The Hot Twelve in 1998

House Districts Most Likely to Change Parties in November 1998

The following list of the 12 most vulnerable House seats was compiled in November 1997. If and when more incumbents choose to retire or run for another office, more seats may fall into this category. The information provided in the list is the same as provided in the full listing of representatives and is the basis for these predictions. There are 62 additional incumbents and open seat races (out of a total of 435 seats) categorized as vulnerable.

   

click here to go to key to explain symbols

Most Vulnerable Democratic Seats
  1996: 1994: 1992: Clinton: First:
CA 3. Open [Vic Fazio] [54%] [50%] [51%] 45% (-4, down 2) [1978]
CA 22. Open [Walter Capps (D)] [48%] - - 44% (-5, down 3) [1996]
CA 46. Loretta Sanchez (D) 47% - - 49% (0, up 6) 1996
IL 19. Open [G. Poshard (D)] [67%] [58%] [69%] 47% (-2, down 6) [1988]
IN 9. Open [Lee Hamilton (D)] [56%] [52%] [70%] 44% (-5, down 3) [1964]
KY 6. Open [Scott Baesler (D)] [56%] [59%] [61%] 46% (-3, down 1) [1992]
OH 6. Ted Strickland (D) 51% - - 45% (-4, 0) 1996
TX 1. Max Sandlin (D) 52% - - 45% (-4, 0) 1996
TX 17. Charles Stenholm (D) 52% 54% 66% 39% (-10, down 1) 1978
WI 8. Jay Johnson (D) 52% - - 46% (-3, up 5) 1996
Most Vulnerable Republican Seats
KY 3. Anne Northrup (R) 50% - - 53% (+4, down 3) 1996
NM 3. Bill Redmond (R) 1997: 43% (special election) 53% (+4, down 4) 1997
WI 2. Open [Scott Klug (R)] [57%] [69%] [63%] 55% (+6, down 1) [1990]

click here to go to key to explain symbols


.... And 15 Simmering "Untouchables"

Coasting Incumbents Who Could Face Surprises in 1998

The following is a list of "untouchable" incumbents -- e.g., representatives who have won their last two elections by landslide (all but Florida's Bill Young in this list have won their last three elections by landslide). Although untouchable incumbents rarely lose -- none lost in 1996, and only three lost in 1994 -- the following are among those with the greatest chance of facing a more competitive election in 1998, although probably not a defeat. Most represent districts that favor the other party and are trending in that party's direction.

   

click here to go to key to explain symbols

  1996: 1994: 1992: Clinton: First:
AZ 5. Jim Kolbe (R) 69% 68% 67% 47% (-2, down 1) 1984
CA 41. Jay Kim (R) 58% (L) 62% 60% 43% (-6, up 2) 1992
FL 10. C. W. (Bill) Young (R) 67% 100% (U) 57% 51% (+2, up 5) 1970
MI 4. Dave Camp (R) 65% 73% 63% 47% (-2, up 3) 1990
MO 4. Ike Skelton (D) 64% 68% 70% 41% (-8, down 2) 1976
NJ 4. Christopher Smith (R) 64% 68% 62% 51% (+2, up 5) 1980
NY 23. Sherwood Boehlert (R) 64% 71% 64% 46% (-3, up 3) 1982
OR 4. Peter DeFazio (D) 66% 67% 71% 45% (-4, down 3) 1986
PA 4. Ron Klink (D) 64% 64% 79% 47% (-2, down 7) 1992
PA 11. Paul Kanjorski (D) 68% 67% 67% 48% (-1, 0) 1984
PA 12. John Murtha (D) 70% 69% 100% (U) 46% (-3, down 7) 1974
TN 8. John Tanner (D) 67% 64% 84% (U) 50% (+1, down 4) 1988
WA 8. Jennifer Dunn (R) 65% 76% 60% 47% (-2, up 3) 1992
WV 1. Alan Mollohan (D) 100% (U) 70% 100% (U) 49% (0, down 3) 1982
WV 2. Bob Wise (D) 69% 63% 71% 49% (0, down 2) 1982

click here to go to key to explain symbols

Produced in July 1997 by
The Center for Voting and Democracy
PO Box 60037 Washington, DC 20039


back to Monopoly PoliticsTable of Contents