CHAPTER NiNE • THE CoNgREss 205
Reapportionment
The allocation of
seats in the House of
Representatives to each
state after a census.
Redistricting
The redrawing of the
boundaries of the
congressional districts
within each state.Candidates for Congressional Elections
Congressional campaigns have changed considerably in the past two
decades. Like all other campaigns, they are much more expensive, with
the average cost of a winning Senate campaign now $9 million and a
winning House campaign more than $1.5 million. In addition, large sums
are spent on congressional campaigns by independent committees, as
explained in Chapter 8. Once in office, legislators spend time almost every
day raising funds for their next campaign.
Most candidates for Congress must win the nomination through a
direct primary, in which those who identify with a particular party vote for
the candidate who will be on the party ticket in the general election. To
win the primary, candidates may take more liberal or more conservative
positions to get the votes of “party identifiers.” In the general election,
they may moderate their views to attract the votes of independents and
voters from the other party.Presidential Effects. Congressional candidates are always hopeful that
a strong presidential candidate on their ticket will have “coattails” that
will sweep in senators and representatives of the same party. (In fact, in
some recent presidential elections coattail effects have not materialized at
all.) One way to measure the coattail effect is to look at the subsequent
midterm elections, held in the even-numbered years following the presi-
dential contests. In these years, voter turnout falls sharply. The party con-
trolling the White House frequently loses seats in Congress in the midterm
elections, in part because the coattail effect ceases to apply. Table 9–2 on
the right shows the pattern for midterm elections since 1946.The Power of incumbency. The power of incumbency in the outcome
of congressional elections cannot be overemphasized. Table 9–3 on the
following page shows that a sizable majority of representatives and a
slightly smaller proportion of senators who decide to run for reelection
are successful. This conclusion holds for both presidential-year and mid-
term elections. Even in 2010, when the Republicans made very large gains,
most incumbents were safe.Apportionment of the House
Two of the more complicated aspects of congressional elections are apportionment
issues—reapportionment (the allocation of seats in the House to each state after a cen-
sus) and redistricting (the redrawing of the boundaries of the districts within each state).
In a landmark six-to-two vote in 1962, the United States Supreme Court made the redis-
tricting of state legislative seats a justiciable (that is, a reviewable) question.^3 The Court did
so by invoking the Fourteenth Amendment principle that no state can deny to any person
“the equal protection of the laws.” In 1964, the Court held that both chambers of a state
legislature must be designed so that all districts are equal in population.^4 Later that year,
the Court applied this “one person, one vote” principle to U.S. congressional districts onTABLE 9–2: Midterm
gains and Losses
by the Party of the
President, 1946–2010
seats gained or Lost by the
Party of the President in the
house of representativesYearPresident’s
Party
Outcome
1946 D. –55
1950 D. –29
1954 R. –18
1958 R. –47
1962 D. –4
1966 D. –47
1970 R. –12
1974 R. –48
1978 D. –15
1982 R. –26
1986 R. –5
1990 R. –8
1994 D. –52
1998 D. +5
2002 R. +5
2006 R. –30
2010 D. –63- Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962). The term justiciable is pronounced juhs-tish-a-buhl.
- Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964).
Copyright 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.