FairVote: The Center for Voting and Democracy

  • Who We Are
    • Who We Are
    • Staff and Leadership
    • Internships and Employment
    • For Press
    • Donate to FairVote
    • Contact FairVote
    • Speakers List
    • Get Involved
  • Reforms
    • Ranked Choice Voting
    • National Popular Vote
    • Fair Voting/Proportional Representation
    • Right to Vote Amendment
    • Universal Voter Registration
  • Research & Analysis
    • Presidential Elections
    • Congressional Elections
    • Redistricting
    • Voting Rights
    • Voter Turnout
    • Women's Representation
    • Elections Worldwide
    • All Reports
    • FairVote Blog
  • Learning Democracy
    • Lesson Plans
    • Ideas from Abroad
Text Size:
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
  • Blog
  • Newsletters/Media
  • Glossary
  • Donate
Research & Analysis / FairVote Blog / "Incumbency Bumps": Measuring National Partisan Swings By Evaluating the Incumbent Advantage in U.S. House Races, 1996-2012

"Incumbency Bumps": Measuring National Partisan Swings By Evaluating the Incumbent Advantage in U.S. House Races, 1996-2012

by Devin McCarthy, Rob Richie // Published December 4, 2012

Incumbent Advantages in U.S. House Races: The reason why most entrenched incumbents are safe in U.S. House elections is not simply that they represent districts leaning in their party's favor. Incumbency is an electoral advantage in itself. Incumbents typically gain that advantage through greater campaign spending ability, more press coverage, "franked mail" privileges, past campaigning in the district, more experienced campaign operations, and ongoing delivery of constituent services for their district. In addition, incumbents may have had opportunities to help shape the boundaries of their home district to their advantage.

We can quantify incumbency advantage by calculating the difference between incumbents' winning percentage and their districts' projected partisanship[1]. In the seven U.S. House elections from 1996 to 2008, for example, incumbents on average had a winning percentage nearly seven percent higher than their districts' partisanship would have predicted-translating into a 67%- 33%  win in a district that favors their party 60% to 40% and an average victory margin boost of 14% over a likely open seat result be in that district. While incumbent advantages continued in 2010-2012, they declined to less than 5% in both years-  a smaller incumbency bump, to be sure, but still providing a margin advantage of more than 8% for an incumbent over what a non-incumbent of the same party would likely win in the district.

Measuring Incumbency Bumps to Determine Partisan Swings: Given that incumbents of both parties are able to secure the same incumbency advantages in comparable ways, the differences in incumbency advantage by party in a given election can be used as a tool to determine the underlying tilt in the nationwide partisan division in a given year. In 2008, for example, the median Democratic incumbent ran 10% higher than their district's partisanship, while the median Republican incumbent only received a 2% bump. We interpret this as a year in which the mood of the electorate was generally favorable to incumbents, with their percentage likely to be 6% higher than a non-incumbent of their party, but it was a better year for Democrats. Democrats ran 4% ahead of that norm and Republicans 4% below it, suggesting that the underlying partisan preference of voters that year was 54%-46% Democratic.

Support for the Parties in 1996-2012: In the basic preference of voters in these nine elections, Democrats have been favored six times, including in 2012, and Republicans three times. But only three times has one party had a preference edge of more than 52% of votes: Democrats in 2006 (53%) and 2008 (54%) and Republicans in 2010 (53.8%). The fact that Republican in 2013 will have a secure hold on the House is tied to the fact that the median district is a 52.2% Republican district. All things being equal, therefore, Democrats need to have a particularly strong national advantage to overcome that Republican bias - as they did in 2006 and 2008 - and then avoid another year like 2010 where Republicans are more easily able erase past Democratic gains.

See chart below summarizing Incumbency Bump analysis for 1996-2012. See a clearer pdf of the same chart here. 

[1]District partisanship measures the degree to which a congressional district's partisan division of votes is likely to deviate from the national presidential partisan division.

 


 

 

* Omits open seats and uncontested seats

  • Research & Analysis
    • Presidential Elections
      • Presidential Tracker
      • Presidential Elections State-by-State: Hardening Partisanship
      • Report: Presidential Election Inequalities
      • 2012 Presidential Primary Resources
    • Congressional Elections
      • House Seat Apportionment: Media Gets It Wrong on Partisan Impact
      • Non-Majority Winners and "Spoilers" in Election 2010
      • Senate Vacancies
      • Dubious Democracy
      • Monopoly Politics 2012
      • Monopoly Politics 2014 and the Fair Voting Solution
      • FairVote's Projections for U.S. House Elections in 2016
    • Local Elections
    • Policy Guide 2016
    • Redistricting
      • The Redistricting Problem
      • Redistricting Reform
      • Litigation
      • Resources
      • Glossary
      • 2011 Redistricting News Archive
      • Monopoly Politics 2012 Map
      • Redistricting Roulette
    • Voting Rights
      • Voting Rights Act
      • Election Administration
      • D.C. Voting Rights
      • Felon Disenfranchisement
    • Voter Turnout
      • What Affects Voter Turnout Rates
      • How Can We Increase Voter Turnout
    • Women's Representation
    • Elections Worldwide
    • All Reports
      • Rural Population Analysis: Limited Attention Under the Status Quo
      • Following the Money — Campaign Donations and Spending in the 2008 Presidential Race
      • Legal Analysis of Alternative Single Winner Election Methods
      • Lost Votes in Vermont State Senate Elections
      • The Role of Cities in National Popular Vote Elections
      • The State of Women's Representation 2013-2014
      • Best Practices for Collaborative Policymaking
      • Comparative Structural Reform
      • Ranked Choice Voting and Racial Group Turnout
    • FairVote Blog
Return to Top
  • Sitemap
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Jobs & Internships
  • Store
  • Archive
  • Newsletters/Media
  • Contact Us
  • RSS Feeds

6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 240, Takoma Park, Maryland 20912

© 2000 – 2014 FairVote. All Rights Reserved.

    !

    This is an old version of the FairVote website that is no longer maintained. For up-to-date information on election reform, visit fairvote.org