2010 Was a Pretty Good Year for Incumbents After All

Back when pundits were tripping over themselves to call 2010 an “anti-incumbent” year or an “anti-Establishment” year, conveniently eliding the distinction as it served their purposes, I wrote:

I would be very surprised if any “anti-incumbent fervor” put much dent in the extraordinarily high rates at which incumbents are reelected.

And then I forecast that among House incumbents running for the general election, 87% would win. Commenter treetop noted last week that my prediction was good. Our data suggest at this moment that 86% of House incumbents won their general election bids. Here’s a graph with data from 1972-2010.

incumbreelect.png

Clearly, incumbents did a little worse in 2010 relative to other years, although 1974 is similar (89%). So I wouldn’t be surprised if some breathless commentator is already declaring that OMG THIS WAS THE MOST ANTI-INCUMBENT ELECTION IN ALMOST 40 YEARS.

Me, I’m still pretty impressed by 87%.

But perhaps incumbents won by slimmer margins? Not really. The median percent of the two-party vote won by incumbents was very much in line with the historical average since 1972: 65% in 2010, compared to 68% overall.

And here’s another interesting thing. You might think that lots of incumbents decided not to run or lost their primary races in 2010. I calculated the percent of races with no incumbent running in the general election and it was an astonishing…10%. Which was really no different than most recent elections. Here again is a graph:

openseats.png

There might be other ways you could prove that incumbents had a harder time in 2010. As Brendan Nyhan has shown, Democratic incumbents in competitive districts were more likely to face quality challengers. But that suggests how the climate in 2010 was disadvantageous to Democrats, not to incumbents as a whole.

What is the bottom line? Don’t read too much into a few isolated early primaries (see: Robert Bennett) or into polls where vast majorities of Americans disapprove of Congress or even indicate their willingness to vote for the challenger.

Incumbents still dominate congressional elections.

9 Responses to 2010 Was a Pretty Good Year for Incumbents After All

  1. John November 11, 2010 at 2:18 am #

    I imagine the status quo also prevailed when it came to the classic question of “Congress in general” vs. “My Congressman.” At the polling firm where I work 2010 was definitely a terrible year for everyone else’s Congressman, but a pretty mundane for my Congresman.

  2. Brendan Moore November 11, 2010 at 4:12 am #

    “So I wouldn’t be surprised if some breathless commentator is already declaring that OMG THIS WAS THE MOST ANTI-INCUMBENT ELECTION IN ALMOST 40 YEARS.”

    I actually did just see this in an article, though I can’t for the life of me remember where.

  3. Jon November 11, 2010 at 8:44 am #

    Is this data coded to take into account that there were more than a few seats that were rematches from 2010 in the House? For example, my district is Ohio 1, and though Steve Driehaus was my member, so was Steve Chabot until Driehaus unseated him in 08. Do we count Driehaus as the incumbent or Chabot? It’d be hard to tell. Though it does fit with the quality challenger characterization.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. POLITICO-GW Poll: 35% Approve of Obama’s Handling of the Economy | The GW Patriot - November 14, 2011

    […] Lack of action on economic issues hurts incumbents of both parties. Three-quarters of voters believe the country is on the wrong track, up from 59 percent this May. Congressional approval is 11%, with 83% of respondents saying they disapprove of Congress. Whether that impacts their re-election is another story. In 2010, a year widely heralded as “anti-incumbent,” 86% of incumbents were re-elected, according to post-election analysis by GW Political Science Professor John Sides. […]

  2. Ce que le Tea Party et Occupy Wall Street ont à nous dire de l’Amérique | Bully Pulpit - December 13, 2011

    […] [1] http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2010/11/10/2010_was_a_pretty_good_year_fo/ […]

  3. Explaining the Puzzle of Congressional Popularity « Pursuit of Truthiness - June 14, 2012

    […] members of Congress are reasonably popular (approval ratings more in the 50% range, with incumbents extremely likely to be re-elected). People like each of the parts but hate the […]

  4. Moe Lane » #rsrh The Hill declares DOOM for “Blame Bush.” - July 23, 2012

    […] respondents hate Congress, too – but then, they always do these days. Didn’t stop an 86% incumbency rate in 2010; probably won’t be a factor this year, given that even with all the new seats from […]

  5. Gerrymandering is not what’s wrong with American politics - February 3, 2013

    […] But surely there is some price to pay for being ideologically out-of-step with your constituents?  The answer is yes.  Being too ideologically extreme (pdf) or too loyal to party is associated with a greater chance of losing (not that many incumbent actually lose, of course). […]

  6. Old Click » Gerrymandering is not what’s wrong with American politics - February 3, 2013

    […] But certainly there is some cost to compensate for being ideologically out-of-step with your constituents?  The answer is yes.  Being too ideologically extreme (pdf) or too constant to party is compared with a larger probability of losing (not that many obligatory indeed lose, of course). […]