OPEN SEATS AND MONEY, 1996 U.S. HOUSE ELECTIONS

Conservative Districts (40% or less for Clinton)

All races (11 of 11) won by Republicans. The average winning percentage was 62%, not counting the Texas-8 race. The average vote against Bill Clinton in those 10 districts was 63%. Note that the Republican candidate's winning margin correlates far more closely to the anti-Clinton vote in the presidential race than how much money was spent -- e.g., note Missouri-7 and Tennessee-1 where Democrats spent little money. Republican winners were outspent by Democrats in one race. Only one Republican won with less than 59% -- no coincidence, as these are districts where the anti-Clinton vote is at least 59%.

* Texas 8 was complicated. There was an open primary on election day, when two leading Republicans received a total of 80% and the two Democrats received 20%. Republican run-off winner Kevin Brady was outspent, but was the candidate backed by party leaders.

Semi-Conservative Districts (41%-44% for Clinton)

Nine of 11 seats were won by Republicans -- 4 of the winners were outspent. Note that the two seats won by Democrats were in southern tobacco country -- where the vote for tough-on-tobacco Clinton might not be a true indicator of Democratic support. Both seats also had been represented by Democrats before 1996, and both winners are considered conservative. The average vote for winning Republicans was 53%, while the average anti-Clinton in these districts was 58% -- one reason for the difference was the presence of third party candidates in these races, as the vote for losing Democrats was 43%, a close match to Clinton's average vote of 42%. Note that only one Republican won with more than 56% (the exception was actually outspent), and none won with more than 58%. In the more conservative districts (sub 41%-Clinton), only one Republican in an open seat election had won with less than 59%.

Slightly-Conservative Districts (45%-49% for Clinton)

Nine of 13 seats were won by Republicans. 9 of 12 winners had 52% or less in this marginal category. Five winners were outspent, although only one very significantly. The average vote for winning Republicans was 53% -- exactly the same as the average anti-Clinton in their districts. Winning Democrats outpolled Clinton in their districts by an average of 8%.

* Another Republican won 10% in complicated election where the Republican incumbent died during primary and his widow then ran and won as pseudo-independent.

Slightly-Liberal Districts (50%-53% for Clinton)

Democrats won all four districts in this category. Only one winner was outspent, but the races in general were competitive financially. The average Clinton vote was 51%, while the average winning percentage for Democrats was one percentage point higher: 52%.

Semi-Liberal Districts (54%-57% for Clinton)

Democrats won all four districts in this category. Only one winner was outspent, but all races were very close financially. The average Clinton vote was 55%, not counting Louisiana-7, while the average vote for Democratic winners in those three districts was 53%.

* In open run-off system, two Democrats made run-off when four Republicans split the Republican vote. The Democrat who spent slightly more money won in the general election.

Liberal Districts (58% or more for Clinton)

Democrats won all ten districts in this category. All spent more money than their opponents, and only one winner had less than 56%. The average percentage for winners was 66% -- the same as the average vote for Clinton in these districts. The district with the greatest difference was Tennessee-9, where a black Democrat ran 10% behind Clinton. Note that the only other gaps between Clinton and a Democratic candidate in double digits in any open seats were 17% in Virginia-5 and Florida-2 (where conservative white Democrats ran ahead of Clinton). On average, the correlation was almost perfect; the average Clinton vote and the average vote for Democratic candidates in the 51 open seats without run-off elections were both 50% (49.8% for Clinton, versus 50.1% for House Democratic candidates).

Republicans won support in close relation to the anti-Clinton vote -- usually about two in five voters -- in their districts no matter how much money they spent. For example, note that the four Republicans in Florida-19, Illinois-7, Tennessee-9 and Texas-15 were heavily outspent, but won an average of 31% -- exactly the same as the anti-Clinton vote in those districts. At the same time, losing Republicans in Arkansas-1, Colorado-1, New Jersey-9 and Rhode Island-2 all spent at least $400,000, but won an average of 40%, slightly less than the average anti-Clinton vote of 41%. in these districts.

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

Table of Contents