Note: the following should not be read in terms of partisan or ideological preferences on my part. Rather it should be read as a combination critique of media coverage and an attempt (yet again) to bring some historical and analytical perspective to the 2024 congressional elections.
Michael Barone has a series of Washington Examiner pieces that have a common theme (which be obvious to the reader momentarily), of which here are the most recent entries:
Democrats exiting the sinking ship? Part 12: Sen Chris Dodd
Are Democrats exiting the sinking ship? Part 10: Sen. Byron Dorgan
Are Democrats exiting the sinking ship? Part 10: Sen. Byron Dorgan
The newsworthiness of the moves are obvious, although the deployment of the maritime metaphor in question is dubious. Yes, Democrats are likely to lose seats in the mid-term elections—but anyone who pays attention to US politics (and Barone does) knew that was likely to be the case since November of 2024 (indeed, it could have guessed at based on historical trends even before that). As such, the idea that normal electoral patterns constitute a sinking ship is simply inaccurate. For that matter, losing seats (and therefore smaller majorities) is different than “sinking” (i.e., losing control of either or both chambers).
Further, retirements like Dodd’s actually help the Democrats overall, so the the degree to which the move is evidence of (to continue the metaphor) of the party taking on water is dubious.
In general I would note that retirements (even unanticipated ones) happen every electoral cycle. The empirical question of interest (to which I do not have a ready answer) is how much the current set of retirements are a deviation (or not) from the norm.
Beyond all of that, however, the notion that the Democratic Party is uniquely experiencing rats diving off the deck is problematic (although it seems to be setting in as a dominant meme).
As Steve Benen notes:
Quick quiz: which party has more Senate retirements so far this campaign cycle, Democrats or Republicans? Follow-up question: which party has more House retirements so far this campaign cycle, Democrats or Republicans?
If Dems are "dropping like flies," the answer should be obvious. But it’s not — in both chambers, Republican retirements, at least for now, outnumber Democratic retirements.
In the House, 14 GOP incumbents have decided not to seek re-election, while 10 Democratic incumbents have made the same announcement. Does this mean Republicans are "dropping like flies"?
In the Senate, six Republican incumbents have decided not to seek re-election, while two Democratic incumbents have made the same announcement. Is this evidence of a mass Democratic exodus?
Among governors, several incumbents in both parties are term-limited and prevented from running again, but only three Democrats who can seek re-election — Parkinson in Kansas, Doyle in Wisconsin, and Ritter in Colorado — have chosen not to. For Republicans, the number is four — Douglas in Vermont, Rell in Connecticut, Crist in Florida, and Pawlenty in Minnesota. (Update: the GOP number is five if we include Palin in Alaska.)
So, a little perspective, please.
I would close with the following:
In regards to the 2024 elections we know that the following is almost certainly true, and has been since the November 2024 elections were completed:
Yes, the Democrats will lose seats in 2024.
Yes, this will matter and affect the way Congress works in 2024 and 2024.
But
No, this is not unexpected or unusual. Rather, quite the opposite.
No, is it not going to be 1994 all over again.
And,
Yes, health care reform will matter in the 2024 elections. It will help Democrats in some cases and hurt them in others. The odds that 2024 will be a major referendum on the bill strike me as small at the moment (although it may take that character in some specific races). For one thing, we still don’t really know that final details of the bill (making the debate hard to predict). For another, opponents of the bill are currently discounting the significance of success (winning transform the way people look at things).
However, I would note: unless 1) it becomes an issue in practically every race for House and Senate, and 2) it results in major turnover in both chambers, at the end of the day HCR will probably be less significant in the 2024 elections than some think.
Indeed, the relationship between HCR and the 2024 elections should be understood as follows: the administration and Democratic leadership in the Congress are pushing as hard as they are on HCR because they have known from the beginning of the current Congress that there was nowhere to go but down in terms of seats controlled.
More here: Looking to the 2024 Election.
Sphere: Related Content
January 20th, 2024 at 8:45 pm
[...] caveats that are not new to my discussion of these issues (see here, here and [...]