Those frustrated with the extreme nature of our politics should get used to the status quo.
Ballotpedia collects a lot of data on elections. Last year, the nonprofit, nonpartisan website observed 76,902 elections across the United States and its territories and gathered data on everything from the presidential race to the Charleston County auditor’s race. Of those elections, 70% were uncontested.
For all general elections in South Carolina, Ballotpedia reported that 61% had only one candidate on the ballot; this is aside from challenged seats where gerrymandering rendered a contested election moot.
Nationally, Cook Political Report rated only 12 races for the U.S. House of Representatives as true toss-ups going into the 2024 election and has only 18 predicted as true toss-ups for 2026.
If uncontested, it means that the only race that matters is the partisan primary. Generally, it is the strongest partisans who turn out in high numbers for these races. To keep or win a seat, candidates must appeal to the furthest wing of their party. In the end, those are the only constituents truly being represented. The preferences of moderate or otherwise partisan citizens remain unrepresented.
How did we get here? The first answer is deep distrust and polarization between the parties. The second answer is heavy gerrymandering, where district lines are deliberately drawn to give an advantage to one party. The third answer is that America is stuck with a two-party system. Let’s just concede this point for now.
As far as the second point goes, where legislators get to draw their own districts, such as in South Carolina, the likely outcome is seats that are safe for the party that currently controls them. Other states draw district lines using a nonpartisan commission, a bipartisan commission or a hybrid of the legislature and a commission.
On the first point, the two parties in South Carolina hold a deep distrust of each other. In a recent Winthrop Poll of the general population of South Carolina (not just likely voters), 74% of Republicans felt the Democratic Party was “too extreme in its positions,” while 80% of Democrats said the same about the Republican Party.
Roughly 4 in 5 Democrats did not believe Republicans governed “in an honest and ethical way,” and more than three-quarters of Republicans reported identical feelings about Democratic governance. Seventy-six percent of Democrats believed that Republicans do not respect the country’s “democratic institutions and traditions,” while 65% of Republicans said the same of Democrats.
Uncontested races produce representatives who win over the furthest wing of their party to keep their seat. Combine this reality with beliefs that the other side is extreme, dishonest and will not respect our democracy, and you have a recipe for a government that does not, and cannot, represent the interests of most citizens.
Is this what we want? In a fall 2024 Winthrop Poll of the general population of all Southern states, we asked Republicans if they would heed the calls of some prominent current and former Republican officials and support a new political party focused on moderate conservatism. A bit more than half said they would. To be clear, this was a general population poll of the entire South. It was not just likely voters, and it was not just South Carolina.
If former and current Democratic officials call for a party focused on moderate liberalism during a presidential election year, we at the Winthrop Poll will ask the same question; I suspect the results would not be significantly different. These data are merely hints of what some might prefer: a party that represents a more moderate version of their ideology.
Can anything be done to induce elected officials to represent the more moderate wings of their parties? Sadly, not much. Moderates within each are the least likely to vote in primaries and involve themselves in party leadership.
Representatives who get to draw their own district lines are unlikely to give up that power. If they and their base believe the other side is too extreme and won’t govern honestly, they’ll feel a moral responsibility not to surrender that power. As long as these conditions hold, so will the status quo.
Scott Huffmon is a Winthrop University political science professor and director of its Center for Public Opinion & Policy Research.
This post was originally published on here
