Read an Excerpt

The U.S. House of Representatives

The Fundamentals of American Government

St. Martin's Press

ELECTION TO THE U.S. HOUSE

As an institution, the House of Representatives has broad discretion to make its own rules. One rule dictated by the U.S. Constitution, however, is that its members stand for election every two years. This feature of the House is in marked contrast to the U.S. Senate, where members stand for election every six years — roughly one-third of the Senate seats are up for reelection every two years. This discrepancy explains, in part, why the House is more sensitive to shifts in public opinion — since every House seat is up for grabs in every regularly scheduled federal election, all members must attempt to win their districts in the same national political environment. For example, in 2010 — which, as demonstrated earlier, was a very good year for Republicans nationally — the GOP gained 63 seats in the House. With all 435 House seats in contention, Republicans managed to win 242 — more than enough for a majority. In the Senate, however, only 37 out of 100 Senate seats were up for election in 2010. Thus 63 senators did not have to face the voters. Democratic senators who were vulnerable to defeat were shielded from an electorate that was inclined to vote them out of office. In the House, however, no such shield exists.

Additionally, every person who uses the title "Representative" or "Congressman" or "Congresswoman" has won an election to represent his or her district in the House. Drawing attention to this fact may seem like stating the obvious, but this feature distinguishes the House from the U.S. Senate, in which senators can be appointed to vacant seats on an interim basis by their state's governor. (Senate seats often become vacant when senators are elected to other offices or retire before their term has expired.) Governors, however, have no power to appoint members of the House. If a member leaves the House before his or her term has expired, that member's seat remains vacant until the next election.

The electoral process that culminates in winning a House seat begins with a primary election. As with presidential elections, primary races for House seats serve as intraparty contests. Thus, all Democratic candidates for a House seat who have gathered the requisite legitimate signatures to gain ballot access compete against each other. Republican candidates for that same House seat will compete in their own primary election. The question of who is eligible to vote in such primary elections depends on the relevant state's election laws. States that hold closed primary elections only allow registered members to vote each party's contest. Thus, only registered Democrats can cast ballots in the Democratic primary election while only Republicans can participate in the Republican primary election. Registered independents usually cannot vote in closed primaries. Some states, however, allow independent voters to vote in either primary (but not in both). In each district, the winner of the Democratic nomination faces off against the Republican nominee in the general election held on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November.

In order to launch a viable bid for the House, a candidate must raise sufficient funds to support his or her campaign. Indeed, the cost of running for Congress has skyrocketed in recent years. In 2012 candidates who won election to the House spent roughly twice as much as victorious candidates did in 1986. Ironically, the competitiveness of House elections has waned during that same period. Successful House candidates in 2012 spent an average of $1.6 million on their campaigns. In the most competitive House elections, however, victorious candidates spent on average $2.3 million to gain election to the chamber.

Money raised by a candidate's campaign pays for television (and radio) advertising that makes the case for that candidate's election, and attacks his or her opponent(s). These funds also pay for a professional campaign staff, office space, and for the candidate's expenses (hotel rooms, transportation, etc.).

Because of the fundraising abilities and political savvy usually required to win election to the House, successful candidates have often held previous offices. They may have served in state legislatures, city councils, or even held a state-wide elected office (such as state treasurer or state attorney general). At times, however, candidates with no prior political experience, no connections to major campaign contributors, or deep pockets, do successfully run for the House. These candidates often run as "political outsiders" and manage to use their lack of a professional political background as an asset. They run against "business as usual" in Washington, D.C., and brand themselves an "everyman" who will truly represent average Americans in Congress. Such candidates can be particularly successful in elections held in political environments in which the public has grown disenchanted with those in power.

In 2006, for example, a year in which strong anti-Republican sentiment dominated the political climate, Tim Walz, a high school teacher and retired National Guard command sergeant major who had served in Afghanistan, launched a long-shot bid as a Democrat for Congress with no prior political experience. His opponent was Gil Gutknecht, a veteran Republican who had represented Minnesota's 1st Congressional District since 1994. Gutknecht was popular with his constituents, having been reelected to his seat two years earlier by a 25-point margin. Known for his mild-mannered temperament and wonky demeanor, he had not been considered by most analysts to be in danger of losing his seat. But the 2006 elections featured a toxic environment for Republicans — President George W. Bush had become deeply unpopular nationally, and in the eyes of voters the Republican Party in Congress had been tainted by scandal. A disgraced Republican lobbyist named Jack Abramoff — who later served time in prison stemming from charges of conspiracy, fraud, and tax evasion — was found to have ties to a number of influential Republican congressmen, one of whom went to prison for his role in the scandal. Gutknecht, however, had no ties to Abramoff or any other scandal. By all accounts, he was a personally honorable man, and was not high on the Democrats' list of top targets in the 2006 elections.

When a political party faces a poisoned political environment, however, voter contempt for that party can be wide reaching and endanger politicians who in any other year would have no trouble being reelected. Such was the case with Gutknecht. To make matters worse for the Republican incumbent, Tim Walz — an energetic upstart candidate who proved to be a highly talented campaigner — was able to capitalize on voters' dissatisfaction with the governing Republican majority. He was able to cast himself as an outsider and use his lack of political experience as an asset in an election in which membership in the party in power was tantamount to being "part of the problem" in the eyes of many voters.

The phenomenon of the victorious political outsider was also present in the 2010 congressional elections. This time, however, it was the novice Republican challengers who upset their Democratic incumbent counterparts. Republican Scott Rigell, for example — a car dealer based in Virginia Beach with no political experience — was elected to represent Virginia's 2nd Congressional District. John Runyan, a former professional NFL football player, ousted Democratic incumbent John Adler in New Jersey's 3rd Congressional District.

But at times an outsider's political success can be short-lived. Because they are often elected in unusual political climates, they may struggle to make headway in a normal electoral environment. In 2010, for example, Republican Joe Walsh managed to ride a national Republican wave to victory in a highly competitive congressional district in the Chicago suburbs. Walsh, a staunch conservative who was unconventional in his personal style and prone to making gaffes in front of reporters and cameras, had tried and failed to run for office in the past. He had run unsuccessfully for Congress in 1996 against longtime Representative Sidney Yates, a liberal Democrat who had held his congressional seat since the Truman administration. Walsh earned considerable attention in the local press for his unorthodox campaign tactics, which included drawing attention to Yates's advanced age (he was eighty-seven) by throwing him a "birthday party." In the end, Walsh — like many political outsiders — was rejected by the voters, losing to Yates by a whopping 26- point margin. 1996, however, was not a "wave" election year. But 2010 was such a year, and a pro-Republican wave swept into office candidates who would have been highly unlikely to win an election in a year in which the Democrats and Republicans were largely on equal political footing. Sometimes these "accidental" congressmen and congresswomen are swept out of office as quickly as they were swept in. Walsh, who sought to win in a new (but also politically competitive) congressional district in the next election following a process known as "redistricting" — went down to defeat in 2012.

Often, political novices who run for Congress lose their first election. Yet even a losing bid for Congress can prove valuable over the long term, because a candidate's elevated profile can bolster a future bid for public office. In fact, the challenger who defeated Joe Walsh in 2012 — an Iraq War veteran named Tammy Duckworth — had herself run unsuccessfully for Congress as a Democrat and political neophyte in 2006. In her first election, Duckworth had been an inexperienced campaigner who nevertheless attracted attention from national Democrats, due in large part to a powerful personal story. In 2004, Lt. Colonel Duckworth, a member of the Illinois National Guard, had been working on a Ph.D. in political science when she was deployed as a helicopter pilot to Iraq. There, a rocket- propelled grenade hit her helicopter. She lost both legs and her right arm was badly damaged.

While her military experience was likely a major asset in her first campaign, she faced a far more politically experienced Republican opponent, then-State Senator Peter Roskam. Although Duckworth lost to Roskam in 2006, she developed a reputation as a promising political talent among national Democrats. In 2009 President Obama nominated her to be Assistant Secretary for Public and Intergovernmental Affairs in the U.S. Veterans Affairs Department, thereby further elevating her national profile. In 2012 Duckworth seized an opportunity to run for Congress against Joe Walsh, and won by a 9- point margin.

Roskam's election in 2006, however, provides a more traditional example of a politician's path to the House. After earning a law degree he worked as a legislative aide to two powerful Republican congressmen, Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) and Tom DeLay (R-TX), who eventually rose through the GOP leadership to be the #2 ranking Republican in the House. Roskam first ran for public office himself in 1992, winning a seat in the Illinois General Assembly. (Most state legislatures mirror the legislative branch of the federal government, and therefore have a state senate [the "upper" body] and a state house or state general assembly [the "lower" body].) Roskam went on to serve in the Illinois State Senate in 2000, a position he held until his election to the House. He had also run unsuccessfully for the House in 1998, having lost to fellow Republican Judy Biggert in the primary election. Thus, by the time he ran for the House in 2006, he was a seasoned political veteran, an experienced campaigner, and already had the fundraising apparatus required to wage a competitive race for Congress. Moreover, Roskam's tenure in the Illinois state legislature had gained him fans and allies by the time he sought national office again in 2006. His antitax positions, for example, had earned him high praise from Americans for Tax Reform, the conservative advocacy group run by antitax crusader and powerful Republican operative Grover Norquist.

While some House candidates win elections largely without the help of their national political party, this remains the exception to the rule. Most candidates want their party's national campaign organizations to aid their efforts and spend money on their behalf. In the House, each major political party has its own nationally based campaign apparatus. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) support the campaign efforts of their candidates in districts throughout the country. Generally speaking, these organizations support the winners of their party's respective primary elections. In certain instances, a campaign committee will actually take sides in a primary — particularly when one candidate is seen as more likely than his or her primary opponents to win the general election.

Occasionally, a campaign committee intervenes in a primary only to see the voters thumb their noses at the establishment's preferred candidate. Such was the case in 2006 when the DCCC decided to intervene in the Democratic primary in New Hampshire's 1st Congressional District. With Democrats appearing poised for major gains that year — and given that NH-1 was (and remains) a highly competitive district — Democratic insiders sought to bolster the person whom they believed would be the strongest candidate against incumbent Republican Jeb Bradley. Thus, the DCCC threw its support to Rep. Jim Craig, the party's leader in the New Hampshire State House. Nationally based Democratic campaign operatives viewed Craig as a far stronger candidate in the general election than fellow Democrat Carol Shea Porter, a social worker with no political experience. But at the grass-roots level, Shea Porter had strong support — particularly among liberals.

Despite the DCCC's intrusion into the race, Shea Porter won the Democratic primary overwhelmingly, defeating Craig 54 to 34 percent (with the remainder of the votes going to other Democratic candidates). Following Porter's upset victory in the primary, national Democrats still failed to take her candidacy seriously and took no action on behalf of their new nominee. Despite being left to fend for herself financially, Shea Porter won the general election, ousting the Republican incumbent and becoming the first woman ever elected to Congress from New Hampshire.

While candidates do win without the support of their party's campaign committees, having such institutional support is generally viewed as desirable. In order to gain the attention and support of the DCCC or NRCC, a candidate must demonstrate that he or she is worthy of the party's investment. While the parties' campaign committees support their nominees in virtually all House races, they only devote financial resources to those whom they believe have a good chance to prevail in a competitive general election. Candidates seek to prove they are able campaigners by demonstrating they can raise money, connect with voters, attract positive attention in the press, and "stay on message" — a political mantra that refers to a candidate's ability to make a disciplined and persuasive case for his or her candidacy.

A candidate's fundraising prowess is important, not only to attract support from the party's campaign committee early on, but also to ensure that his or her message reaches the voters. This requires, among other things, considerable expenditures on television advertising. To fund a competitive race for Congress, a candidate can turn to a number of sources. The political parties' campaign committees spend money on their behalf and buy advertising in local media markets. Candidates themselves can also raise money from individuals inside or outside their districts. Outside groups (entities with a political agenda that are technically unaffiliated with the two political parties) can also spend heavily in House races.

---

Excerpted from The U.S. House of Representatives by Matthew Spieler. Copyright © 2015 Matthew Spieler. Excerpted by permission of St. Martin's Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

---