Dubious Democracy and the 1994 Elections

Electing the U.S. House of Representatives

The Center for Voting and Democracy

The Center for Voting and Democracy in 1995 released Dubious Democracy, a statistical analysis of the 1994 elections for the United States House of Representatives. Much had been written about the historic nature of the elections in which the Republican party gained a majority in the House for the first time since 1954. But the Center's study went beyond the national partisan results to provide statistics that help explain the increasing frustration of many American voters -- a frustration that has not diminished with the change in control of the House.

Behind 1994's vote for change in the House of Representatives were three disturbing facts:

• Most eligible voters did not participate.
• Most voters have limited choices.
• Most races are not remotely competitive.

"Winner-take-all," plurality elections in single-member districts put profound limitations on American democracy. They give more power to those who draw the district lines -- usually legislators who then run for office within the districts they created -- than to voters. They almost always limit voters' choices to at most two candidates, promoting "zero-sum" politics in which it is entirely logical for candidates to attack opponents and muddy their own positions -- a politics that today extends more and more to governance. Furthermore, districts emphasize where voters live over what they think and what they might consider their broader interests.

The report highlights the "representation index." It measures the percentage of eligible voters who helped elect a representative. The democracy index in U.S. House elections in 1994 was just over 20%, meaning that close to 80% of the American voting age population did not help elect someone to the House. Our representation index is far lower than that of most other democracies that use forms of proportional representation.

The combination of voters turning out to the polls, having a range of choices and having their vote count creates a meaningful political center grounded in the reality of what voters want. Just as forty years of Democratic control of the House did not reflect the changes in political wind that took place during those four decades, the Republicans are not governing on a foundation that is clearly established on what the majority wanted in 1994. Republican policies perhaps will be popular, but how Republicans got into power and how they might stay there are not tied to a need to win majority support.

Impact of "No Choice" Elections

Some of our strongest statistics measure the disturbing lack of competition in House elections. Races were won on the average by 33.5%, and only 157 out of 435 seats were won by less than 20%. While 34 Democratic incumbents lost, 103 Democratic incumbents joined 87 Republican incumbents in winning "landslide victories" (victories by at least 20%) in both 1992 and 1994. Eighteen of New York's 31 districts were won by at least 40%, while 11 of Florida's 23 districts were uncontested.

A full 10% of people who voted in statewide elections did not vote in House elections, a margin only partly explained by the 31 uncontested seats. Lack of competition clearly had an impact on voter turnout. The 118 races won by at least 40% had a voter turnout of 35.5%, the 247 won by at least 20% had a turnout of 36.9% and the 157 won by less than 20% had a turnout of 40.4%. The three states that did not have statewide races all had voter turnout in 1994 under 30%, suggesting what turnout would be if only House races were on the ballot.

This lack of competition can be traced to the partisan composition of districts usually drawn carefully by legislators to provide certain results. As an example of the impact of redistricting, Democrats outspent Republicans in over half of the 56 House seats taken over by Republicans, but only one of those seats were among the 99 districts that Bill Clinton won with a majority in 1992.

Our study also showed that women remained stuck at only 11% of the House in 1994 and the number of states with women representatives in the House actually decreased from 27 to 23, in contrast to international trends for women steadily increasing their share of political power. Single-member district elections may be the primary culprit: in Germany's 1994 elections, women won 13% of seats contested in single-member districts and a full 39% of seats filled by proportional voting.

Our analysis also revealed other findings as well. For those following partisan swings, the Republican victory is magnified by the fact that Republican percentages of the statewide vote in House races decreased in only six states. On the other hand, the fact that only 17 of the 56 Republicans who won seats held by Democrats had higher vote totals than losing Republicans had won in those districts in 1992 suggest the impact of voter turnout.

Following are excerpts from the report, including an example of the report's state profiles and a glossary of terms used in profiles.

Note: Election results are based on Associated Press reports after the elections and do not include all absentee vote totals. Estimates of eligible voters are based on the post-election report by Curtis Gans of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate (CSAE) and cannot be determined with pinpoint accuracy. The CSAE report provides estimates by state only, which meant that determinations of voter turnout by district were based on the voting age population estimates for 1992 elections in the National Journal's Almanac of American Politics -- and thus might not reflect changes in voting age population. Nevertheless, future data corrections are likely to cause only minor changes.

GLOSSARY

UNITED STATES

Comments

Republicans' dramatic win in 1994 House elections -- taking a majority of seats for the first time in forty years -- was marred by a low representation index. Barely 20% of voters helped elect candidates, competition actually decreased, over 24 million voters won no representation and women took only 11% of seats. These results provide support for repealing a 1967 law mandating single-seat districts to allow states to adopt PR.

TEXAS

Comments

After 1992's democratic debacle created by a classic partisan and incumbent protection gerrymander -- in which 29 of 30 seats were won by at least 10% and Democrats took 70% of seats with under 50% of the vote -- Texas was slightly more competitive in 1994. The average victory margin "dropped" to 35% and two incumbents lost. Yet Republicans won only 37% of seats despite winning 53% of the vote, and there were 15 repeat landslides.

Table of Contents
Chapter Three