| Monopoly Politics 2004: Projections in U.S. House Races | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| In this report we list our projections for U.S. House races in 2004 and provide all the data used in making those projections. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| We go into more detail in our | methodology and terminology section | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| For understanding this report, note the following: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1. Projections are based on the parties equally dividing the national vote. Shifts in that vote would shift | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| some, but not many, of the projections. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2. 2000 partisanship, 2002 partisanship and (for Texas only) 2004 partisanship are based on the way we analyze presidential | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| election results in a district. If district lines had not changed since 2000, the district partisanship would not have changed. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3. The key projection terms are: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Landslide: winning by more than 20% | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comfortable: winning a seat by more than 10% but less than 20% | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tight: winning a seat by less than 10% | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Competitive: seat is potentially in play in 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Vulnerable: seat most likely to change hands in 2004 in a 50-50 national vote | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4. In the incumbent column, blue text indicates Democrats, red text indicates Republicans and light green text indicates Independents. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5. Note that due to redistricting, there often was not a clean connection between district numbers in 2000 and in 2002. Many . | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| incumbents ran in district with new numbers, and some districts with the same number were quite different in 2002 than in 2000. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Summary of Projections | Codes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Projection | Dem/Ind | Rep | Total | UU | Incumbent is completely uncontested in November 2004 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Landslide | 109 | 102 | 211 | U | Incumbent is uncontested by a major party in Nov. 2004 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comfortable | 38 | 69 | 107 | O | Open seat in 2004 election | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tight | 9 | 24 | 33 | D | Incumbent defeated in primary | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Projections | 156 | 195 | 351 | S | Denotes an incumbent who switched parties. | This data all comes from the Projections page and is used to format the Easy Viewing page | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Competitive | 37 | 34 | 71 | I | Denotes incumbent verses incumbent | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Vulnerable | 13 | 0 | 13 | V | Special election to fill vacancy since November 2002 | These cells are used to show no projected party | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Seats | 206 | 229 | 435 | 2 | Denotes an incumbent uncontested in the last 2 elections | in the projection party column to the left | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Competitive | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Vulnerable | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| DISTRICT INFORMATION | 2004 PROJECTIONS | DISTRICT HISTORY | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Low | Low | Winning Party | District Partisanship | Party favored by p-ship | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2002-2004 | Projected | Projected | 1st | Winning % | Party | Partisanship | Proj | No | 2000 | 2002 | TX only | TX only | |||||||||||||||||||
| State | CD | Codes | Incumbent | Result | Party | % | Elected | 2000 | 2002 | Winners | 2000 | 2002 | *2004 | State | CD | Party | Proj | Party | Party | 2000 | 2002 | 2004 | 2000 | 2002 | 2004 | ||||||
| Alabama | 1 | Jo Bonner (R) | Landslide | R | 61% | 2002 | 91% | 60% | R R | 60% | 61% | Alabama | 1 | R | R | R | R | 40% | 39% | 39% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| Alabama | 2 | Terry Everett (R) | Landslide | R | 63% | 1992 | 68% | 69% | R R | 62% | 61% | Alabama | 2 | R | R | R | R | 38% | 39% | 39% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| Alabama | 3 | Mike Rogers (R) | Competitive | 51% | 2002 | 87% | 50% | R R | 56% | 52% | Alabama | 3 | Competitive | R | R | 44% | 48% | 48% | R | R | R | ||||||||||
| Alabama | 4 | Robert Aderholt (R) | Landslide | R | 62% | 1996 | 61% | 87% | R R | 58% | 61% | Alabama | 4 | R | R | R | R | 42% | 39% | 39% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| Alabama | 5 | Bud Cramer (D) | Comfortable | D | 57% | 1990 | 89% | 73% | D D | 55% | 55% | Alabama | 5 | D | D | D | D | 45% | 45% | 45% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| Alabama | 6 | 2 UU | Spencer Bachus (R) | Landslide | R | 76% | 1992 | 88% | 90% | R R | 69% | 73% | Alabama | 6 | R | R | R | R | 31% | 27% | 27% | R | R | R | |||||||
| Alabama | 7 | Artur Davis (D) | Landslide | D | 76% | 2002 | 75% | 92% | D D | 75% | 68% | Alabama | 7 | D | D | D | D | 75% | 68% | 68% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| Alaska | 1 | Don Young (R) | Landslide | R | 69% | 1973 | 70% | 75% | R R | 71% | 71% | Alaska | 1 | R | R | R | R | 29% | 29% | 29% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| Arizona | 1 | Rick Renzi (R) | Competitive | 50% | 2002 | 54% | 49% | R R | 56% | 53% | Arizona | 1 | Competitive | R | R | 44% | 47% | 47% | R | R | R | ||||||||||
| Arizona | 2 | Trent Franks (R) | Comfortable | R | 58% | 2002 | 66% | 60% | R R | 58% | 58% | Arizona | 2 | R | R | R | R | 42% | 42% | 42% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| Arizona | 3 | U | John Shadegg (R) | Comfortable | R | 60% | 1994 | 64% | 67% | R R | 55% | 56% | Arizona | 3 | R | R | R | R | 45% | 44% | 44% | R | R | R | |||||||
| Arizona | 4 | Ed Pastor (D) | Landslide | D | 65% | 1991 | 69% | 67% | D D | 62% | 64% | Arizona | 4 | D | D | D | D | 62% | 64% | 64% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| Arizona | 5 | J.D. Hayworth (R) | Comfortable | R | 58% | 1994 | 61% | 61% | R R | 56% | 55% | Arizona | 5 | R | R | R | R | 44% | 45% | 45% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| Arizona | 6 | U | Jeff Flake (R) | Landslide | R | 62% | 2000 | 54% | 66% | R R | 54% | 61% | Arizona | 6 | R | R | R | R | 46% | 39% | 39% | R | R | R | |||||||
| Arizona | 7 | Raul Grijalva (D) | Comfortable | D | 59% | 2002 | 59% | D | New | 59% | Arizona | 7 | D | D | D | New | 59% | 59% | New | D | D | ||||||||||
| Arizona | 8 | Jim Kolbe (R) | Comfortable | R | 56% | 1984 | 60% | 63% | R R | 51% | 52% | Arizona | 8 | R | R | R | R | 49% | 48% | 48% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| Arkansas | 1 | Marion Berry (D) | Tight | D | 54% | 1996 | 60% | 66% | D D | 52% | 51% | Arkansas | 1 | D | D | D | D | 52% | 51% | 51% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| Arkansas | 2 | Vic Snyder (D) | Competitive | 53% | 1996 | 58% | 93% | D D | 51% | 51% | Arkansas | 2 | Competitive | D | D | 49% | 49% | 49% | R | R | R | ||||||||||
| Arkansas | 3 | John Boozman (R) | Landslide | R | 74% | 2001 | 56% | 99% | R R | 61% | 61% | Arkansas | 3 | R | R | R | R | 39% | 39% | 39% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| Arkansas | 4 | UU | Mike Ross (D) | Competitive | 53% | 2000 | 51% | 61% | D D | 52% | 51% | Arkansas | 4 | Competitive | D | D | 52% | 51% | 51% | D | D | D | |||||||||
| DISTRICT INFORMATION | 2004 PROJECTIONS | DISTRICT HISTORY | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Low | Low | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2002-2004 | Projected | Projected | 1st | Winning % | Party | Partisanship | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| State | CD | Codes | Incumbent | Result | Party | % | Elected | 2000 | 2002 | Winners | 2000 | 2002 | *2004 | ||||||||||||||||||
| California | 1 | Mike Thompson (D) | Comfortable | D | 58% | 1998 | 65% | 64% | D D | 52% | 53% | California | 1 | D | D | D | D | 52% | 53% | 53% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| California | 2 | Wally Herger (R) | Landslide | R | 65% | 1986 | 66% | 66% | R R | 64% | 65% | California | 2 | R | R | R | R | 36% | 35% | 35% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| California | 3 | O | Open (Doug Ose) (R) | Competitive | 52% | 1998 | 56% | 62% | R R | 54% | 57% | California | 3 | Competitive | R | R | 46% | 43% | 43% | R | R | R | |||||||||
| California | 4 | John Doolittle (R) | Landslide | R | 64% | 1990 | 63% | 65% | R R | 61% | 63% | California | 4 | R | R | R | R | 39% | 37% | 37% | R | R | R | ||||||||
| California | 5 | Robert Matsui (D) | Landslide | D | 65% | 1978 | 69% | 71% | D D | 59% | 62% | California | 5 | D | D | D | D | 59% | 62% | 62% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| California | 6 | Lynn Woolsey (D) | Landslide | D | 64% | 1992 | 64% | 66% | D D | 64% | 64% | California | 6 | D | D | D | D | 64% | 64% | 64% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| California | 7 | George Miller (D) | Landslide | D | 69% | 1974 | 76% | 71% | D D | 71% | 68% | California | 7 | D | D | D | D | 71% | 68% | 68% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| California | 8 | Nancy Pelosi (D) | Landslide | D | 79% | 1987 | 84% | 80% | D D | 79% | 79% | California | 8 | D | D | D | D | 79% | 79% | 79% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| California | 9 | Barbara Lee (D) | Landslide | D | 81% | 1998 | 85% | 81% | D D | 81% | 80% | California | 9 | D | D | D | D | 81% | 80% | 80% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| California | 10 | Ellen Tauscher (D) | Comfortable | D | 55% | 1996 | 53% | 76% | D D | 53% | 57% | California | 10 | D | D | D | D | 53% | 57% | 57% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| California | 11 | UU | Richard Pombo (R) | Comfortable | R | 56% | 1992 | 58% | 60% | R R | 51% | 54% | California | 11 | R | R | R | R | 49% | 46% | 46% | R | R | R | |||||||
| California | 12 | Tom Lantos (D) | Landslide | D | 67% | 1980 | 75% | 68% | D D | 69% | 68% | California | 12 | D | D | D | D | 69% | 68% | 68% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| California | 13 | Pete Stark (D) | Landslide | D | 69% | 1972 | 70% | 71% | D D | 69% | 69% | California | 13 | D | D | D | D | 69% | 69% | 69% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| California | 14 | Anna Eshoo (D) | Landslide | D | 65% | 1992 | 70% | 68% | D D | 65% | 63% | California | 14 | D | D | D | D | 65% | 63% | 63% | D | D | D | ||||||||
| California | 15 | Michael Honda (D) | Landslide | D | 62% | 2000 | 54% | 66% | D D | 59% | |||||||||||||||||||||