Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


The Historically Undersized Pennsylvania Democratic US House Delegation

Bookmark and Share

The 2012 cycle yielded the lowest number and percentage of major party Pennsylvania U.S. House members from the state's winning presidential candidate since the birth of the two-party system in 1828

pennsylvaniaseal10.pngPennsylvania Democrats have come out swinging early and often this year as the party aggressively mounts a campaign to retake the governorship in the 2014 cycle with U.S. Representative Allyson Schwartz perhaps the strongest of many declared candidates seeking to upend the seemingly vulnerable Tom Corbett.

A much bigger challenge for the party, however, is to recapture some of the U.S. House seats lost in recent cycles with redistricting (and perhaps a few underachieving campaigns) resulting in the party's worst performance in congressional races in a presidential cycle since before the Great Depression.

As things currently shape up, D.C.'s major prognosticators list 10 of the GOP's 13 Pennsylvania U.S. House seats as "safe" with three seats occasionally popping up on the "likely Republican" or "lean Republican" lists: Pat Meehan in the 7th CD, Mike Fitzgerald in the 8th CD, and Keith Rothfus in the 12th CD.

As such, barring an unforeseen tsunami in a mid-term election with the party's president in the White House, Democrats will continue to languish with a paltry number of U.S. House seats that - just like in neighboring Ohio - is historically unprecedented.

So just how bad do things stand for the Pennsylvania Democratic U.S. House delegation?

A Smart Politics analysis finds that in 2012 Pennsylvanians elected the lowest number (five) and lowest rate (27 percent) of U.S. Representatives by a major party whilst simultaneously casting its electoral votes for that party's presidential nominee across the 47 presidential election cycles since the birth of the modern two-party system in 1828.

The 2012 Democratic U.S. House candidates in Pennsylvania broke their own record in futility set in 2004 when John Kerry carried the Keystone State as the party captured just seven of 19 seats in the nation's lower legislative chamber, or 36.8 percent.

That record was beaten last fall when only five Pennsylvania Democrats won House seats in the newly drawn map of 18 congressional districts, even though President Barack Obama carried the state by 5.4 points over Mitt Romney at the top of the ticket and Democratic incumbent U.S. Senator Bob Casey defeated Tom Smith by 9.1 points.

The only time a smaller percentage of House seats was won by the party of Pennsylvania's victorious presidential candidate was in 1912, when third party Progressive nominee Teddy Roosevelt scored a plurality victory while two Progressives won House contests: Willis Hullings in the 24th CD and Henry Temple in the 28th.

The five races won by the Democrats in 2012 was also the lowest number as well as lowest rate of seats captured by the party in a presidential election cycle since the Calvin Coolidge administration.

In the Election of 1928, the GOP was victorious in 35 of Pennsylvania's 36 U.S. House races with John Casey the lone Democrat to claim a seat that November.

To be sure, Democratic U.S. House candidates in Pennsylvania have fared poorly in many presidential election cycles over the last several decades, scoring an ever lower percentage of House seats a dozen times since 1828:

· 1860: 24.0 percent, 6 of 25 seats
· 1872: 18.5 percent, 5 of 27 seats
· 1880: 25.9 percent, 7 of 27 seats
· 1888: 25.0 percent, 7 of 28 seats
· 1896: 10.0 percent, 27 of 30 seats
· 1900: 13.3 percent, 4 of 30 seats
· 1904: 3.1 percent, 1 of 32 seats
· 1908: 12.5 percent, 4 of 32 seats
· 1916: 16.7 percent, 6 of 36 seats
· 1920: 2.8 percent, 1 of 36 seats
· 1924: 0.0 percent, 0 of 36 seats
· 1928: 2.8 percent, 1 of 36 seats

But what makes the 2012 and 2004 cycles so unusual for the party - and different from these aforementioned dozen hapless cycles - is that the Democratic presidential candidate carried Pennsylvania at the top of the ticket.

Overall, the party of the victorious presidential candidate in the Keystone State has won an average of 62.9 percent of U.S. House contests across the 47 cycles since 1828 - or more than twice the rate of victory by the Democratic Party in 2012.

And while Democrats remain optimistic about their chances to win Pennsylvania's 2014 gubernatorial race, that will not alleviate their deficit in the nation's lower legislative chamber, at least to the extent redistricting has cornered the party into several "unwinnable" districts across the state.

To effectuate change on that front, the key cycle will be 2018, when the party will need to not only win the governor's mansion but also retake the state legislature, which crafts such redistricting maps in the first instance.

And then there is this final tidbit: the 27.8 percent of U.S. House seats won by Pennsylvania Democrats in 2012 is the second lowest rate in state history for the party that won the White House.

A lower rate can only be found in 1916: Woodrow Wilson narrowly won reelection over Republican Charles Hughes while Democrats won only six of 36 seats from the Keystone State, or 16.7 percent. (Hughes carried Pennsylvania by 14 points).

Overall, Pennsylvania has sent an average of 60.3 percent of its U.S. Representatives to D.C. in presidential election cycles who were of the same party as the winner of the White House.

Percentage of Pennsylvania U.S. House Seats Won by Party of Winning Presidential Candidate, 1828-2012

Cycle
PA Pres Vote
Democrat
GOP/Whig
3rd Party
Total
% Seats PA Pres Party
2012
Democrat
5
13
0
18
27.8
2008
Democrat
12
7
0
19
63.2
2004
Democrat
7
12
0
19
36.8
2000
Democrat
10
11
0
21
47.6
1996
Democrat
11
10
0
21
52.4
1992
Democrat
11
10
0
21
52.4
1988
Republican
12
11
0
23
47.8
1984
Republican
13
10
0
23
43.5
1980
Republican
13
12
0
25
48.0
1976
Democrat
17
8
0
25
68.0
1972
Republican
13
12
0
25
48.0
1968
Democrat
14
13
0
27
51.9
1964
Democrat
15
12
0
27
55.6
1960
Democrat
14
16
0
30
46.7
1956
Republican
13
17
0
30
56.7
1952
Republican
11
19
0
30
63.3
1948
Republican
16
17
0
33
51.5
1944
Democrat
15
18
0
33
45.5
1940
Democrat
19
15
0
34
55.9
1936
Democrat
27
7
0
34
79.4
1932
Republican
11
22
0
33
66.7
1928
Republican
1
35
0
36
97.2
1924
Republican
0
36
0
36
100.0
1920
Republican
1
35
0
36
97.2
1916
Republican
6
29
1
36
80.6
1912
Progressive
12
22
2
36
5.6
1908
Republican
4
27
1
32
84.4
1904
Republican
1
31
0
32
96.9
1900
Republican
4
26
0
30
86.7
1896
Republican
3
27
0
30
90.0
1892
Republican
10
20
0
30
66.7
1888
Republican
7
21
0
28
75.0
1884
Republican
8
20
0
28
71.4
1880
Republican
7
18
2
27
66.7
1876
Republican
10
17
0
27
63.0
1872
Republican
5
22
0
27
81.5
1868
Republican
8
16
0
24
66.7
1864
Republican
9
15
0
24
62.5
1860
Republican
6
19
0
25
76.0
1856
Democrat
15
10
0
25
60.0
1852
Democrat
16
9*
0
25
64.0
1848
Whig
9
13*
2
24
54.2
1844
Democrat
12
10*
2
24
50.0
1840
Whig
15
13*
0
28
46.4
1836
Democrat
18
3*
7
28
64.3
1832
Democrat
14
0
14
28
50.0
1828
Democrat
24
0
2
26
92.3
Total
 
504
766
33
1,303
62.9
* Whig Party. Note: Far right column denotes the percentage of House seats won by the party of the winning presidential candidate in Pennsylvania. In 1828 and 1832 Pennsylvania elected 24 and 14 Jacksonian (Democrats) respectively to the U.S. House of Representatives. Table compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: Smart Politics Google Reader Subscribers: Transition Reminder
Next post: US Senate Special Elections by the Numbers

Leave a comment


Remains of the Data

Kevin McCarthy Becomes Least Tenured Floor Leader in US House History

At less than four terms, McCarthy has served 423 fewer days in the chamber than any floor leader in U.S. House history and almost 10 years less than the average leader.

Political Crumbs

The Second Time Around

Former Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez became the seventh major party or second place gubernatorial candidate in Colorado to get a second chance at the office when he narrowly won his party's nomination last month. Two of the previous six candidates were successful. Democrat Alva Adams lost his first gubernatorial bid to Benjamin Eaton in 1884, but was victorious two years later against William Meyer. Democrat Charles Johnson placed third in 1894 behind Republican Albert McIntyre and Populist incumbent Governor David Waite but returned as the Fusion (Democrat/Populist) nominee in 1898 and defeated GOPer Henry Wolcott. Gubernatorial candidates who received a second chance but lost both general elections include Democrat Thomas Patterson (1888, 1914), Progressive Edward Costigan (1912, 1914), Republican Donald Brotzman (1954, 1956), and Republican David Strickland (1978, 1986).


How Are the Plurality Winners Doing?

Nearly 40 percent of plurality winners of U.S. Senate elections lose their seat in the next election cycle. Will that happen to any of the three such incumbents on the ballot in 2014? Recent polling suggests Democrats Al Franken of Minnesota, Mark Begich of Alaska, and Jeff Merkley of Oregon all currently have an advantage over their nominated/frontrunning GOP opponents, but each is flirting with plurality support once again. Franken led endorsed GOPer Mike McFadden 48 to 42 percent in a new SurveyUSA poll while the polling group showed Merkley with a 50 to 32 percent advantage over Monica Wehby. Begich led each of the three major GOP candidates in last month's PPP survey: 42 to 37 percent over Daniel Sullivan, 41 to 33 percent over Mead Treadwell, and 43 to 27 percent over Joe Miller.


more POLITICAL CRUMBS

Humphrey School Sites
CSPG
Humphrey New Media Hub

Issues />

<div id=
Abortion
Afghanistan
Budget and taxes
Campaign finances
Crime and punishment
Economy and jobs
Education
Energy
Environment
Foreign affairs
Gender
Health
Housing
Ideology
Immigration
Iraq
Media
Military
Partisanship
Race and ethnicity
Reapportionment
Redistricting
Religion
Sexuality
Sports
Terrorism
Third parties
Transportation
Voting