Candidate Sex and Congressional Elections

Abstract

In 1992, an unprecedented number of women were elected to Congress. This election seemed to debunk the notion of female disadvantage as female candidates ran better than males. Since 1992, however, female candidates have failed to compete as effectively as men in congressional elections, again raising the specter of a sex bias. In this paper, we examine 365 open seat congressional elections held since 1982 in order to ascertain whether the indicators of female success in the 1980s and early 1990s structured female candidate success and/or failure after 1992. For this study, these indicators include candidate attributes such as financial quality and candidate experience. Our examination indicates that candidate attributes have significantly weakened as predictors of open seat election outcomes, especially in female versus male races. Instead, a strong increase in the correlation of the presidential normal vote and the congressional vote in open seats since 1992 indicates the emergence of elections where candidate attributes are secondary to the partisanship of the district. Female versus male races demonstrate much higher partisan coherence than all-male open seat contests, and Democratic women run about six points behind Republican women when district partisanship is controlled. These factors, combined with the increasingly Democratic distribution of female nominations, mitigate against female gains through open seats after 1992.