Reconsidering the Trend in Incumbent Vote Percentages in House Elections

Authors

  • Jeffrey M. Stonecash

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2003.24.0.225-239

Abstract

The rise in the vote percentage for House incumbents since 1946 has been a central concern in election studies. The presumed increase has prompted numerous attempts to explain it. The increase has also served as a basis for considerable commentary about change in the nature of contemporary politics and elections. This analysis argues that the presumed increase is largely an artifact of the questionable decision to exclude uncontested elections. As the number of uncontested races declined from the 1950s through the 1960s, adding in these districts created an apparent increase that arguably did not really occur. When all incumbent races are considered, the pattern over the last 50 years is one of no increase in the percentage of the vote received by incumbents.

References

Abramowitz, Alan I. 1975. Name Familiarity, Reputation and the Incumbency Effect in a Congressional Election. Western Political Quarterly 28:668-684. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/447984 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591297502800405

Abramowitz, Alan I. 1989. Campaign Spending in U.S. Senate Elections. Legislative Studies Quarterly 14:487-507. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/439955

Abramowitz, Alan I. 1991. Incumbency, Campaign Spending, and the Decline of Competition in U.S. House Elections. Journal of Politics 53:34-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131719

Alford, John R. and John R. Hibbing. 1981. Increased Incumbency Advantage in the House. Journal of Politics 43:1042-1061. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2130188

Ansolabehere, Stephen, James M. Snyder, Jr., and Charles Stewart, III. 2000. Old Voters, New Voters, and the Personal Vote: Using Redistricting to Measure the Incumbency Advantage. American Journal of Political Science 44:17-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2669290

Born, Richard. 1979. Generational Replacement and the Growth of Incumbent Reelection Margins in the U.S. House. American Political Science Review 73:811-817. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1955406

Brady, David W., John F. Cogan, and Morris P. Fiorina. 2000. An Introduction. Pp. 1-9 in Continuity and Change in House Elections, eds. David W. Brady., John F. Cogan, and Morris P. Fiorina. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Burnham, Walter Dean. 1965. The Changing American Political Universe. The American Political Science Review 59:7-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1976117

Burnham, Walter Dean. 1970. Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics. New York: W.W. Norton.

Burnham, Walter Dean. 1975. Insulation and Responsiveness in Congressional Elections. Political Science Quarterly 90:411-435. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2148294

Campbell, James E. 1983. The Return of the Incumbents: The Nature of the Incumbency Advantage. Western Political Quarterly 36:434-444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591298303600309 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/448401

Collie, Melissa P. 1981. Incumbency, Electoral Safety, and Turnover in the House of Representatives, 1972-1976. American Political Science Review 75:119-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1962163

Cover, Albert. 1977. One Good Term Deserves Another: The Advantage of Incumbency in Congressional Elections. American Journal of Political Science 21:523-541. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110580

Cover, Albert D., and David R. Mayhew. 1977. Congressional Dynamics and the Decline of Competitive Congressional Elections. Pp. 62-82 in Congress Reconsidered, eds. Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Cox, Gary, and Jonathan Katz. 1996. Why Did the Incumbency Advantage Grow? American Journal of Political Science 40:478-497. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111633

Congressional Quarterly. 1994. Congressional Quarterlyís Guide to U.S. Elections, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.

Converse, Philip E. 1976. The Dynamics of Party Support. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Cummings, Milton C. 1966. Congressmen and the Electorate. New York: Free Press.

Dubin, Michael J. 1998. United States Congressional Elections, 1788-1997. Jefferson: McFarland and Company, Inc.

Erickson, Robert S. 1971. The Advantage of Incumbency in Congressional Elections. Polity 3:395-405. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3234117

Erickson, Robert S. 1972. Malapportionment, Gerrymandering and Party Fortunes in Congressional Elections. American Political Science Review 66:1234-1245. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1957176

Erickson, Robert S. 1976. Is There Anything Such as a Safe Seat? Polity 8:623-632. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3234295

Ferejohn, John A. 1977. On the Decline of Competition in Congressional Elections. American Political Science Review 71:166-176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003055400259364 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1956960

Fiorina, Morris. 1977a. Congress: Keystone to the Washington Establishment. New Haven, CT: Yale.

Fiorina, Morris. 1977b. The Case of the Vanishing Marginals: The Bureaucracy Did It. American Political Science Review 71:177-181. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1956961 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003055400259376

Fiorina, Morris. 1981. Some Problems in Studying the Effects of Resource Allocation in Congressional Elections. American Journal of Political Science 25:543-567. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110818

Flanigan, William H., and Nancy H. Zingale. 1979. Political Behavior of the American Electorate. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Garand, James C., and Donald A. Gross. 1984. Changes in the Vote Margins for Congressional Candidates: A Specification of Historical Trends. American Political Science Review 78:17-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1961246

Gross, Donald A., and James C. Garand. 1984. The Vanishing Marginals, 1824-1980. Journal of Politics 46:224-237. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2130441

Jacobson, Gary C. 1978. The Effects of Campaign Spending in Congressional Elections. American Political Science Review 72:469-491. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1954105

Jacobson, Gary C. 1985. Money and Votes Reconsidered: Congressional Elections, 1972-1982. Public Choice 47:7-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00119352

Jacobson, Gary C. 1987. The Marginals Never Vanished: Incumbency and Competition in Elections to the U.S. House of Representatives, 1952-1982. American Journal of Political Science 31:126-141. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111327

Jacobson, Gary C. 1990. The Effects of Campaign Spending in House Elections: New Evidence for an Old Argument. American Journal of Political Science 34:334-362. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111450

Jacobson, Gary C. 1997. The Politics of Congressional Elections, 4th ed. New York: Longman.

Jacobson, Gary C. 2000. Party Polarization in National Politics: The Electoral Connection. Pp. 9-30 in Polarized Politics, ed. Jon R. Bond and Richard Fleisher. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Jacobson, Gary C. 2001. The Politics of Congressional Elections, 5th ed. New York: Longman.

Johannes, John R., and John C. McAdams. 1981. The Congressional Incumbency Effect: Is it Casework, Policy Compatibility, or Something Else? American Journal of Political Science 25:512-542. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110817

Jones, Charles O. 1964. Inter-Party Competition in Congressional Seats. Western Political Quarterly 17:461-476. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591296401700305 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/445796

Krasno, Jonathon S., and Donald P. Green. 1988. Preempting Quality Challengers in House Elections. Journal of Politics 50:920-936. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131385

Krehbiel, Keith, and John R. Wright. 1983. The Incumbency Effect in Congressional Elections: A Test of Two Explanations. American Journal of Political Science 27:140-157. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111057

Levitt, Steven D., and Catherine D. Wolfram. 1997. Decomposing the Sources of Incumbency Advantage. Legislative Studies Quarterly 22:45-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/440290

Mann, Thomas E. 1978. Unsafe at Any Margin. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.

Mayhew, David R. 1974a. Congressional Elections: The Case of the Vanishing Marginals. Polity 6:295-317. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3233931

Mayhew, David R. 1974b. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

McAdams, John C., and John R. Johannes. 1988. Congressmen, Perquisites, and Elections. Journal of Politics 50:412-439. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131801

Nelson, Candice J. 1978-79. The Effect of Incumbency on Voting in Congressional Elections. Political Science Quarterly 93:665-678. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2150109

Parker, Glenn R. 1980. The Advantage of Incumbency in House Elections. American Politics Quarterly 8:449-464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X8000800404

Payne, James L. 1980. The Personal Electoral Advantage of House Incumbents, 1936-1976. American Politics Quarterly 8:465-482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X8000800405

Serra, George. 1994. Whatís In It for Me: The Impact of Congressional Casework on Incumbent Evaluation. American Politics Quarterly 22:403-420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X9402200401

Serra, George, and Albert D. Cover. 1992. The Electoral Consequences of PerquisiteUse: The Casework Case. Legislative Studies Quarterly 17:233-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/440059

Thomas, Scott J. 1989. Do Incumbent Campaign Expenditures Matter? Journal of Politics 51:965-976. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131543

Tufte, Edward R. 1973. The Relationship between Seats and Votes in Two-Party Systems. American Political Science Review 67:540-554. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1958782

Yiannakis, Diana Evans. 1981. The Grateful Electorate: Casework and Congressional Elections. American Journal of Political Science 25:568-580. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110819

Downloads

Published

2003-11-01

Issue

Vol. 24: Fall 2003

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.

  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.

  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:

    1. Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;

    2. Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;

    3. Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.

  1. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  2. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.

  3. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.

  1. The Author represents and warrants that:

    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;

    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;

    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;

    4. the Work has not previously been published;

    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and

    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.

  2. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.