BCT Editorial – 9/26/06

This page was last updated on September 26, 2006.

No sure bet; Editorial; Beaver County Times; September 26, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“The latest New York Times/NBC poll found that a substantial majority of Americans disapprove of the job the Republican-controlled Congress is doing.

“Does their displeasure mean Democrats are going to regain control of Congress in the November general election? Not necessarily.

“To start with, all politics is local. The poll may reflect a national attitude toward Congress, but if the past is any indication of the future, most people believe their local representative is the exception to the rule and will vote accordingly.

“Politics has been made even more local because of computer-aided gerrymandering. Virtually every House member represents a district that was redistricted in 2002 to maximize protection for the incumbent. That’s why in an increasing number of congressional districts, the primary election, not the general election, is the real election.”

[RWC] According to The Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), the incumbent reelection rate has been very high for a long time. Since 1964, the rate has varied from 85% to 98% for the U.S. House. Since 1996, the rate has varied from 94% to 98%. Very high reelection rates are not restricted to the recent past. For example, the reelection rate varied from 95% to 98% from 1984 through 1990.

“Another reason incumbents are tough to defeat is the power of incumbency, with special-interest money being the political steroid that makes them practically unbeatable.”

[RWC] Where does the Times get its data? While the “special-interest money” point sounds good, it doesn’t appear to be accurate. For example, according to Federal Election Commission data, 70% of President Bush’s 2004 campaign contributions (in dollars) came from individuals. For John Kerry it was 69%. This year, that figure for senatorial candidates Santorum and Casey is 77% and 90%, respectively.

Overall, for the 2004 cycle, the CRP reported about 60% of House campaign contributions were from individuals for both Democrat and Republican candidates. For the Senate, the figure is about 83% for Democrats and 77% for Republicans.

“Many incumbents have campaign funds that are so huge that they intimidate potential challengers. If they do have a credible challenger, this money edge allows them to pummel their opponent via the-truth-is-not-always-accurate political ads.”

[RWC] The incumbent “campaign funds” comment is true. Overall, for the 2004 cycle, the CRP reported Senate incumbents had about a 9:1 fundraising advantage while House incumbents had about a 6:1 advantage.

“Of course, the only poll that matters is the one on Nov. 7. The anti-Congress mood the polls are finding might pan out. However, don’t bet the bank on it. The incumbents have too much going in their favor to put much credence in pre-election polls.”