Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

The vulnerable GOP congressman convinced that economic interest voters will save him from the Trump and abortion backlash

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Two years ago, Kari Lake appeared to be on an unstoppable path to becoming governor of Arizona.</li><li>Now, she's a heavy underdog to Rep. Ruben Gallego in a state where Trump and Harris are tied.</li></ul>As a group of Rep. Ruben Gallego's supporters gathered at a downtown Phoenix bar last Wednesday to watch his Senate debate with Kari Lake, the sense of confidence in the room was palpable, if unusual for a Democratic campaign in a historically conservative state like Arizona."I think he's going to carry this with no problem," said Democratic state Rep. Patty Contreras. "I don't think she stands a chance."That wasn't the assessment made by Contreras, or most other Arizona Democrats, when Lake made her political debut <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/arizona-gop-governor-karrin-taylor-robson-kari-lake-trump-pence-2022-7">three years ago</a> as a gubernatorial candidate. Combative yet charismatic, Lake was quickly recognized as the most skilled purveyor of Trumpism aside from the former president himself. She wasn't simply imitating Donald Trump, but refashioning his political style to fit her own profile as a well-known local TV anchor. It didn't hurt that her opponent was then-Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, who even Democrats will admit is a <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/az-gov-candidate-katie-hobbs-defends-refusal-debate-kari-lake-2022-10">less-than-stellar campaigner</a>. "She was a fresh face, she was well-spoken," Contreras said of Lake, adding that Hobbs "sometimes is not as articulate as we would like her to be."Lake was widely expected to win that year, and Democrats regarded her with fear. But then she lost, albeit by just two-thirds of a percentage point.In the intervening years, she has expended the bulk of her political oxygen <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/kari-lake-files-lawsuit-challenging-arizona-gubernatorial-loss-maricopa-hobbs-2022-12">insisting that the election was stolen</a> from her as she's traveled the country as one of the <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/kari-lake-financial-disclosure-book-sales-paid-speeches-2024-7">MAGA movement's biggest celebrities</a>. The consensus that emerged from interviews here with not just Arizona's political experts, but even Republicans who plan to vote for her, is that Lake gradually dug her own political grave by doing so."Don't tell me that you're angry about the last election," said Rep. David Schweikert, a Republican who represents a Scottsdale-area swing district, adding that voters "don't care" about the "resentments" that Lake and other candidates are campaigning on.With Sen. Kyrsten Sinema <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/kyrsten-sinema-retiring-arizona-senate-ruben-gallego-kari-lake-2024-3">out of the picture</a> and Lake flailing, Gallego has had the space to run a successful version of the campaign that Vice President Kamala Harris has sought to wage at the presidential level, where a lawmaker who once wore progressivism on their sleeve has successfully triangulated toward the center in the face of Trumpist opposition.<div type="image" title="Rep. Ruben Gallego" height="1500" width="2000" msid="114224427" hostid="261" sizebytes="113218"></div>A large chunk of the state's more traditional Republicans <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/kari-lake-arizona-senate-race-gop-support-poll-gallego-2024-4">continue to feel alienated</a> by Lake's denigration of the late Sen. John McCain and his supporters during her 2022 campaign. That's allowed Gallego to court Republicans like Julie Spilsbury, a city councilor in Mesa who's backing the Democratic congressman even as she acknowledges that he's been "pretty far left" throughout his career."I've seen a willingness to moderate," Spilsbury told a small group of reporters at a "Republicans for Harris" event in Mesa last week, adding that both Harris and Gallego are "big-tent Democrats that say 'we want you,' and the Republicans are saying, 'get the hell out of our party.'"The situation is all the more remarkable given that political headwinds in Arizona — a state disproportionally impacted by both <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/inflation-housing-food-alice-rent-poverty-healthcare-wage-growth-cpi-2024-6">inflation</a> and the border crisis — have been blowing rightward. While Trump and Harris remain locked in a dead-heat race for the state's 11 Electoral College votes, Gallego boasts a polling lead over Lake that's outside the state's margin of error.Lake's campaign did not respond to a request for comment for this story. But at a press conference last week, she told reporters that she had "zero faith in the public polling" of her race and insisted that her own internal polls showed a tight race. "These polls are meant to take the oxygen out of our movement," Lake argued. "They're meant to keep donors away."<h2 id="7407865c-3d80-4482-87e5-8b8985aa3d54">'She's lost credibility'</h2>Lake remains a skilled politician, a fact that was apparent during last week's debate, where she smoothly lobbed attacks at Gallego as he occasionally tripped over his words. But the congressman's supporters remained relaxed throughout the event, breaking into laughter when Lake professed a desire to put "country over party" or erroneously used the term "UVF" to refer to in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments. "She was certainly a juggernaut when she ran for governor," said Kirk Adams, a Republican who was former Gov. Doug Ducey's chief of staff and once served as the speaker of the Arizona House. But today, Adams argued, she's primarily defined by her status as a political loser. "If you were to ask people, 'What do you know about Kari Lake?' There are likely two things that they will tell you: She was a news anchor for a very long time, and she thinks that the 2022 election was stolen from her."It's a facet of Lake's candidacy that rankles even her supporters. Maryjane Carsten, a 71-year-old Republican retiree who lives in Oracle, said she felt like she was "voting for the best of the worst" in the Senate race."I like that she's a conservative," Carsten said as she made her way into Sen. JD Vance's rally in Tucson on Wednesday. "But she just would not let that election go. She just won't let stuff go. She needs to."Compounding that issue is Lake's unclear positioning on abortion. Like many Republicans, she's pledged not to support a national abortion ban, though she told reporters last week that she voted against a ballot measure to expand abortion rights in Arizona. She's also expressed conflicting views on a <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/kari-lake-arizona-abortion-ban-good-law-2024-4">near-total abortion ban</a> that almost took effect in the state this year, saying that she opposed it only to <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/23/politics/kari-lake-abortion-arizona/index.html">bemoan later</a> that it wasn't being enforced."She's lost credibility with a giant portion of the electorate, which, at the beginning of that game, could have been hers," said Chuck Coughlin, a former GOP political strategist in Arizona who's backing Gallego.<div type="image" title="Kari Lake at a Trump rally in Prescott Valley on Sunday." height="1500" width="2000" msid="114224283" hostid="261" sizebytes="185556"></div>Of course, Trump has also refused to concede his last election and has offered conflicting views on abortion. Yet while a Lake win at this point would be an upset, that's simply not the case for Trump. The difference between the two candidates may simply come down to the fact that the former president is, well, a former president who has a mostly positive economic record to run on."The Donald Trump playbook only really works for one person, and that's Donald Trump," said Barrett Marson, a Republican political strategist in Arizona.Mike Noble, the founder and CEO of the Arizona polling firm Noble Predictive Insights, said that his polling had found that voters, including Republicans, simply viewed Lake differently. "She does have all the baggage Trump has, but she doesn't have any of the positives, the policy wins and things like that," Noble said.The election is just over three weeks away, and Lake is now hobbling toward the finish line. She trails Gallego in public polling by an average of 7 percentage points, and she's consistently struggled to keep up with the Democratic congressman's fundraising machine. Last week, Gallego's campaign said that he had raised over $50 million since he entered the race, with $21.7 million of that sum coming in since July. Lake's campaign has declined to release her latest fundraising figures, suggesting they're lackluster.Deep-pocketed national GOP groups have also largely avoided the race, even as they've plunged tens of millions of dollars into <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/us-senate-races-2024-election-landscape-democrats-republicans-2023-1">more promising targets</a> elsewhere. Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC tied to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, hasn't spent a dime in Arizona this year."Normally, these things are more competitive," said Noble. "This Senate race should be more competitive."

How one of MAGA's brightest stars went from unstoppable to long shot

<ul class="summary-list"><li>With a salary of $174,000 per year, members of Congress make more than 80% of American households.</li><li>But that's still not enough, given the demands of the job and the fact that already-wealthy people have an easier time with them.</li></ul>Congress hasn't exactly been doing its best as of late.It's <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/house-republicans-made-history-motion-vacate-censure-expulsion-2023-12">historically unproductive</a> and chaotic, and those of us who cover the institution end up writing more about bills that won't pass or <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/lauren-boebert-protecting-my-voters-district-switch-colorado-carpetbagging-2024-1">needless drama</a> than how our representatives are delivering for us.<a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/video-hunter-biden-marjorie-taylor-greene-congress-contempt-hearing-2024-1">This week in particular</a> is probably not the best time to suggest that these people deserve — well, maybe not deserve, but need — a hefty raise.But hear me out.The current salary for rank-and-file members of both the House and Senate is $174,000. That's not nothing. In fact, it's more than what over 80% of American households made in 2022.But being a member of Congress isn't any old job.It's an incredibly important and consequential position, one in which you're basically always working, or could be called upon to work, even when you're not in DC. The schedule changes pretty often. You're likely traveling between DC and your home district twice a week. You need somewhere to sleep in both places, and some of your colleagues are <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/speaker-mike-johnson-sleep-in-his-capitol-hill-office-2023-11">doing it in their offices</a>. The public also doesn't think that highly of you, or anything that you came to Washington to advocate for.In short, as Republican Rep. David Schweikert of Arizona put it, the job is "miserable." But Schweikert, a fiscal hawk, isn't keen on endorsing any sort of pay raise."I sort of wish we were paid according to our work product — right now we would pretty much be paid zero," said Schweikert. "And the reality is, we're still paid better than most Americans."The public largely agrees with the Arizona congressman, and that's perhaps the biggest impediment to changing compensation. A poll conducted by Business Insider in 2019 found that 55% of Americans would actually <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/americans-disagree-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-congress-pay-increase-poll-2019-3">like to see a pay cut</a> for Congress.But under the status quo, it's mostly already rich people who are able and willing to withstand all of those demands.Experts have long argued that Congress needs a raise for the purposes of attracting — and perhaps more importantly, retaining — high-quality public servants, safeguarding against potential corruption, and broadening the pool of potential candidates beyond those who are already wealthy."When you pay [lawmakers] enough, their incentives to go and be looking to get paid elsewhere diminish, and they become better public servants," said Daniel Schuman, the director of governance at the POPVOX Foundation. "That's just human nature."<h2>Stunted salary growth and limited perks</h2>The salaries for members of Congress haven't budged in nearly 15 years. Since in 2009, lawmakers have affirmatively chosen to block annual cost-of-living adjustments designed to keep pace with inflation. The only surefire way to get a higher salary is to become the speaker of the House ($223,500) or become a majority or minority leader in either chamber ($193,400).This past year, House members did get some extra help, thanks to some last-minute changes made by Democrats before they lost the majority: House members can now seek reimbursement for expenses like food and lodging when they're in DC. But that money comes from a fund that lawmakers also use for other expenses like staff pay, meaning they have to balance their own personal costs against the needs of the office. (In the Senate, you're out of luck with reimbursements entirely.)And while lawmakers have access to a <a target="_blank" href="https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/080416/how-congress-retirement-pay-compares-overall-average.asp">relatively good</a> pension plan, it takes a while to earn it."If you want a whole lot of rich people, and nobody else, this is the kind of system that you would set up," said Schuman. "People say, 'Well, it's public service, and if you don't like it, you shouldn't do it.' Well, then who's going to do it? People you don't want doing it."<h2>'The plaything of multimillionaires and billionaires'</h2>Last week, Republican Rep. Patrick McHenry of North Carolina <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/patrick-mchenry-lawmaker-pay-not-enough-money-congress-2024-1">made waves</a> when he declared that members of Congress need to be paid more. But it's easy for him to say — he's retiring, and doesn't have to answer to voters for that position.But he's hardly the only lawmaker who thinks that, or who's willing to say it."You have quite a number of members of Congress that sleep in their offices," said Republican Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, who supports a raise. "In this day and age, it makes sense to have people that feel that they can serve, and still be able to sleep in a home at night.""Congress should not be the plaything of multimillionaires and billionaires who've already secured their fortunes and don't care about earning a living," said Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. "No one wants to waste taxpayer dollars, but Congress needs to be more realistic about what it takes to attract the top people to public service."Historically, Democrats have been more willing to push for higher pay for members of Congress, including <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-pushing-for-controversial-congressional-raise-2019-6">Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.</a>"I know it's kind of a contrarian position," said Ocasio-Cortez. "If we want working-class people who don't rely on independent wealth to represent people in Congress, we have to make it work."But it's not just AOC — in 2019, then-House Majority Steny Hoyer <a target="_blank" href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/11/steny-hoyer-congressional-pay-raise-1360934">tried to enact a modest bump</a> in the salary for members of Congress, only to have that halted in part by a revolt from Democrats who represent swing districts.Among them was Democratic Rep. Dan Kildee of Michigan, who's now retiring from Congress at the end of this year. At the time, he argued that it was wrong for Congress to raise its own salary while doing nothing about the federal minimum wage, which has been stuck at $7.25 since 2009."Politically, it's a very sensitive issue," Kildee told me this week. "I do think there's a good argument that the cost of living adjustment should apply [to lawmakers' salaries]."<div type="image" title="Sen. Elizabeth Warren says raising salaries is about preventing Congress from becoming the &quot;plaything of multimillionaires and billionaires.&quot;" height="1500" width="2000" msid="106784487" hostid="261" sizebytes="41162"></div>And even as Democrats offer their support for raising lawmakers' salaries, they're quick to make clear that they're not just concerned with their own bottom line."I think in general, all the salaries should be raised around here," said Rep. Maxwell Frost of Florida, who had <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/gen-z-congressman-maxwell-frost-denied-apartment-bad-credit-2022-12">well-publicized difficulties</a> securing an apartment in DC due to his financial situation. "We should have a bigger budget so we can pay our staff even more."<h2>The resistance to raising salaries</h2>The arguments against raising salaries are fairly familiar, and can be summed up by some combination of "Congress sucks" or "you knew what you were getting into.""I think when we all ran for this position, we knew what the salary was," said Sen. Deb Fischer of Nebraska, the top Republican on the Senate subcommittee that has jurisdiction over lawmakers' salaries. "I'm not supportive of a raise."Republican Sen. JD Vance of Ohio says he "strongly agrees" with the idea of paying congressional staffers more, arguing that staff are "always going to get poached by a lobbying firm, because we can't possibly compete with their salary."But he doesn't extend that same logic to the lawmakers who oversee that staff, and suggested that it may be best if lawmakers have already built up some wealth through private sector experience.<div type="image" title="Republican Sen. JD Vance of Ohio and Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California both oppose increasing lawmakers' salaries." height="1500" width="2000" msid="106784490" hostid="261" sizebytes="205412"></div>"This is public service, you're not going to make a lot of money serving in Congress," said Vance. "If you're going to serve in the United States Senate, you probably should accomplish something before you get here."Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California — who in recent months has <a target="_blank" href="https://khanna.house.gov/media/press-releases/release-ro-khanna-introduces-new-political-reform-and-anti-corruption-plan">touted</a> a "political reform plan" aimed at combatting corruption — said he would support establishing some form of free housing for members of Congress. "Maybe that would add to some of the camaraderie," he said.But for now, he's against raising salaries, despite the likely anti-corruption benefits that could bring."People who make great contributions to America don't do it for the money," said Khanna. "I think we can attract talent without the finances."But the risks incurred by the current salary level are not abstract. In 2022, former Republican Rep. Gregg Harper of Mississippi — a lawmaker who served for ten years and rose to become the chairman of a House committee — <a target="_blank" href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-117hhrg48600/html/CHRG-117hhrg48600.htm">testified</a> that he retired in part because he could no longer take care of his son, who has an intellectual disability."I knew that if I stayed, I would not be able to take care of my son and my family," Harper said at the time. "And so I had to at least have the opportunity to try to make more money [in the private sector.]"<h2>So, how much money should lawmakers get?</h2>Ask a member of Congress what they should be making instead of $174,000, and suddenly, they clam up a bit."You know, I'm not sure," said Ocasio-Cortez."To be determined," said Warren. "I'm open to hearing different ways to think through it."If you were to account for inflation, a salary of $174,000 in 2009 is worth over $250,000 today. Federal district judges, who made the same amount of money as rank-and-file lawmakers in 2009, <a target="_blank" href="https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/judicial-compensation">now earn</a> $232,600.<div type="image" title="Former Rep. Gregg Harper of Mississippi stepped down in part because Congress didn't pay enough." height="1500" width="2000" msid="106784492" hostid="261" sizebytes="149218"></div>In the private sector, meanwhile, the average chief executive salary in the Washington, DC metropolitan area in 2022 was $305,480, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics."The [proper salary] is basically someplace where you don't have an economic desire to go someplace else," said Schuman, adding that "between $250,000 and $300,000 is probably about right."For simplicity's sake, let's put the number at $274,000 — a $100,000 raise for members of Congress. And then, of course, lawmakers would need to stop blocking the annual cost-of-living adjustment, as they have since 2009."They need to reset what the baseline number is, and then they need to leave it alone," said Schuman.Is this proposal likely? No. Especially not right now, given the inability of the Republican-led House to pass any legislation that's even slightly controversial, let alone as unpopular with the public as this. Nor is jacking up lawmakers' salaries likely to be a panacea that solves every problem in a troubled institution.But if you're angry about <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/financial-conflicts-congress-members-rated-2021-12">lawmakers trading stocks</a>, or raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars off of their personal brands <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/these-senators-more-money-books-salaries-2022-2023-8">via book sales</a>, it's worth considering how providing Congress with a bigger salary might realign lawmakers incentives, at least a little bit.After all, as Schuman said, "you get what you pay for."

A $174,000 salary isn't enough for members of Congress. In fact, they should probably give themselves a $100,000 raise. 

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The House overwhelmingly passed a bill on Wednesday that could lead to TikTok being banned.</li><li>50 Democrats and 15 Republicans voted against it. Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett voted "present."</li></ul>The House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/tiktok-ban-house-vote-explained-what-to-know-2024-3">bill</a> on Wednesday that could lead to TikTok being banned in the United States.The "Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act" easily cleared the chamber by a lopsided 352-65 vote, with 50 Democrats and 15 Republicans voting against the bill.Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas voted "present."The legislation would require ByteDance, the Chinese company that owns TikTok, to sell off the app within 180 days — or 6 months — or face a ban. It would also apply to any other company that could be subject to the influence of a US foreign adversary.Lawmakers have <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/tiktok-ban-lawmakers-skeptical-congress-2023-2">long raised alarms</a> about TikTok, pointing to the fact that under Chinese law, ByteDance is required to share data with the Chinese government. Some have argued that the popular social media platform could even be a vector for foreign influence campaigns, while others are concerned about the potentially addictive nature of the platform.The bill cleared the House Energy and Commerce Committee by a unanimous 50-0 vote last week, and the fact that the bill is not an outright ban — but rather forces the sale of TikTok — was enough to convince dozens of Democrats who otherwise may have taken a more skeptical approach."It isn't a ban," said Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia, adding that the forced divestiture is "not without precedent."Several lawmakers pointed to the past example of Grindr, a gay dating app that used to be owned by the Chinese company Beijing Kunlun until the US government <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/us-declares-chinese-ownership-of-grindr-a-national-security-risk-report-2019-3">forced its sale</a> in 2019."[Grindr] sold quickly and there was no disruption to users in the platform," said Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois, the lead Democratic sponsor of the bill. "I suspect that's the same thing that's going to happen with regard to ByteDance."But some lawmakers weren't convinced by those arguments, including several progressive Democrats who argued that the bill was rushed and ill-considered.Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin, a leading progressive, told Business Insider that he became more firmly against a ban after lawmakers received an intelligence briefing on the matter on Tuesday afternoon."I was swayed to vote no," said Pocan. "It showed me that there isn't a lot there."Democratic Rep. Maxwell Frost of Florida, the sole Gen Z member of Congress, said he considered the bill to be essentially a ban, arguing that the legislation doesn't give ByteDance enough time to be sold."I think we're setting them up to be banned in the United States," said Frost, arguing that there are "not a lot of players who have enough capital to buy something as big and valuable as TikTok" — and that those who can are likely to be other large social media companies, raising antitrust concerns.But Krishnamoorthi was dismissive of that idea, citing <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/ex-activision-ceo-bobby-kotick-wants-to-buy-tiktok-report-2024-3">reports</a> that there have "already been a number of bidders who've come forward who are interested in acquiring perhaps the world's most valuable social media company."On the right, concerns about the bill stemmed from both free speech issues and perhaps the influence of former President Donald Trump, who <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tiktok-comments-meeting-with-billionaire-investor-jeff-yass-2024-3">backhandedly came out</a> against banning TikTok, citing the potential benefits a ban would have for Facebook.Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia went on a lengthy diatribe against Facebook and Twitter in a floor speech outlining her opposition to the TikTok bill, arguing that it could lead to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg buying TikTok.Despite the bill's easy path through the House — and President Joe Biden's pledge to sign the legislation — it remains unclear whether the bill will become law.It still has to pass the Senate, where the chamber's already glacial pace is compounded by <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/tiktok-ban-lawmakers-skeptical-congress-2023-2">disagreements among senators</a> about how to address TikTok.Here are the 15 Republicans who voted against the bill:<ul><li>Andy Biggs of Arizona</li><li>Dan Bishop of North Carolina</li><li>Warren Davidson of Ohio</li><li>John Duarte of California</li><li>Matt Gaetz of Florida</li><li>Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia</li><li>Clay Higgins of Louisiana</li><li>Nancy Mace of South Carolina</li><li>Thomas Massie of Kentucky</li><li>Tom McClintock of California</li><li>Alex Mooney of West Virginia</li><li>Barry Moore of Alabama</li><li>Scott Perry of Pennsylvania</li><li>David Schweikert of Arizona</li><li>Greg Steube of Florida</li></ul>Here are the 50 Democrats who voted against the bill:<div type="image" title="The 50 Democrats who voted against the TikTok bill." height="538" width="1186" msid="108474506" hostid="261" sizebytes="48162"></div>

These 50 Democrats and 15 Republicans voted against a bill that could lead to a TikTok ban

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Redistricting and fights over political lines have fueled the aging of America's government. </li><li>More often than not, older members of Congress win in primaries between two incumbents.</li><li>But polarization and partisanship are enabling younger members to knock out their elders.</li></ul>Every 10 years, a new US Census forces states to redraw their political maps through redistricting. Whenever a state loses a House seat in the process, incumbent members of Congress are forced to run against each other — and younger, less experienced incumbents often end up on the chopping block. An Insider analysis, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1X97S6hUby6PPHAMoEwvAxkAUo8EUwLk8xMosx4hVd8c/edit#gid=638845180">based on data compiled by Bloomberg's Greg Giroux,</a> found that in 20 incumbent-on-incumbent contests since 1992 where there was an age difference of at least two years between the candidates, 12 were won by the older member and eight by the younger member. The dynamics of member-on-member contests have favored older incumbents and reinforced <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/gerontocracy-united-states-government-red-white-gray-2022-9">the gerontocracy in American politics</a> as we know it. Since the 1990s, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/gerontocracy-united-states-congress-red-white-and-gray-data-charts-2022-9">the age of Congress has significantly increased</a> compared to the baseline growth seen over the 20th century — and redistricting has only hastened that trend. "It doesn't surprise me that age would make a difference on the margins," Jamie Carson, a political scientist at the University of Georgia who studies congressional elections, told Insider of member-on-member races. "It brings a bit more experience, better fundraising prowess, and maybe they know the district better." The 2012 cycle, where the more senior representative won eight of 11 such contests following redistricting, was particularly brutal for younger incumbents. In New Jersey, then 75-year-old Bill Pascrell easily dispatched 59-year-old Democratic Rep. Steven Rothman by 22 points <a href="https://www.nj.com/news/2012/05/how_the_rothman_vs_pascrell_co.html">when the two ran in the same district</a> in 2012. Fifty-year-old Rep. David Schweikert narrowly ousted the one-term 35-year-old Ben Quayle, the son of former Vice President Dan Quayle, in the Phoenix suburbs. Sixty-nine-year-old John Mica, who had served in Congress for nearly 20 years, knocked out 55-year-old Sandy Adams, who served one term, in suburban Central Florida. And 60-year-old Janice Hahn defeated fellow Democrat Laura Richardson, 50, in the general election for California's 44th District by a resounding 20 points.<div type="image" title="Rep. Alex Mooney, left, and Rep. David McKinley, right" height="1300" width="2000" msid="94502177" hostid="261" sizebytes="154214"></div><h3>Youth movement — fueled by partisanship?</h3>But that trend is changing. Accelerating partisanship and polarization, in particular, are shaking up the game — and increasingly empowering younger lawmakers to knock out their more senior rivals. In 2022, the 75-year-old, five-term Rep. David McKinley, a West Virginia Republican, had some key advantages on his side when reapportionment put him in the same district as 50-year-old Rep. Alex Mooney. McKinley, endorsed by both Virginia's Republican governor and its powerful Democratic senator, Joe Manchin, <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/12/gop-primary-west-virginia-infrastructure-00024473">was able to tout his role in the passage of a landmark bipartisan infrastructure bill</a> that provided much-needed funds for his state. But an endorsement from President Donald Trump and <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/races/outside-spending?cycle=2022&amp;id=WV02">hundreds of thousands in outside spending</a> from conservative groups boosted Mooney to win the day. Younger candidates have won four out of six member-on-member primaries of the 2022 cycle, though in one case, Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, who's 75, was younger by just a few months than Democratic rival, Rep. Carolyn Maloney. And in the cases of the two older incumbents who came out on top in their races, age and tenure in Congress weren't the deciding factors.<div type="image" title="Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois outside a January 6 committee hearing on June 13, 2022." height="1333" width="1777" msid="94502179" hostid="261" sizebytes="160780"></div><h3>State lawmakers have expertly wielded their redistricting pens to kneecap their opponents — and hurt younger candidates </h3>Over the decades, intentional partisan gerrymandering — and the inevitable reshuffling that comes along with states losing districts and redrawing their lines — have dashed many congressional careers and aspirations.Partisan gerrymandering and internal party struggle over district lines can also prevent young candidates or candidates from diverse backgrounds from getting elected to Congress in the first place. "Wisconsin's 7th District is very gerrymandered, so that was already a challenge that, going in, I knew," Tricia Zunker, who ran as a Democrat in a special election in a rural, Republican-leaning north-central Wisconsin district in spring 2020, told Insider in an interview.Partisan gerrymandering, the redrawing of political district lines to favor one political party over the other, has gotten increasingly tactical. State lawmakers, in addition to utilizing the process to kneecap the opposing party, also make strategic choices about which members of Congress to sacrifice. In 2002, Republican state lawmakers in Michigan, who then controlled the redistricting process, drew two Democrats into the same blue district to make the surrounding districts safer for their party, <a href="https://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/590605-redistricting-101-cracking-and-packing/">a gerrymandering tactic known as packing.</a>The new map put <a href="https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1147714">then 45-year-old Rep. Lynn Rivers in the same district as Rep. John Dingell</a>, a scion of Michigan politics who still holds the mantle of the longest-serving member of Congress in history.Rivers mounted a competitive challenge — but still lost the race by 18 points. And she's not the only one who saw her time in Congress come to an end after partisan gerrymandering pitted her against a colleague. After the 2020 Census, Republican lawmakers in Georgia took the opportunity to force out one of the two Democratic women who had won seats in the blue-trending Atlanta suburbs, pushing Reps. Lucy McBath and Carolyn Bourdeaux into the same safely Democratic district. In Illinois, which lost one House seat after 2020, a map drawn by Democrats in the state legislature pitted two sets of Republican incumbents against each other in northern and central Illinois. Rep. Rodney Davis lost to freshman Rep. Mary Miller in one of those races. In the other, Rep. Adam Kinzinger <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/gop-rep-adam-kinzinger-wont-run-for-reelection-in-2022-2021-10">decided to retire</a> rather than run against Rep. Darin LaHood. "Through a strategic lens, it's a chance to knock out an incumbent and make that seat more vulnerable," Carson, the political scientist, said of gerrymandering.The game of political musical chairs set off by a state losing a seat in Congress can also box out young, upstart candidates hoping to break in. Lourin Hubbard, a 33-year-old water-quality-control manager in California's Central Valley, ran as a Democrat in a June 2022 special election after a top GOP representative, Devin Nunes, left Congress early to run the Trump Media &amp; Technology Group, the company behind the former president's Truth Social platform.Hubbard, who lost to the 71-year-old Republican Connie Conway, considered running for a full term in Congress. But California's new commission-drawn congressional map, which will fully take effect come January 2023, dissolves Nunes' old district and splits it up into four new ones — including one held by Democratic Rep. Jim Costa. Hubbard told Insider that local county Democrats discouraged him from running for a full term in Congress against Costa, who now holds a safely Democratic Fresno-based seat. The new map "created some tension and conflict" within the county Democratic Party. "And to avoid that conflict altogether, I was like, 'I'll just run in the special,'" he said. <div type="image" title="Democratic Rep. Andy Levin of Michigan at a press conference on Capitol Hill on February 9, 2022." height="1331" width="1780" msid="94502181" hostid="261" sizebytes="151940"></div><h2>Partisanship and parochial factors are shaking up member-on-member primaries</h2>Incumbency<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/incumbent-advantage"> is the best predictor of whether a candidate wins an election</a>. Challengers, Carson noted, have the best shot at unseating incumbents if they have prior political experience, money, or are up against an incumbent with particular weaknesses or a scandal."Even if you don't like the incumbent, that's not enough," Ryan Williamson, a resident fellow for governance at the R Street Institute, a Washington DC-based policy think tank, told Insider. "You have to actively dislike the incumbent and mobilize around unseating them, which is a much higher burden."But the rare contests where incumbents are pitted against each other are "idiosyncratic," Carson said, and don't follow predictable patterns — especially in the 2022 cycle. Two decades after the Dingell-Rivers race, another primary fight between two Michigan Democrats shows how partisanship and money can eclipse age, experience — and even membership in a political dynasty — in member-on-member races. Rep. Haley Stevens, 39, could have had an uphill battle against Rep. Andy Levin, 61, when he decided to run against her in her suburban Detroit district, which became more safely Democratic under new lines drawn by a citizen-led commission. Like Dingell in 1955, Levin took over the House seat held for decades by his father, Sander Levin, in the 2018 midterm elections, following both his father and his uncle, former Sen. Carl Levin, to Washington. But Levin took a risk by choosing to run in the safely blue 11th District instead of the more Republican 10th District where he lived, planting himself on largely unfamiliar turf <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-6-house-races-where-incumbents-are-likely-to-face-another-incumbent/">where he represented just a quarter of the electorate. </a>The <a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/report-after-citizens-united-outside-spending-doubles/">explosion in outside campaign spending</a> since 2002 has shaken up the dynamics of all House primaries and heavily factored into the 11th District contest. A slew of pro-Israel, women's, and progressive organizations poured <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/races/outside-spending?cycle=2022&amp;id=MI11">over $9 million</a>, $7.45 million of which benefited Stevens, into the race. Stevens <a href="https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2022/08/02/haley-stevens-andy-levin-congressional-district/10200586002/">ended up beating Levin by 20 points</a> in August — overcoming both his seniority in age and the potency of his family name. Like in all House elections, money plays a significant role in member-on-member races. Older incumbents often have more money in the bank and more established fundraising networks from their years campaigning for elected office and, in some cases, greater personal wealth, candidates and experts told Insider. The candidate who spent the most money won four out of six member-on-member contests in 2022 and nine out of 11 contests in the 2012 cycle, according to an Insider analysis of campaign-finance records. "Every new midterm breaks the previous record, and a bulk of that money is going to flow to the most competitive primaries and general elections," Carson said, noting that "money is a necessary but not sufficient condition," particularly in member-on-member contests. State lawmakers have drawn incumbents together for political gain for decades, but the post-2020 redistricting cycle also saw many maps drawn by courts or independent commissions. Many of those commissions prioritized drawing competitive districts over protecting longtime incumbents, which blunted the advantage that some more tenured incumbents enjoyed. New York's court-drawn congressional map, resulting from a messy and protracted legal battle, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/30/nyregion/jerry-nadler-carolyn-maloney.html">pitted two longtime House Democrats and committee chairs</a>, Nadler and Maloney, against each other in upper Manhattan.That race, a clash of two septuagenarian titans of New York politics, was driven more by parochial forces than national ones, with The New York Times editorial board and the powerful Sen. Chuck Schumer <a href="https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-government/ny-election-2022-key-endorsements-ny-12-congressional-district-20220817-56gr6n3jpbcyvij2ikt5sj5pdi-story.html">throwing their support behind Nadler</a> in the final stretch. As the Stevens-Levin race showed, the member of Congress representing most of the new district's constituents is generally favored in a matchup between two incumbents in the same seat. But in other races, like the Hahn-Richardson contest, a candidate who represented very little of their new territory came out on top. And four out of six member-on-member contests that have taken place so far in 2022 saw the member who represented less of their new district winning their race, according to <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qjVA5g1bmZVDgTvwBpoZCSoEKLyhV7az3NVSlduUvzE/edit#gid=1417433366">Daily Kos Elections.</a> In Georgia, for example, McBath won <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-6-house-races-where-incumbents-are-likely-to-face-another-incumbent/">despite representing just 12% of her new district</a>, while her opponent represented over 57% of it. Partisanship and ideology are now playing a more prominent role than age and seniority in shaping House primaries, especially on the Republican side. The winners of the two 2022 primaries where Republican incumbents faced each other, Miller and Mooney had firmly aligned with Trump's wing of the Republican Party, earned Trump's endorsement, and also enjoyed outside spending on their behalf by groups like <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs//C00487470/independent-expenditures/2022?t0-search=miller">the Club for Growth</a> and the political arm of <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs//C00552851/independent-expenditures/2022">the House Freedom Caucus.</a> In Illinois, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/illinois-congressional-state-local-primary-elections-results-2022-6">Miller defeated Davis by 14 points</a> despite raising and spending less money than Davis, serving in Congress for less time, and only representing slightly more of the new district. Mooney, who also served less time and represented just a third of the redrawn district, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/west-virginia-primaries-david-mckinley-alex-mooney-live-results-2022-5">defeated McKinley by an even wider margin of 18 points.</a> Knocking out an incumbent with years of lawmaking experience is still difficult, and older candidates' structural advantages aren't disappearing. But the forces of partisanship are making it easier for challengers. House Republicans who fought the Trumpian takeover of the party, like Reps. Liz Cheney, Tom Rice, Peter Meijer, and Jaime Herrera Beutler, all <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/with-cheneys-loss-just-2-house-republicans-who-voted-to-impeach-trump-are-on-the-ballot-in-november/">lost to Trump-backed primary challengers</a>. And others, like Kinzinger and Reps. Anthony Gonzalez, John Katko, and Fred Upton, chose to forgo running altogether. In all, 14 House incumbents <a href="https://pressgallery.house.gov/member-data/casualty-list">lost renomination</a> in 2022, the highest number in a single cycle since 1992. The forces of partisanship and polarization, Carson said, would have pushed that number even higher if not for dozens of members heading for the exits."For the longest time, it was hard to beat incumbents because people of the opposite party would be willing to cross party lines," Carson said. "That has changed. If you're a Democrat in a Republican district, your days are probably numbered."

You Searched For "schweikert doesn" and got 5 results

The vulnerable GOP congressman convinced that economic interest voters will save him from the Trump and abortion backlash

Bryan Metzger

How one of MAGA's brightest stars went from unstoppable to long shot

Bryan Metzger

A $174,000 salary isn't enough for members of Congress. In fact, they should probably give themselves a $100,000 raise.

Bryan Metzger

These 50 Democrats and 15 Republicans voted against a bill that could lead to a TikTok ban

Bryan Metzger

Fights over political lines have fueled the aging of America's government. But that may be changing.

Grace Panetta,Walt Hickey

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides