November 2006

Election Watch 2006 (Session II)

AEI’s Election Watch series, which began in 1982, is the longest running election program in Washington. This year’s final session, on November 9, summarized the 2006 midterm election results. Panelists focused on the campaigns and the 110th Congress, which convenes in January 2007. They also considered the following topics: Who won and why? What were the campaigns’ political missteps and masterstrokes? Who will chair each committee and what will it mean for legislation, oversight, and the 2008 elections?

Karlyn Bowman
AEI

In each election cycle, we look for a key group which impacted election results. This year, independents and moderates swung massively to the Democrats. Democrats won independents by 57 to 39 percent.

Democrats won women’s votes by their largest margin since the late 1980s, but they also won men’s votes for the first time since 1992. The marriage gap was much larger than the gender gap, as married voters barely fell into the Republican camp, while nonmarried voters swung massively to the Democrats. Women win in Congressional races just as often as men do, but the key is getting them to run. This has been happening more often at the local and state level, and it explains the increase in women elected to Congress.

The intensity of opposition to Bush and the Iraq war was clear in the exit polls. Only 29 percent of voters, however, indicated that they felt we should withdraw our troops now. Sixteen percent wanted to send more. The war was probably the most important issue for voters in the election.

Statistics are now available for a number of other important issues. The Democrats want to raise the minimum wage, with 86 percent of voters in favor. Democrats have also stated that they wish to break ties between lobbyists and legislators. The majority of the public, however, is skeptical that both parties can cooperate to achieve this goal. Democrats wish to implement all of the recommendations of The 9/11 Commission Report, but the public is also skeptical that this will be done. There is no indication that Medicare played a big role for seniors, who vote predominantly for Republicans. Polls have shown that a large majority of the public believes that college tuition is too expensive for the average family. Finally, many voters feel that oil companies should be more heavily regulated.

Norman J. Ornstein
AEI

District gerrymandering may have prevented Democrats from picking up a larger number of seats than they did. It may be difficult for Democrats to hold the House in 2008. At the same time, the landscape of the Senate is much more favorable for Democrats, because twenty-one Republican seats and only twelve Democratic seats will be in play in 2008.

The Democrats saw a large influx of moderate and conservative members. This means that Democrats in both houses will have a less homogeneous profile in the future. The number of moderate Republicans decreased in both houses, so the Republican Party has become more homogeneous and moved further to the right on the political spectrum.

Democrats have a larger majority than expected, but it is not large enough to be cohesive and prevent acrimonious leadership struggles for majority leader and majority whip. There will also be leadership struggles among Republicans in both houses.

The emergence of a Democratic majority in both houses will have important consequences. During the next two years, it will be very difficult for nominees to be confirmed for positions on appellate courts, especially the Supreme Court. The future will be difficult for executive branch nominees as well. The Democratic majority in both houses will have enormous control over the policy agenda, as it will decide what issues will be addressed, as well as how they will be handled. Finally, Democrats will control investigations by increasing the amount of agency oversight, hearings on wrongdoing, and possible impeachment proceedings.

But can the president work cooperatively with leadership in both houses? Incentives, such as the president’s need to define a legacy, could help to promote cooperation. Areas of possible common ground exist, such as immigration, health care, education, and energy conservation.

John C. Fortier
AEI

This was a very significant election for a number of reasons. Similarly to Republicans in 1994, no Democratic incumbents lost. No open seat Democrats lost. Many prominent moderates defeated conservative Republicans in conservative districts. The number of moderate Republicans who lost was significantly larger than the number of moderate Democrats coming in.

Not counting Florida, only two Republicans lost in House bids in the South. In New England, only one Republican representative remains.

The governors’ races were not surprising. Six seats changed from Republican to Democrat. Republicans picked up no governorships, not even by close margins. Democrats also made significant gains in state legislatures, winning majorities in nine states.

Unfortunately, it does not seem that the president and the new Democratic majorities will have as many incentives to work together as divided governments usually have. The 2008 race will be open for both sides, and a limited amount of time exists before campaigning will begin anew.

AEI intern Seth Rokosky prepared this summary.