E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSEven though all eyes are focused on the battle for the White House, there are 435 House members who’ll be elected next Tuesday. The House is likely to stay in Republican hands, giving Mitt Romney a helping hand if he wins the presidency, but presenting President Barack Obama with a legislative choke-point if he wins a second term, potentially limiting or blocking his agenda for at least two years.
Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, discusses seats Democrats would need to take control of the House, and the chances of the Republican Party gaining seats on Tuesday.
In the final days of the 2012 campaign, Democrats face a steep climb in their effort to retake control of the House, probably one that’s too steep.
Needing 25 seats to regain the majority they lost in 2010, the Democrats are fighting both against the power of incumbency and, in some states, against partisan lines drawn during last year’s re-mapping of congressional districts.
One forecasting model designed by political scientists Eric McGhee, John Sides, and Ben Highton predicts that the Democrats will gain one seat in the House. Analyst David Wasserman of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report said in an assessment Thursday, “the most likely outcome is no net change to a Democratic gain of five seats.”
Related: 2012 Election Book from NBC News
In an April interview on Fox News, House Speaker John Boehner said “there's a one in three chance that we could lose” the House and “we got a big challenge, and we've got work to do.” Although, that statement may have been more of a spur to motivate GOP donors then a genuinely fretful forecast of the risks to Boehner’s majority.
Karl B Deblaker / AP
House Speaker John Boehner speaks to supporters gathered at a rally in Raleigh, N.C., Saturday, Oct. 13, 2012.
But the speaker’s comment gave ammunition to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Rep. Steve Israel who flagged it for Democratic donors in an e-mail “BREAKING: He admitted it” – in other words Boehner had conceded that his majority was in jeopardy.
Even if Boehner was exaggerating for effect back in April, there are surely opportunities for Democratic gains, some of them obvious ones – such as the Democratic-leaning upstate New York district represented by conservative first-termer Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle – and others that the DCCC has worked hard to create and exploit in the last several months.
Israel “decided that we needed to expand the playing field and play offense in more Republican-held seats or else Republican outside groups would overtake us with their money. We’ve been aggressive and put them on defense in seats they never would have expected,” said DCCC communications director Jesse Ferguson.
Among the places Democrats say they have a good chance to make gains:
- California’s 36th Congressional District: Rep. Mary Bono Mack, first elected in 1998 after the death of her husband Rep. Sonny Bono, faces a genuine challenge. “Raul Ruiz, the Democrat, has clearly made this into a more competitive race than some initially anticipated it would be," said Andy Stone, spokesman for the House Majority PAC, an outside Democratic group that will have spent over $300,000 on ads in that race by Election Day.
- Florida’s 2nd Congressional District: Democrat Al Lawson is making a challenge to freshman Rep. Steve Southerland, with help from the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, House Majority PAC, and a get-out-the-vote group called Fair Share Action, which is funded by AFSCME, by Denver gay rights activist and Democratic mega-donor Tim Gill, and others. The district had been represented for years by Blue Dog Democrat Allen Boyd before Southerland toppled him in 2010.
- Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District: Democrat John Ewing, the treasurer of Douglas County (Omaha), is trying to unseat Rep. Lee Terry, first elected in 1998. "We view it as a real possibility to expand the map here," said Stone. The House Majority PAC has invested $75,000 in late TV buys. The Omaha World Herald endorsed Ewing calling him “an extremely capable public servant” with “the ability to work across divides to find practical solutions.” The paper added, “After 14 years, it's time for a change.”
The New York Times' David Leonhardt talks about the jobs report and the country's fiscal future.
The DCCC “Red to Blue” list is the roster of challengers whom the party designates for financial, communications, grassroots, and strategic support. The “Red to Blue” label signals to Democratic donors that these are competitive candidates worth backing. Some on the “Red to Blue” list, like Manan Trivedi who is seeking to oust battle-hardened five-term survivor Rep. Jim Gerlach in the suburbs of Philadelphia, seem likely to fall short.
And one red-to-blue Democrat has already fallen by the wayside: Democrats had high hopes for Pete Aguilar in California’s 31st Congressional District, but he failed to win a place on the ballot, getting only 22 percent in the June open primary in which the top two finishers advance to the November ballot.
The GOP has suffered from its own unexpected events: in Tennessee, first-term Rep. Scott DesJarlais, a doctor, is under pressure after The Huffington Post reported that he had an affair 12 years ago with a patient while he was getting a divorce. The news site published a transcript of a telephone conversation in which DesJarlais allegedly counseled the woman to get an abortion.
For all the effort and money being invested in this year’s House races, in one sense, the outcome of the struggle next Tuesday was largely shaped in 2010, when conservative fervor and anger over “Obamacare” drove Republicans to the polls, resulting in catastrophic losses for the Democrats. The Republicans won 63 seats, the largest gain for either party since 1948.
Recommended: Romney's closing argument: 'I promise change'
This year’s list of competitive races makes it clear once again how big a catastrophe 2010 was for the Democrats. They lost more than two dozen incumbents who’d represented Republican-leaning districts – including some long-serving members such as former House Armed Services Committee chairman Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri. The districts Democrats like Skelton once held, or the redrawn versions of them, are now mostly safe for Republicans.
“Our strategy in 2010 was to go to the seats that wanted to vote Republican,” said NRCC communications director Paul Lindsay. Democrats such as Skelton were in districts that had voted for Republican presidential candidates Sen. John McCain in 2008 and President George W. Bush in 2004. This year, Lindsay said, “We are competing in Republican territory; they (the Democrats) are competing in more swing territory.”
Recommended: Ad spending closes in on $1 billion
But in 2010, Democrats also lost several districts, especially in the Northeast and Midwest, which had been Democratic turf, which they’ve had to spend money this year to try to reclaim.
To be sure, some of the first-term Republicans who are in Democratic-leaning districts seem unlikely to survive next Tuesday: Buerkle, for one, may be too conservative for her Syracuse-based district.
But in the irregular cycle of each party gaining, then losing, and then regaining the House majority, it now appears that the Democrats’ turn has not yet come.
Redistricting explains some of their challenge.
Not all redistricting has worked to the Republicans’ advantage: they’ll lose some races in Illinois and California due to re-mapping. But Republicans were able to play defense. Case in point: Pennsylvania.
Pollster and political scientist Terry Madonna at Franklin & Marshall College said Pennsylvania Republicans did “a masterful job” in gerrymandering the state’s congressional districts, calling it “the most skillful gerrymander any state has done.” The Republicans protected their incumbents, especially the four freshmen elected in 2010.
The only House seat now in play in the Keystone State is a Democratic one held by Rep. Mark Critz, Madonna said.
He added that the $5.4 million investment of Republican money on TV ads in the presidential race in Pennsylvania in the final ten days of the campaign might give a lift to Critz’s GOP opponent Keith Rothfus by boosting Republican turnout.
When all the votes are counted, it seems almost certain that House Democrats will have much more work to do in 2014.
Leave a Comment:
Get rid of Harry Reid and congress might do some work.
i agree he is a major road block.
Where has he a Nancy been latley?
Nancy has been in the minority, although she is the minority leader in the House (democrats there aren't bright enough to remove her either).
Reid, however kept his seat in 2010, so he is not up for re-election this year (it would be nice if he were). And considering that the democrats are not intelligent enough to oust him as their leader in the Senate, that means that republicans need to take the majority to get rid of that road block. This is probable as this crop of senators up for re-election is primarily democrat in composition. If even half of the seats up for a vote become or stay republican, then Reid is out as Senate leader.
KevinT Get rid of the republican house and congress might do something. Why would you only want to hold one side responsible. BOTH SIDES CAUSED THE PROBLEM!
We will keep the House no matter what, so you Liberal loons better pack your bags and move to Cuba.
Vote for the Mormon Romney, do not vote for the Moron Obama.
Sorry; we're all Americans; we're all staying; deal with it.
Deal with this jockstrap. President Elect Romney!
Send Robmee back to the Cayman Islands!
Boozer Go have another round and SFTU
wake up country
fire congress this tuesday....simply vote out the incumbent!
Democrats don't have to retake the House... Once Obama is reelected there will be more than enough Moderate Republicans to swing the balance back over to a House that is willing to work with the President instead of for Grover Norquist...
Wrong The members of congress will do what the people voted them in to do. Each congressman plays fiddle to their voters so they can be reelected.
If Obama is re-elected it wont matter who controls Congress. Obama will simply finish with one last Executive Order. He will declare himself King of all citizens. No pun intended.
@ under,
really, sounds like more of the same Republican fear-mongering that they have done for the past 4 years... seems like I heard the same thing about your gun rights being take away also...
KevinT What planet have you been living on. You know that congress has not been doing what they promised to do. This they played the fiddle to Grover Norquist.
Senate Republicans applied pressure to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) in September, successfully persuading it to withdraw a report finding that lowering marginal tax rates for the wealthiest Americans had no effect on economic growth or job creation.
"The pressure applied to the research service comes amid a broader Republican effort to raise questions about research and statistics that were once trusted as nonpartisan and apolitical," the Times reported. Democrats in Congress, however, have resurfaced the report and published it in full. It can be read below.
Republicans told the Times they had issues with the tone, wording and scope of the report, but they clearly objected most strongly to its findings, which undermine the governing fiscal philosophy of the party, that tax cuts for the wealthy will spur growth and benefit everybody.
GOP officials told The Times that the decision by the CRS came after a cooperative discussion, but Democrats have suggested that the move is part of a broader effort by Republicans to squelch legitimate research that runs counter to their economic principles.
The CRS report, by researcher Thomas Hungerford, concluded:
The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie.
However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. As measured by IRS data, the share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession. At the same time, the average tax rate paid by the top 0.1% fell from over 50% in 1945 to about 25% in 2009. Tax policy could have a relation to how the economic pie is sliced—lower top tax rates may be associated with greater income disparities.
You know they should have someone who is unemployed give the job's report.
But then they'd be doing a job.
They should have waited until next Wednesday then Obama could have done he is good at giving speaches and he will be lookking for a job. Haha.
The line "and others that the DCCC has worked hard to create and exploit in the last several months." says it all.
Exploit.
The Democratic Party supported unions are turning down extra help from other states to turn power back on in NJ and NY because they are NONUNION workers. Can you believe that. People without heat and power won't get it because the unions don't want help from NONUNION electrical workers. Why people can't see that the D's work for unions, which is just as bad as the R's working for the big corps.
R this time, 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond. I am a conservative, but I would rather lose to the Green Party than lose to the Democrats anymore. We need a 3rd, 4th and 5th Party which will FORCE the government to find ways to work together. 2 are destroying us.
Our Congress does not function as it should !
Republicans have been obstructionists from the beginning !
First it was OLE YOU LIE WILSON !! then Mitch McConnell "Our goal is to make President Obama a one term president, AT ALL COSTS"
This is the Republican Party Today!!!
Romney/Ryan funded by the Kock Brothers "Propaganda Machine"
Kock Brothers "PROPAGANDA MACHINE" THE 3%
The Republican Reformist Party!!
Romney/Ryan are the founder and leader of the Republican Reformist Party!! and the most influential voice in the organization, the systematic extermination of the belief in America!! and the destruction of 50% of the American population by all means!!! Including the 47% who have no VOICE in POLITICS!!
VOTE OBAMA/BIDEN 4 for 44
Care for a tissue?
Get real. George Soros is running the show for the democrats. Kind of pathetic you choose a Hungarian over an American company.
what did they do when dems had control? oh yeah, shove obama care down our throats.
Republicans need to finish the job this year by adding the senate and presidency to the mix. We should be able finally make some progress and stop the defict and entitlement spending bleeding. Can't wait to see the true obstructionist from the dumocrats silent.
People have not met the real Obama. If he is reelected, he will show his true colors this next term, and it will be bad for the country.
Agreed Kevin. His comments to Putin say everything we should need to know to not vote for the guy, but no one is covering it. Voters from all backgrounds should be demanding to know what he meant by having more flexibility after the election. Obviously, he plans to do something that he can't tell us now. What is it? It's amazing and disgusting that his supports just don't care.
Updated election forecasting model still points to Romney win, University of Colorado study says
October 4, 2012 •
Social Sciences
An update to an election forecasting model announced by two University of Colorado professors in August continues to project that Mitt Romney will win the 2012 presidential election.
According to their updated analysis, Romney is projected to receive 330 of the total 538 Electoral College votes. President Barack Obama is expected to receive 208 votes -- down five votes from their initial prediction -- and short of the 270 needed to win.
The new forecast by political science professors Kenneth Bickers of CU-Boulder and Michael Berry of CU Denver is based on more recent economic data than their original Aug. 22 prediction. The model itself did not change.
“We continue to show that the economic conditions favor Romney even though many polls show the president in the lead,” Bickers said. “Other published models point to the same result, but they looked at the national popular vote, while we stress state-level economic data.”
While many election forecast models are based on the popular vote, the model developed by Bickers and Berry is based on the Electoral College and is the only one of its type to include more than one state-level measure of economic conditions. They included economic data from all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Their original prediction model was one of 13 published in August in PS: Political Science & Politics, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Political Science Association. The journal has published collections of presidential election models every four years since 1996, but this year the models showed the widest split in outcomes, Berry said. Five predicted an Obama win, five forecast a Romney win, and three rated the 2012 race as a toss-up.
The Bickers and Berry model includes both state and national unemployment figures as well as changes in real per capita income, among other factors. The new analysis includes unemployment rates from August rather than May, and changes in per capita income from the end of June rather than March. It is the last update they will release before the election.
Of the 13 battleground states identified in the model, the only one to change in the update was New Mexico -- now seen as a narrow victory for Romney. The model foresees Romney carrying New Mexico, North Carolina, Virginia, Iowa, New Hampshire, Colorado, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida. Obama is predicted to win Michigan and Nevada.
In Colorado, which Obama won in 2008, the model predicts that Romney will receive 53.3 percent of the vote to Obama’s 46.7 percent, with only the two major parties considered.
While national polls continue to show the president in the lead, “the president seems to be reaching a ceiling at or below 50 percent in many of these states,” Bickers said. “Polls typically tighten up in October as people start paying attention and there are fewer undecided voters.”
The state-by-state economic data used in their model have been available since 1980. When these data were applied retroactively to each election year, the model correctly classifies all presidential election winners, including the two years when independent candidates ran strongly: 1980 and 1992. It also correctly estimates the outcome in 2000, when Al Gore won the popular vote but George W. Bush won the election through the Electoral College.
In addition to state and national unemployment rates, the authors analyzed changes in personal income from the time of the prior presidential election. Research shows that these two factors affect the major parties differently: Voters hold Democrats more responsible for unemployment rates, while Republicans are held more responsible for fluctuations in personal income.
Accordingly -- and depending largely on which party is in the White House at the time -- each factor can either help or hurt the major parties disproportionately.
In an examination of other factors, the authors found that none of the following had a statistically significant effect on whether a state ultimately went for a particular candidate: The location of a party’s national convention, the home state of the vice president or the partisanship of state governors.
The authors also provided caveats. Their model had an average error rate of five states and 28 Electoral College votes. Factors they said may affect their prediction include the timeframe of the economic data used in the study and that states very close to a 50-50 split may fall in an unexpected direction due to factors not included in the model.
“As scholars and pundits well know, each election has unique elements that could lead one or more states to behave in ways in a particular election that the model is unable to correctly predict,” they wrote.
All 13 election models can be viewed on the PS: Political Science & Politics website at http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=PSC.
Contact:
Peter Caughey, CU-Boulder media relations, 303-492-4007
David Kelly, CU Denver media relations, 303-315-6374
YES Romney will win when he cheats.
Ohio = Obama 4 more
I hope Ohio has more sense than to vote for Oblamer again, I suspect if he is elected again, he'll find someone else to blame.
Oblamer is going to lose!
President Obama is going to win this election by a good margin (Electoral College) and the Senate will preserve the Democratic majority. We don't need or want to have a Democratic house. We just need to remove the extremists who put politics ahead of the good of the country (on both sides of the aisle).
I suspect that the Republicans will be ready to go to work. They failed in their agenda to make this a one-term presidency. If they don't get their $$it together immediately, they will definitely lose the house in two years.
Pipe dreaming again....Dumocrats will lose both, then some real work will get done.
The funny thing is that despite their jobs, jobs and more jobs platform that was in fact their only agenda.
Oh yes, they also put forth 40 bills defining marriage.
With an 11% approval rating I am amazed any incumbent will keep his/her seat.
The choices voters face are in order:
Bad
Worse
Worst
The democrats don't need to control the house, they just need republicans in the house that are willing to work on fixing the problems. Shutting down government is not a solution. Not paying our debt is not a solution. I think some of the more radical tea-nuts have lost their primaries to more moderate people. Lets hope at least. I know its true in my state. One side will always not have a majority. The answer cannot be 'we will just wait for the next election to do anything'.
It will be interesting to see what Mitch McConnell will say if Obama wins. Will he just wait 4 more years before deciding to work for his country? What a waste of a senate seat. Do nothing for 4 years because you are a bigot.
change.....Obama is the problem.
Obama is a problem for you. You are the problem with America.
I like Chuck Lorre's Vanity Card from last night "Ask yourself if you are better off than the sh*t storm we were in 4 years ago"
OBAMA/2012
no better off thats for sure.
I am better off,I am better off,I am better off, That's for sure.
This may sound blasphemous but I want the President and Senate to remain with the Democrats and the House to be with the Republicans. Both parties are so evil these days only focusing on their special interests that anyone who has the complete power will completely ruin this country.
The Democrats will grant amnesty in a heartbeat to the millions that charged into this country illegally and take every public assistance available. Don't believe me, look at California where the illegal are the only thing that matter to the Democratic majority. Schools and colleges are closing, medical emergency rooms are closing but guess what they can give 40 million to illegals, they can drive without a legal license, they can collect any sort of welfare without any problem.
Similarly the The Republicans bent on privitizing everything under the sun, would throw grandma and grandpa to the mercy of for profit companies that will deny them any medical coverage or benefit at the time they most need it.
So I hope it stays the way it does.
I'm glad to see at least one person hope for the thing that we Americans are likely to do. I'd say that apparently James is the only person who actually likes America, but his post sure sounds like he dislikes both halves of America equally.
I'd prefer a Democrat house like we had in 2009/10 when we turned around the worse economic crisis since the Great Depression (or like we had in 93/94 when we turned around the second worst crisis). But gridlock to me is acceptable, because we are on the right track of slow but steady improvement. Trying to rush to make the recovery faster by dramatic changes always risks making things worse. Really - massive tax changes or massive spending changes would be detrimental. Best to do as Obama maps out - small increase on taxes above $250k and continued small increases in spending, and wait for the great American economy to do the heavy lifting.
if that is what you hope for, you don't remember that congress passing obamacare against the will of 70% of american citizens. that should tell you right there who is going to win.
Democrats are Parasites. Between 2008 and 2010 they had full control and so much for making the country better. Maybe the Republicans, in spite of their Bush sins, can do a good job this time if they are in control?
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
As to 2009 & 2010: Job losses from 700,000/month to job gains of 200,000/month
DJIA from 6600 to 13,000
GDP from -7% to +2%
End of Iraq war
All Americans getting health care
Lowest increase in health care costs in 50 years
Sheesh - you couldn't ask for a better turn around. If we'd kept the Dems in the House in 11 & 12, we might be a lot better. Those @#^&@%@ obstructionists didn't do a single bit of good in their 2 years. And what about their promise to cut spending by $100b? Anyone remember that? Spending is up $300b over 2010 and there is no more stimulus to jsutify it. All their spending is corporate pork.
After President Obama get's reelected we will stay on the congress to get things done, and stop this blocking, obstructing and filibustering GOP/baggers....
We aren't worried!!!!!
O&JOE
We have a system of "checks and balances." The liberals write the checks and expect the earning-class to pay the balances.
The GOP in the house has been writing the checks the last two years. Read your constitution.
Brussells -
So true.
despite what this article says, in actual facts the dems stand to lose even more house seats and will probably lose control of the senate. democrats, the tsunami is coming.
Hope your tin foil hat is waterproof.
All eyes are on Obummer and how he handles the East Coast disaster. Do your job Mr. President, get those people help.
Chris Christie gives the President an A+.
It Aint gonna happen... the house is in republican control, the senate will follow and Romney will win this election.
I have never understood the way a liberal thinks. it just makes no sense. why would anyone vote for the biggest failure in american presidential history, TWICE. Why anyone would vote for someone who has no concept of how to lead is beyond me.
And I can't understand why you think going from DJIA of 6600 to 13,200 is "failure."
Or why going from 10.2% unemployment to 7.9% is "failure"
Or why going from -7% GDP to +2% is "failure."
Or why going from losing 700,000 jobs/month to making 170,000/month is "failure"
Or why achieving the highest consumer confidence in 5 years is "failure"
and so on. You explain to me why those things are "failures," and I'll tell you why I'm very happy Obama is going to get 4 more years.
How can anyone think that the GOP in the House will block Obama from doing anything?
He'll just issue edicts, proclamations and 'Executive Orders' like every other Emperor does.
Hey Boner! where are all the jobs you promised after your drunk ass was made speaker of the house? You worthless souse, your a God damn drunk who will hopefully develop a liver disorder or better yet cancer from all those cigarettes you smoke. Your worthless, please drive your car at a high rate of speed into a tree or a brick wall so someone else can actually work for the people.
Hey Nick! Check Harry Reid's pockets and desk!
if you republican conservative tea party of the hateful are sooooooo sure you've got the right plan for america , '' it is noooo different from the bush trickled down reaganomics plan ''. why doesn't your people insight the great and effective '' bush years '' ???? !!!!!!!!!! why are you people sooooooooo ashamed of his plan ????? !!!!!!!!!!! remember his plan is nooooooooooo different from robme and lying ryan's plan , lol !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That's the point that no conservative seems able to address.
Those guys keep saying - let's do the same stuff that collapsed the economy in 2008: deregulate, cut taxes on the wealthy, and increase military spending by trillions.
But they won't explain why the economy tanks every time they try it.