	52.82%	R+10.5	R
98	37.73%	60.63%	R+22.9	32.52%	61.78%	R+29.3	R
99	28.97%	69.60%	R+40.6	25.97%	68.75%	R+42.8	R
100	34.03%	64.51%	R+30.5	28.29%	67.35%	R+39.1	R
101	39.74%	58.92%	R+19.2	37.40%	58.74%	R+21.3	R
102	31.56%	66.91%	R+35.3	24.88%	71.23%	R+46.3	R
103	81.25%	17.74%	D+63.5	78.28%	18.44%	D+59.8	D
104	46.98%	51.71%	R+4.7	42.83%	53.30%	R+10.5	R
105	45.32%	53.34%	R+8	44.00%	51.91%	R+7.9	R
106	43.98%	54.60%	R+10.6	43.80%	51.46%	R+7.7	R
107	42.37%	55.71%	R+13.3	28.98%	66.96%	R+38	R
108	34.84%	63.47%	R+28.6	26.52%	69.44%	R+42.9	R
109	42.93%	55.31%	R+12.4	32.18%	63.26%	R+31.1	R
110	38.40%	59.80%	R+21.4	25.85%	69.59%	R+43.7	R
111	39.36%	59.14%	R+19.8	28.62%	67.57%	R+39	R
112	69.10%	29.74%	D+39.4	55.53%	41.46%	D+14.1	D
113	67.49%	31.46%	D+36	56.83%	40.31%	D+16.5	D
114	58.64%	40.26%	D+18.4	44.66%	52.39%	R+7.7	D
115	64.27%	34.56%	D+29.7	58.15%	38.28%	D+19.9	D
116	40.79%	57.87%	R+17.1	31.33%	66.07%	R+34.7	R
117	41.83%	56.50%	R+14.7	30.66%	66.00%	R+35.3	R
118	55.83%	43.08%	D+12.8	40.74%	56.46%	R+15.7	D
119	51.23%	47.10%	D+4.1	35.40%	61.77%	R+26.4	D
120	53.79%	44.76%	D+9	42.55%	54.62%	R+12.1	R
121	61.17%	37.18%	D+24	47.71%	48.91%	R+1.2	D
122	44.86%	53.22%	R+8.4	30.76%	65.46%	R+34.7	R
123	51.65%	46.75%	D+4.9	31.73%	65.03%	R+33.3	D
124	37.56%	60.67%	R+23.1	25.51%	70.74%	R+45.2	R
125	36.51%	62.03%	R+25.5	23.43%	72.95%	R+49.5	R
126	63.45%	34.97%	D+28.5	57.62%	38.36%	D+19.3	D
127	80.68%	18.33%	D+62.4	77.08%	19.95%	D+57.1	D
128	41.43%	57.06%	R+15.6	38.02%	57.47%	R+19.5	R
129	41.67%	56.89%	R+15.2	37.61%	57.86%	R+20.3	R
130	42.78%	55.70%	R+12.9	35.25%	60.10%	R+24.9	R
131	44.49%	54.03%	R+9.5	41.91%	53.76%	R+11.9	R
132	65.53%	33.25%	D+32.3	64.10%	32.82%	D+31.3	D
133	59.02%	39.41%	D+19.6	52.89%	42.75%	D+10.1	D
134	43.39%	55.42%	R+12	41.92%	54.04%	R+12.1	R
135	64.54%	34.06%	D+30.5	61.91%	34.09%	D+27.8	D
136	59.36%	39.16%	D+20.2	53.35%	42.48%	D+10.9	D
137	46.66%	52.14%	R+5.5	40.33%	56.02%	R+15.7	R
138	43.63%	55.31%	R+11.7	39.52%	56.92%	R+17.4	R
139	39.33%	59.34%	R+20	30.73%	66.15%	R+35.4	R
140	63.59%	35.05%	D+28.5	54.38%	41.60%	D+12.8	D
141	62.97%	35.53%	D+27.4	52.82%	43.31%	D+9.5	D
142	49.07%	49.78%	R+0.7	46.32%	50.25%	R+3.9	R
143	45.51%	53.19%	R+7.7	47.61%	48.14%	R+0.5	R
144	44.70%	54.17%	R+9.5	45.34%	50.70%	R+5.4	R
145	44.16%	54.36%	R+10.2	39.59%	55.70%	R+16.1	R
146	50.85%	47.96%	D+2.9	48.37%	47.29%	D+1.1	R
147	43.65%	54.97%	R+11.3	41.16%	54.54%	R+13.4	R
148	60.73%	38.33%	D+22.4	67.12%	29.75%	D+37.4	D
149	60.45%	38.56%	D+21.9	66.82%	29.98%	D+36.8	D
150	49.69%	49.13%	D+0.6	51.73%	44.27%	D+7.5	R
151	50.81%	48.28%	D+2.5	55.25%	41.23%	D+14	R
152	52.27%	46.64%	D+5.6	54.58%	41.63%	D+12.9	R
153	63.65%	35.32%	D+28.3	66.36%	30.20%	D+36.2	D
154	74.52%	24.59%	D+49.9	77.91%	19.15%	D+58.8	D
155	47.56%	51.25%	R+3.7	51.80%	43.97%	D+7.8	R
156	49.44%	49.46%	R+0	54.28%	41.62%	D+12.7	D
157	52.13%	46.72%	D+5.4	58.80%	37.01%	D+21.8	R
158	48.38%	50.45%	R+2.1	52.99%	42.96%	D+10	R
159	83.68%	15.63%	D+68	77.53%	20.25%	D+57.3	D
160	46.71%	52.30%	R+5.6	49.20%	47.16%	D+2	R
161	55.77%	43.14%	D+12.6	53.41%	43.19%	D+10.2	D
162	57.37%	41.38%	D+16	49.64%	46.80%	D+2.8	R
163	55.33%	43.45%	D+11.9	54.70%	41.57%	D+13.1	R
164	82.20%	16.96%	D+65.2	81.93%	15.75%	D+66.2	D
165	48.98%	50.02%	R+1	51.81%	44.91%	D+6.9	R
166	61.53%	37.33%	D+24.2	67.49%	28.93%	D+38.6	D
167	48.42%	50.53%	R+2.1	55.67%	40.48%	D+15.2	R
168	47.78%	51.08%	R+3.3	51.51%	44.79%	D+6.7	R
169	34.04%	64.45%	R+30.4	27.83%	67.92%	R+40.1	R
170	56.95%	42.17%	D+14.8	49.20%	48.35%	D+0.9	R
171	40.68%	57.64%	R+17	39.86%	55.53%	R+15.7	R
172	59.28%	39.77%	D+19.5	55.26%	41.93%	D+13.3	D
173	64.49%	34.35%	D+30.1	56.90%	40.57%	D+16.3	D
174	61.67%	37.38%	D+24.3	57.06%	40.39%	D+16.7	D
175	79.87%	18.59%	D+61.3	81.59%	15.10%	D+66.5	D
176	50.90%	47.71%	D+3.2	41.51%	54.94%	R+13.4	R
177	65.38%	33.22%	D+32.2	56.98%	39.92%	D+17.1	R
178	42.85%	56.21%	R+13.4	46.82%	50.00%	R+3.2	R
179	92.03%	7.63%	D+84.4	89.49%	8.95%	D+80.5	D
180	91.88%	7.78%	D+84.1	90.18%	8.68%	D+81.5	D
181	94.57%	4.54%	D+90	92.34%	5.28%	D+87.1	D
182	80.77%	17.83%	D+62.9	85.13%	12.25%	D+72.9	D
183	46.31%	52.33%	R+6	37.34%	58.86%	R+21.5	R
184	74.15%	24.62%	D+49.5	68.00%	29.12%	D+38.9	D
185	81.50%	18.03%	D+63.5	77.31%	21.01%	D+56.3	D
186	92.45%	6.89%	D+85.6	90.67%	7.27%	D+83.4	D
187	41.65%	56.98%	R+15.3	39.49%	56.43%	R+16.9	R
188	92.78%	5.93%	D+86.9	93.67%	3.86%	D+89.8	D
189	52.75%	45.91%	D+6.8	45.71%	51.06%	R+5.4	R
190	97.49%	2.19%	D+95.3	95.73%	2.77%	D+93	D
191	97.46%	2.39%	D+95.1	95.90%	3.11%	D+92.8	D
192	96.72%	3.08%	D+93.6	95.06%	3.68%	D+91.4	D
193	32.78%	65.92%	R+33.1	27.49%	68.67%	R+41.2	R
194	70.09%	28.46%	D+41.6	72.03%	24.29%	D+47.7	D
195	92.86%	6.25%	D+86.6	92.54%	5.33%	D+87.2	D
196	35.76%	62.90%	R+27.1	28.34%	67.63%	R+39.3	R
197	97.04%	2.75%	D+94.3	95.62%	3.52%	D+92.1	D
198	97.73%	1.99%	D+95.7	96.12%	2.54%	D+93.6	D
199	39.71%	58.82%	R+19.1	37.16%	58.63%	R+21.5	R
200	94.69%	4.79%	D+89.9	94.29%	3.97%	D+90.3	D
201	98.24%	1.52%	D+96.7	96.47%	2.17%	D+94.3	D
202	80.92%	18.39%	D+62.5	78.97%	19.01%	D+60	D
203	96.00%	3.80%	D+92.2	94.44%	4.23%	D+90.2	D
Total	52.08%	46.68%	D+5.4	47.85%	48.58%	R+0.7	-
Source: Daily Kos

State overview

Partisan control

This section details the partisan control of federal and state positions in Pennsylvania heading into the 2018 elections.

Congressional delegation

• Following the 2016 elections, Democrats and Republicans each held one U.S. Senate seat in Pennsylvania.
• Republicans held 12 of 17 U.S. House seats in Pennsylvania.

State executives

• As of May 2018, Democrats held five of 11 state executive positions, while six were held by nonpartisan officials.
• The governor of Pennsylvania was Democrat Tom Wolf.

State legislature

• Republicans controlled both chambers of the Pennsylvania General Assembly. They had a 120-79 majority in the state House and a 33-16 majority in the state Senate.

Trifecta status

• Pennsylvania was under divided government, meaning that the two parties shared control of the state government. Tom Wolf (D) served as governor, while Republicans controlled the state legislature.

2018 elections

See also: Pennsylvania elections, 2018

Pennsylvania held elections for the following positions in 2018:

• One U.S. Senate seat
• 18 U.S. House seats
• Governor and lieutenant governor
• 25 of 50 state Senate seats
• 203 state House seats

Demographics

Demographic data for Pennsylvania
	Pennsylvania	U.S.
Total population:	12,791,904	316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):	44,743	3,531,905
Race and ethnicity**
White:	81.6%	73.6%
Black/African American:	11%	12.6%
Asian:	3.1%	5.1%
Native American:	0.2%	0.8%
Pacific Islander:	0%	0.2%
Two or more:	2.1%	3%
Hispanic/Latino:	6.4%	17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:	89.2%	86.7%
College graduation rate:	28.6%	29.8%
Income
Median household income:	$53,599	$53,889
Persons below poverty level:	15.9%	11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in Pennsylvania. **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

As of July 2017, Pennsylvania had a population of approximately 12,800,000 people, with its three largest cities being Philadelphia (pop. est. 1.6 million), Pittsburgh (pop. est. 300,000), and Allentown (pop. est. 120,000).

State election history

This section provides an overview of federal and state elections in Pennsylvania from 2000 to 2016. All data comes from the Pennsylvania Department of State.

Historical elections

Presidential elections, 2000-2016

This chart shows the results of the presidential election in Pennsylvania every year from 2000 to 2016.

Election results (President of the United States), Pennsylvania 2000-2016
Year	First-place candidate	First-place candidate votes (%)	Second-place candidate	Second-place candidate votes (%)	Margin of victory (%)
2016	Donald Trump	48.6%	Hillary Clinton	47.9%	0.7%
2012	Barack Obama	52.1%	Mitt Romney	46.7%	5.4%
2008	Barack Obama	54.7%	John McCain	44.3%	10.4%
2004	John Kerry	51.0%	George Bush	48.5%	2.5%
2000	Al Gore	50.6%	George Bush	46.4%	4.2%

U.S. Senate elections, 2000-2016

This chart shows the results of U.S. Senate races in Pennsylvania from 2000 to 2016. Every state has two Senate seats, and each seat goes up for election every six years. The terms of the seats are staggered so that roughly one-third of the seats are up every two years.

Election results (U.S. Senator), Pennsylvania 2000-2016
Year	First-place candidate	First-place candidate votes (%)	Second-place candidate	Second-place candidate votes (%)	Margin of victory (%)
2016	Patrick Toomey	48.8%	Katie McGinty	47.3%	1.5%
2012	Bob Casey	53.7%	Tom Smith	44.6%	9.1%
2010	Patrick Toomey	51.0%	Joe Sestak	49.0%	2.0%
2006	Bob Casey	58.7%	Rick Santorum	41.3%	17.4%
2004	Arlen Specter	52.6%	Joseph Hoeffel	42.0%	10.6%
2000	Rick Santorum	52.4%	Ron Klink	45.5%	6.9%

Gubernatorial elections, 2000-2016

This chart shows the results of the four gubernatorial elections held between 2000 and 2016. Gubernatorial elections are held every four years in Pennsylvania.

Election results (Governor), Pennsylvania 2000-2016
Year	First-place candidate	First-place candidate votes (%)	Second-place candidate	Second-place candidate votes (%)	Margin of victory (%)
2014	Tom Wolf	54.9%	Thomas Corbett	45.1%	9.8%
2010	Thomas Corbett	54.5%	Dan Onorato	45.5%	9.0%
2006	Ed Rendell	60.4%	Lynn Swann	39.6%	20.8%
2002	Ed Rendell	53.4%	Mike Fisher	44.3%	9.1%

Congressional delegation, 2000-2016

This chart shows the number of Democrats and Republicans who were elected to represent Pennsylvania in the U.S. House from 2000 to 2016. Elections for U.S. House seats are held every two years.

Congressional delegation, Pennsylvania 2000-2016
Year	Republicans	Republicans (%)	Democrats	Democrats (%)	Balance of power
2016	13	72.2%	5	27.8%	R+8
2014	13	72.2%	5	27.8%	R+8
2012	13	72.2%	5	27.8%	R+8
2010	12	63.2%	7	36.8%	R+5
2008	7	36.8%	12	63.2%	D+5
2006	8	42.1%	11	57.9%	D+3
2004	12	63.2%	7	36.8%	R+5
2002	12	63.2%	7	36.8%	R+5
2000	11	52.4%	10	47.6%	R+1

Trifectas, 1992-2017

A state government trifecta occurs when one party controls both chambers of the state legislature and the governor's office.

Pennsylvania Party Control: 1992-2025
One year of a Democratic trifecta  •  Twelve years of Republican trifectas
Scroll left and right on the table below to view more years.

Year	92	93	94	95	96	97	98	99	00	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	25
Governor	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
Senate	R	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R
House	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	D	D	_

See also

• Pennsylvania's 1st Congressional District election (May 15, 2018 Democratic primary)
• Pennsylvania's 1st Congressional District election (May 15, 2018 Republican primary)
• United States House of Representatives elections in Pennsylvania, 2018
• United States House of Representatives elections, 2018

Footnotes

Ballotpedia

About

Overview • What people are saying • Support Ballotpedia • Contact • Contribute • Job opportunities

---

Executive: Leslie Graves, Founder and CEO • Gwen Beattie, Chief Operating Officer

Communications: Alison Graves, Director of Communications • Carley Allensworth • Abigail Campbell • Frank Festa • Sarah Groat • Nathaniel Harwood • Dillon Redmond • Erica Shumaker
External Relations: Geoff Pallay, Director of External Relations • Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy • Ashley Fleming • Thomas Mardik • Hannah Nelson
Operations: Meghann Olshefski, Director of Operations • Amanda Herbert • Mandy Morris • Caroline Presnell • Kelly Rindfleisch
Tech: Matt Latourelle, Director of Technology Operations • Ryan Burch • Kirsten Corrao • Beth Dellea • Travis Eden • Tate Kamish • Margaret Kearney • Eric Lotto • Joseph Sanchez • Mary Susmitha

Contributors: Scott Rasmussen

---

Editorial Content

Josh Altic, Director of Content • Daniel Anderson, Associate Director of Elections & Data • Cory Eucalitto, Associate Director of Features • Ryan Byrne, Managing Editor of Ballot Measures • Mandy McConnell, Managing Editor of News • Doug Kronaizl, Managing Editor of Local Expansion • Abbey Smith, Managing Editor of Elections • Janie Valentine, Managing Editor of Law • Joel Williams. Managing Editor of Events • Andrew Bahl • Jaclyn Beran • Marielle Bricker • Joseph Brusgard • Emma Burlingame • Kelly Coyle • Jon Dunn • Thomas Ellis • Nicole Fisher • Joseph Greaney • Thomas Grobben • Jaime Healy-Plotkin • Brianna Hosea • Molly Kehoe • Tyler King • Glorie Martinez • Norm Leahy, Senior Editor • Nathan Maxwell • Jimmy McAllister • Brandon McCauley • Ellie Mikus • Ellen Morrissey • Mackenzie Murphy • Kaley Platek • Samantha Post • Adam Powell • Annelise Reinwald • Ethan Rice • Spencer Richardson • Victoria Rose • Briana Ryan • Myj Saintyl • Maddy Salucka • Emma Soukup • Alexis Thacker • Mina Vogel • Samuel Wonacott • Trenton Woodcox

[show]

Pennsylvania's current delegation to the United States Congress

Senators

John Fetterman (D)

David McCormick (R)

Representatives

District 1

Brian Fitzpatrick (R)

District 2

Brendan Boyle (D)

District 3

Dwight Evans (D)

District 4

Madeleine Dean (D)

District 5

Mary Scanlon (D)

District 6

Chrissy Houlahan (D)

District 7

Ryan Mackenzie (R)

District 8

Rob Bresnahan (R)

District 9

Dan Meuser (R)

District 10

Scott Perry (R)

District 11

Lloyd Smucker (R)

District 12

Summer Lee (D)

District 13

John Joyce (R)

District 14

Guy Reschenthaler (R)

District 15

Glenn Thompson (R)

District 16

Mike Kelly (R)

District 17

Chris Deluzio (D)

Republican Party (11)

Democratic Party (8)