The U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 13, 2026. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — Fewer than 5% of U.S. House races are seen by a top political analysis as truly competitive heading into November’s midterm elections, giving relatively few voters the ability to determine which party controls the chamber for the next two years.
The other 414 of 435 House districts are viewed by the nonpartisan Cook Political Report with Amy Walter as at least leaning toward a Democrat or a Republican, as of Oct. 22.
That lack of competition, once a primary election is won, heavily influences which priorities lawmakers pursue in office, according to experts interviewed by States Newsroom. It also means voters in those regions have less ability to hold lawmakers accountable during the general election, especially if those politicians haven’t kept their campaign promises or were embroiled in an ethics scandal.
“For a lot of candidates it’s that primary which is particularly important,” said Zachary Peskowitz, professor of political science at Emory University in Georgia. “And so that obviously creates very different incentives for how they behave in Congress than if they were concerned with the general election.”
There’s evidence the significant number of uncompetitive House races during the general election can lead to “more extreme ideological positions,” he said.
“It can generate a kind of more confrontational style to lawmaking, where your goal is to activate your partisan supporters as opposed to reaching out toward the middle or across the aisle,” Peskowitz said.
While gerrymandering has led to more hyper-partisan House districts, there are other factors as well, including that voters tend to focus more on political party than the specific characteristics and policy proposals of an individual candidate, he said.
The number of truly competitive House races this year is among the lowest during the last three decades, according to ratings from the Cook Political Report. That’s the case despite the enormous amount of attention paid to which party ultimately will end up with control of the chamber.
With less than two weeks until voting ends, there are just 21 toss-up seats where either candidate is viewed as having a chance to win the district.
Another 12 are rated as leaning toward the Democrat, while 13 lean slightly toward the Republican candidate winning. The remaining races, a whopping 89%, are projected as likely or solid for one political party or the other.
Here’s the percent of toss-up or lean races that were at least somewhat competitive heading into Election Day for the last few decades under the report’s analysis:
Sean M. Theriault, professor of congressional studies at the University of Texas at Austin, said the relatively small number of swing districts has contributed to narrow majorities in the House, giving just a few lawmakers the ability to “hold the rest of the majority party hostage until they get what they want.”
“What we saw with the Republicans, it’s typically the people on the far right who are the ones who are holding their party hostage,” Theriault said. “And what we saw with Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in previous majorities where the margins were small, it was more likely to be the more moderate members, which has a different sort of flavor.”
A limited number of toss-up races also makes it more challenging for voters to hold their representatives accountable during the general election, when everyone can vote regardless of their party registration. Many states require people to register as either a Democrat or a Republican to cast a ballot in the primary.
“In terms of holding your legislators accountable, especially in the general election, it makes it far more difficult,” Theriault said.
Jonathan Hanson, lecturer in public policy at the University of Michigan, said it’s “a sad fact in the American political system that most of the congressional seats” are not competitive during the general election.
Having a large number of races that are essentially guaranteed wins for either a Democrat or a Republican can also suppress voter turnout, further reducing the number of Americans who determine which party sets the agenda in the House.
“It’s pretty clear that voters turn out at higher rates when there’s a close election, especially a high-profile election,” Hanson said. “It wouldn’t be surprising at all for a voter to say, ‘You know what? In my sleepy congressional race, it’s really not going to matter whether I vote or not. The same person is going to win.’ And so their level of motivation for going to the polls just drops off.”
The combination of uncompetitive districts and low voter turnout often leads to lawmakers who view party loyalty as the most important aspect of the job, not brokering deals that can actually become law, he said.
“I think it absolutely makes the chamber less responsive to voters because the fate of most members of Congress is delinked from the middle part of the political spectrum,” Hanson said. “So as long as people aren’t facing competition, they just tend to stick with their party line, and it makes it very hard for there to be compromise.”
Kyle Kondik, managing editor at Sabato’s Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia, another political forecaster, said the nonpartisan organization will move the House races it sees as toss-ups to favor one of the political parties before Election Day.
At the moment, he expects Democrats have similar prospects to the 2018 midterms, when Republicans went from holding 241 seats to 199, losing the House majority. The House currently is made up of 218 Republicans, 214 Democrats and one independent, with two vacancies.
“I think they could match 2018 just because the environment is so bad for Republicans,” Kondik said. “I don’t know if that’s where we’ll land on our projections but, like, Republicans seem to be springing leaks everywhere.”
As far as voter turnout goes, he said, presidential election years tend to see more people cast ballots, though a close House race in a wave year can have an impact.
“I think it’s probably just a function of the president not being on a ballot,” Kondik said of lower midterm turnout numbers. “I think that’s the main ingredient because, you know, clearly presidential elections have significantly higher turnout, usually 15 points higher or more than the previous midterm.”
“Although you know, it does seem like turnout can be a little bit higher in places that have a lot of intense competition.”
