Data From 1995 Shows GOP Pain, But Not Definitive

The mythology that has arisen around the December 1995 government “shutdown” (if the government does not really shutdown, is it really a shutdown?) suggests that it as a crushing political and policy defeat for the Republican party.  In Sunday’s Washington Post, Newt Gingrich (Speaker of the House at the time) makes a compelling case that it was a political and policy win for the GOP.  (Actually, there were two “shutdowns” — a five day “shutdown” in November, and then a 21 day “shutdown” from December 16th to January 6th.)

While I’m not sure it was a political “win,” an examination of the data shows it was not a loss either.  Republicans only lost nine seats in the November elections, holding on to a tenuous majority that Democrats had guaranteed would be just a two year reign.  Eighteen GOP incumbents lost, compared to just three Democrats, but the GOP won over a net six Dem open seats.  Most of the incumbents who lost were from the Northeast or Midwest.  The few who were from other parts of the country tended to be fluke wins in 1994 by candidates who opted to be controversial rather than competent.

But let’s look at other data.  Clinton’s approval rating was already climbing up prior to the shutdown.  During the summer, Clinton had averaged 46% approval before dipping to 44% in September.  But, in October, he rebounded to 49%, and then hit 53%, 51% and 52% in November, December, and January respectively.  Going from 49% pre-“shutdowns” to 52% is not helpful to Republicans, but neither is it remarkable.  Clinton’s approval rating reached a high of 60% in September of 1996, with the likely driver being 5% GDP growth for the year, rather than the shutdown.  Clinton had a significant number of key markers in Presidential campaigns going his way — he would have won without the “shutdowns.”

The more politically problematic numbers came on the generic ballot, where a one point deficit in October (41% GOP/42% Dem) shifted to a three point deficit in December (41% GOP/44% Dem) and then dropped to eight points in January (38% GOP/46% Dem).  To lose only nine seats after dropping to minus eight on the generic ballot at the turn of the calendar is pretty remarkable.   By October, polls among likely voters were showing that GOPers were down three points on the generic.  That underscores how Republicans were able to run strong campaigns and shift those perceptions in a shorter time frame than they would have now.

(Interesting and snarky note — Democrats won the popular vote for Congress, but obviously did not win a majority of seats.  It served as a good test run for their 2000 Presidential strategy of winning the popular vote while losing the electoral college.)

Unemployment and the national debt were much lower in 1995.  Before the “shutdowns,” unemployment was just 5.5% in December, and only went up to 5.6% the next three months.  The national debt was $4.99 trillion dollars, which sounds like a lot until it is compared to our very current $14.1 trillion.

Voters are  currently more divided on who they would blame in a shutdown than in 1995.  Back then, voters were ready to blame Republicans 43%-32% over Bill Clinton.  Now, voters are pretty evenly divided in who they trust to make the right decisions about reducing the federal budget deficit — 42% trust GOPers in Congress, while 42% trust Obama. 

All of the analysis about the impact of a government shutdown is akin to pregame analysis before the Super Bowl.  Pregame analysis is cheap, and things will change IF there is a “shutdown.”  I am not arguing that the GOP was helped by the shutdown in 1995, but a look back shows whatever damage happened was highly contained.  Clinton had enough going right for him that he would have been re-elected regardless, and Republican House losses were minimal (and not necessarily attributable to the shutdown).  At the same time, there is no question from the data that the shutdown hurt the GOP on the generic ballot, although we were able to come back on that prior to the election.  Certainly at the time the political pressure seemed huge, but by November voters had moved on to other issues.

Similar Articles

  • Public Education Update
    read more

  • Americans See China And Russia As Adversaries Posing Two Different Threats
    read more

  • A New Look At Ideology
    read more

  • Is social media your friend or a frenemy?
    read more

  • Trump’s numbers tied for his peak high as impeachment talk looms
    read more

Public Opinion Strategies helped us to clarify what we wanted to learn and then conducted research and analysis that shed light even beyond the questions we set out to ask. They were very receptive to our suggestions, responsive to our queries, and flexible when we needed them to be.

Public Opinion Strategies has consistently offered unparalleled advice and spot-on polling that has shaped how and where we spent money and deploy key resources. Additionally, they have always been an excellent steward of limited campaign resources, ensuring we spend wisely and not a dollar more than necessary in order to get the information we need.

Robert Blizzard and Public Opinion Strategies did a great job for us throughout our successful campaign for Congress. Robert gave us accurate data, spot on analysis, and professional advice, all of which were essential to our victory.

Public Opinion Strategies is one of our go-to pollsters when it comes to testing public support for bond ballot measures and other initiative proposals. They are available to provide ongoing consultation with regard to crafting of ballot questions, public outreach messaging, and related efforts.

ACLI has worked with Public Opinion Strategies for decades, through several tough industry battles—often ones in which public opinion does not naturally fall on the side of insurers. Yet Bill and his team consistently provide invaluable strategic advice by refining our messages and helping us frame our issues in a way that makes them understandable and persuasive.

The data from Public Opinion Strategies provided important insight and informed our public awareness campaign. We sincerely appreciate their professionalism and expertise in this arena.

Nicole McCleskey and the team at Public Opinion Strategies have been invaluable to me, both during my campaigns and as Governor of the State of New Mexico. It’s not just the accuracy of their numbers, but guiding the overall strategy that makes them so valuable.

Public Opinion Strategies has been a part of our team in Missouri for more than a decade. With their data and guidance, Republicans here were able to attain a majority in the House in 2002 for the first time in fifty years, and we have been able to grow that majority to the point that we now have a record, veto-proof majority.

In my tenure at two leading business associations, facing huge and complex consumer issues, I have benefitted enormously from the objective advisory skills of Bill and his team. They do their homework, they are rigorous, dispassionate and thoughtful. Turning questions into answers is a clever tag, but it’s also an apt description of the professional talents of the firm.

I consider Public Opinion Strategies to be a part of our team. That is the way we have always worked. They have helped us to understand our needs and fashioned research solutions to meet those needs. They have helped us to meet killer deadlines by being flexible, executing rapidly, and insuring quality. Teamwork is the best way to describe it.

Accuracy, speed, and deep knowledge of key issues and public sentiment are the hallmarks of quality opinion research, and on these measures Public Opinion Strategies consistently delivers. I have had the pleasure of working with Public Opinion Strategies for more than 15 years on dozens of issues, and they are undoubtedly the gold standard.

Public Opinion Strategies’ track record of success and wealth of experience in political campaigns and issue advocacy are why they are one of the most trusted and well respected public opinion firms in Washington, D.C. Their insights and perspectives have helped to inform a wide array of public affairs activities across multiple industries.

Social Media Auto Publish Powered By :