Results by State
|
Governors
|
U.S. Senate | U.S. House
Political Parties
A Wave Election
By any measure the 2010 mid-term elections were a resounding setback
for Democrats. Republicans were able to feed off of the energy
generated by Tea Party activists, while Democrats, after successful
cycles in 2006 and 2008, suffered from an
"enthusiasm gap." The result was reverses at every level for the
Democrats. The wave started in November 2009 as Republicans won
governorships in New Jersey and Virginia, it continued on Jan. 19,
2010, when Republican Scott Brown was elected to the U.S. Senate in the
Massachussetts special election, and on November 2 it hit with full
force. Democrats lost 63 net seats in the U.S. House, the
most since 1938. In the U.S. Senate, Democrats lost six seats, although
they did manage to maintain control of the chamber. (By comparison,
over the previous 17 mid-term elections the party
holding the White House had lost an average of 28 House seats and 4
Senate seats). Of 37 governships at stake, an astounding 23 were open.
Republicans won 23 to 13 for the Democrats and one Independent,
shifting the balance from 26 Democrats and 24 Republicans to 29
Republicans, 20 Democrats and 1 Independent. With reapportionment and
redistricting coming
up following the 2010 Census, state legislative races were intensely
contested (>).
Republicans gained over 675 legislative seats giving them the most
seats since 1928, according to the National Conference of State
Legislatures. A number of observers believe that Democrats could pay a
price for for their poor showing for a decade to come.
Sour Economy
Looming over the 2010 mid-term elections was the question of jobs and
the economy. The near collapse of the economy in 2008 created a
difficult
hole to dig out of, and the slow recovery weighed heavily against
Democrats. Candidate Obama had built people's
expectations up to an extraordinary level. On Feb. 17, 2009 President
Obama signed the $787 billion
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
of 2009 into law. The Recovery Act likely
worked to a degree, but conservatives attacked it as wasteful spending
and progressives argued that it had not been nearly enough (1, 2). Problems such as the loss
of manufacturing jobs, the housing crisis
(two million foreclosure
homes in Fall 2010 according to Realty Trac), rising poverty and income
inequality (poverty rate at 14.3
percent in 2009, the highest since 1994) were not
amenable to quick
fixes. The most obvious indicator of trouble for the Democrats
was the
continuing high
unemployment rate--officially 9.6% in the last report before Election
Day (1,
2). Deficit spending and the
national debt approaching $13 trillion (1,
2) caused great
unease. President Obama established
a
National
Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (or "debt
commission"), charged with issuing its report about a month after the
election, on Dec. 1, 2010 (>).
Meanwhile,
state
governments
were
affected
by
the
slow
economy;
revenue
shortfalls
and
structural
deficits
necessitated
difficult
cuts
(>). Also on
the economic front, Congress had to address the matter of whether to
extend all or some of the Bush tax cuts, set to expire on
Dec. 31, 2010; this debate was put off until the lame duck
session (1, 2).
Health Care
Health care reform was
clearly a major issue (1, 2).
After a year of
contentious debate, President
Obama
signed historic health insurance reforms
into law on March 23, 2010.
While one might have expected Democratic candidates would hail such a
landmark piece of legislation on the campaign trail, it proved to be a
big liability. Conservatives labeled it a big government takeover of
health care, and even supporters were put off by the overlong and messy
process in which it was adopted. Further, major provisions were not to
take effect for several years. A number of states quickly challenged
the
constitutionality of the law. Conservatives made repeal of "Obamacare"
a prime target in the campaign. One of the key elements of House
Republicans' "Pledge
to America" was "a plan to repeal and replace the government takeover
of
health care."
Other Issues
Illegal immigration (>) was
brought sharply into focus by the tough
measure signed into law by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) on April
23, 2010. The U.S. Department of Justice filed suit challenging
the
constitutionality of Arizona's law, S.B. 1070, on July 6, and half a
dozen other lawsuits were filed as well. In Phoenix on July 28, one day
before the law was to take effect, U.S. District Judge Susan R. Bolton
issued a preliminary injunction blocking major provisions of S.B. 1070
from being implemented.
Progressives
pushed
for
"comprehensive
immigration
reform"
and
argued
or
threatened
that
President
Obama would
lose
votes if he failed to
keep
his
promises. On the conservative side, in many Republican primaries
candidates sought to out-tough their opponents on the immigration
issue.
By Election Day, the April 20 explosion
and fire on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico and
subsequent devasting oil spill (>) had receded
from the headlines, but for almost three months the grainy images of
oil spewing into the Gulf were
a constant element of the news, and a serious distraction for the
administration. BP did not manage to stop the flow until the July 15
"integrity test." By then an estimated
4.9 million barrels had spilled into the Gulf, making it the largest
unintentional oil spill in history (some 800,000 barrels were
captured).
The disaster reminded Americans for a short while of the need to
address
our energy needs. Progressives' hopes
that the disaster might lead to a major energy bill addressing climate
change faded in the summer heat; conservatives were united against "cap
and
trade."
America remained a nation at war. Overseas, tens of thousands of
U.S. troops were in
Afghanistan and Iraq (1, 2). In May the number in
Afghanistan surpassed those
in Iraq, and on August 19, the last combat brigade exited Iraq, ahead
of the August 31 deadline set by President Obama; however, 50,000
troops remained. Meanwhile,
Afghanistan proved to be tough going.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal was ousted in June 2010 over disparaging
remarks and Gen. David
Petraeus took over leadership of the campaign. There were around
100,000 troops in Afghanistan.
According to the National Conference of State Legislators, voters
in 37 states had their say on 160 initiatives and
referenda affecting a broad range
of issues (1,
2).
The Tea Party Movement
The
broad perception
that
"Washington
is
broken" was reflected in numerous polls.
An April 2010 Pew Research Center survey found "a perfect storm of
conditions associated with distrust of government (>)."
In
July
2010
Gallup
found
only
11
percent
of
Americans
have
"a
great
deal"
or
"quite
a
lot" of confidence in Congress, a record
low, and the lowest of the 16 institutions Gallup polled on, while half
of Americans have "very little" or "no" confidence in Congress (>).
A major contributor to the lack of confidence in Congress was the dysfunctional legislative process and partisan, ideological tone. The U.S. Senate drew particular attention. Columnist E.J. Dionne, Jr. opined in a July 29 column that the Senate "has become an embarrassment to our democratic claims" and George Packer painted a bleak picture in his article "The Empty Chamber" in the August 9 issue of The New Yorker (1, 2, 3). Scandals involving several House members occurred during the 111th Congress, but these did not have much effect nationally as had been the case in 2006. (Reps. Eric Massa (D-NY) and Mark Souder (R-IN) resigned, there were charges against Reps. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) and Maxine Waters (D-CA), and a continuing investigation into Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) (1, 2).
2010
saw the
largest
number of candidates running for Congress in decades; more candidates
filed with the Federal Election
Commission to run for
House since the FEC began keeping track in 1975. Most importantly, the
dissatisfaction led
the
growth
of
the
Tea
Party
movement. The Tea Party movement recalled the Ross Perot-inspired
Reform Party, but it was not a party. Rather, it was a highly
decentralized "open source political organization." Tea Party Patriots
united around the values of "fiscal responsibility, constitutionally
limited government, and free markets." Although the Tea Party claimed
to draw from "all slices of the
political spectrum," its principles clearly aligned more closely with
the Republican Party; at the same time Tea Party activists had a strong
independent streak.
The Republican
Message
The Republican message, by and large, was a case against the excesses
of big government.
The fact that this paralleled the Tea Party principles gave Republicans
a huge boost. To a degree the GOP sought to nationalize their
campaigns. On September 23 House Republican
leaders formally unveiled "A Pledge to
America," described as "a new governing agenda built by
listening to you and focusing on your top priorities."
[PDF] (>) Republican House
Chief Deputy Whip Rep. Kevin McCarthy (CA),
who led the drafting of the 2008 Republican platform, helped craft the
document. Thousands of ideas
were submitted through the America Speaking Out website (>). The announcement event, at Tart
Lumber Company in Sterling, VA, recalled the time 16 years ago, on
Sept. 27, 1994, when over 300 Republican House
candidates rallied around the Contract with America on the steps of the
Capitol. The "Pledge to America" was a very different document than the
Contract, however. The Contract had specific legislative proposals,
while the Pledge set broad goals. The Pledge did not figure
significantly in day to day campaigning for House seats. Meanwhile, out
of the Republican
National Committee,
Republicans targeted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with a "Fire
Pelosi" message (>).
The Democratic
Message
Democrats vowed to focus on about 15 million "surge voters" who
helped propel President Obama to victory in 2008. They sought to
portray the
mid-terms as a choice between
results and obstruction (>).
Democrats argued that Republicans had little to offer beyond going back
to the ideas of President George W. Bush and that Republicans and
extreme Tea Party elements were inextricably linked. Ultimately,
the
results
will
be
seen
as
a
referendum
on
the
first
two
years of the Obama Administration. Although Obama's
popularity had declined significantly since the glory days of the
campaign, he and Joe Biden actively
raised money and campaigned for Democratic candidates (1, 2);
Michelle
Obama
also
ventured
out
onto
the
campaign
trail
starting
on
October
13.
Former
President
Bill
Clinton
did
more
than 90 events.
The DNC reported record spending for a midterm cycle, claiming "the
largest ground game in the history of midterm elections" and
"unprecedented outreach to key Democratic constituencies" (>). The enthusiasm gap undercut all
these efforts.
Other Parties
Although the
discontent could have led to
significant
wins
for
third
parties, they did not have much impact. The
major
parties'
huge
financial
and
institutional
advantages
remained. A
few
high
profile
independents did well.
Close to Four Billion Dollars
Money is always a factor in campaigns. 2010 shattered the record
for spending in a midterm cycle.
The Center for
Responsive Politics has estimated that spending on U.S. Senate and U.S.
House races in the 2010 cycle, including spending by party committees
and interest groups,
totaled between $3.7 and $4 billion (>);
this compares to $2.85 billion in 2006. This is just for federal
elections and does not include state races and ballot campaigns.
Candidates for U.S. House and Senate spent almost $1.7 billion ($1.06
billion by House candidates and $630.8 million by Senate candidates) (>).
The Wesleyan Media Project reported that over
$1 billion was spent on advertising in U.S. Senate, House and
gubernatorial races (>).
(The
Project
further
reported
that
2010
was
"the
most
negative
campaign
in
recent
history."
"More
than half of all ads are pure attack ads, and
if we include contrast spots, roughly 2 out of every 3 ads on the air
are negative,” stated Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of
government at Wesleyan University and co-director of the Project.)
The Campaign Legal Center identifies (>)
three
major
changes
that
occurred
in
campaign
finance
in
the
2010
cycle: A major question this cycle: the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens
United decision (>),
the
failure
of
disclosure
laws,
and
the
emergence
of
super
PACs.
Citizens
United, issued on January 21, 2010, made
it
possible
for
corporations
and
unions
to
use
general
funds
to
affect
elections;
before
such activity was done through political action committees which
had to follow disclosure rules.
Within
a
few
weeks
of
the
decision,
Democrats
introduced
the
DISCLOSE
Act
(Democracy
is
Strengthened
by
Casting
Light
on
Spending
in
Elections) (>).
The
bill
passed
the
House
in
June
but
failed
to
advance
in
the
Senate.
In
the
closing
month
of
the
campaign,
Democrats
sought
to
make
an
issue
of
spending
by
outside
groups
and
the
lack
of
transparency
and
gained
some
traction
(1,
2, 3). The Campaign Legal Center describes
"an unprecedented lack of political transparency." Also new for this
cycle, 72 super
PACs, "independent expenditure-only committees" which can accept
unlimited contributions, spent $83.7 million, led by the conservative
American Crossroads at $21.6 million (>).
Diversity
Republicans made historic strides in adding to the diversity of their
elected officials. They elected Susana Martinez governor of New Mexico,
Marco Rubio U.S. Senator from Florida and four new congressmen:
Francisco Canseco (TX), Jaime Herrera (WA), Raúl Labrador (ID),
and David Rivera (FL). They sent two African-Americans to Congress: Tim
Scott (SC) and Alan West (FL). Their women candidates also fared better
than the Democrats. Republicans elected three new woman
Governors, Susana Martinez (NM), Mary Fallin (OK) and Nikki Haley (SC);
a new woman Senator, Kelly Ayotte (NH); and nine of the 13 new women in
the House.
Women Officeholders Before and After the 2010 Midterm Elections
D |
R |
NP |
Total |
D |
R |
NP |
Total |
|
U.S. Senate |
13 |
4 |
- |
17 / 100 or 17.0% |
12 |
5 |
- |
17/100 or 17.0% |
U.S. House* | 56 |
17 |
- |
73 / 435 or 16.8% |
48 |
24 |
- |
72/435 or 16.6% |
Statewide Offices** |
50 |
20 |
1 |
71 / 315 or 22.5% |
||||
State Legislatures |
1,814 / 7382 or 24.6% |
*Does not include three Delegates from DC, Guam and USVI.
**Women Governors went from 3D and 3R to 4R and
2D.
Source: Center
for
American
Women
and
Politics,
Eagleton
Institute
of
Politics
at
Rutgers
All in all, however, there is still a long way to go for women to reach parity in elected offices. The Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP), Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers reported that a record number of women candidates filed for U.S. Senate (36: 19D, 17R) and U.S. House (262: 134D, 128R) in 2010. After the primaries, according to CAWP, there were 15 women U.S. Senate candidates (9D, 6R, including Murkowski), 138 U.S. House candidates (91D, 47R, not including non-voting delegate candidates) and 10 gubernatorial candidates (5D, 5R). After November 2 the number of woman elected officials at the top level remains essentially unchanged; indeed CAWP noted that due to defeats of Democratic congresswomen, 2010 is "the first time the number of women in Congress has dropped since 1979." Perhaps the statewide offices and state legislatures will show improvements.
Looking Ahead
The
White House faces the challenge of working with a Republican House,
while Republicans share the burden of governing in
these difficult economic times. Many observers are forecasting two
years of gridlock.
Republican successes in 2010 were not a bad showing for a party that
was seen as an "endangered species" following the 2008 campaign (see Time
magazine's May 18, 2009 cover story). Republican leaders recognize that
they are on probation, and that they must produce results. Another wave
could easily hit in 2012. Recall that President Bill Clinton was
convincingly elected to a second term following Democrats' setbacks in
the 1994 midterms.
--text by Eric
M. Appleman, revised January 2, 2011
See also: Reacting
to
the
Midterm
Elections
"Midterm Elections of 2010." The Forum. Vol. 8, Iss. 4. [Berkeley Electronic Press].
Money
FEC-2010 House and Senate Campaign Finance
Sunlight Foundation-Follow the Unlimited Money
Wesleyan Media Project-2010 Political Advertising Analysis
Center for Responsive Politics-Open Secrets
Campaign Finance Institute-2010 Federal Elections
The Campaign Legal Center
National Institute on Money in State Politics
Prognosticators
The Cook Political Report
The Rothenberg Political Report
Sabato's Crystal Ball
News Sources
Washington Post-Campaigns
New York Times-Politics
Hotline On Call
Politico-2010
The Hill-"Ballot Box" blog
CBS News-Political Hotsheet
MSNBC-Decision 2010
FOX News-Elections
Examples of Interest Group Activity
Potential 2012 Candidates
Newt Gingrich American Solutions, Solutions PAC
Mike Huckabee Huck PAC
Sarah Palin Sarah PAC
Tim Pawlenty Freedom First PAC
Mitt Romney Free & Strong America PAC
Rick Santorum America's Foundation
Looking Ahead: Redistricting
Republicans - RNC-Redistricting; RSLC-The Redistricting Majority Project (REDMAP); Making America's Promise Secure
Democrats - DLCC-Redistricting Updates; National Democratic Redistricting Trust, Foundation for the Future
Rose Institute of State and Local Government: "Redistricting in America: A State-by-State Analysis" [April 2010].
National Conference of State Legislatures: Redistricting
Brookings Institution: Principles for Transparency and Public Participation in Redistricting
USC Annenberg Center: The ReDistricting Game