Cozen Currents: By the Numbers

“While House Democrats have both history and momentum on their side going into the midterms, there are some key quantitative variables and races to watch to determine whether they can meet their expectations or possibly exceed them.” — Howard Schweitzer, CEO, Cozen O’Connor Public Strategies

The Cozen Lens

• Traditional midterm indicators, from generic-ballot polling to consumer sentiment, point to Democratic gains in the House in the November midterm elections. However, mid-decade redistricting has produced a narrower, GOP-leaning battlefield. This places a ceiling on Democrats’ potential gains and gives the GOP a chance to retain its majority should the political environment change between now and the fall.
• President Trump’s recent executive order on AI has shifted the debate over federal regulation of the technology. Meanwhile, blue and red states are filling the void left by the absence of binding federal rules.
• The World Cup will bring the world to America’s doorstep, as well as a set of complications for federal, state, and local governments.

Subscribe to Cozen Currents

A Quantitative Guide to the House Midterm Elections

How the GOP Holds Its Majority. Redistricting has given the GOP an advantageous midterm playing field. However, to hold onto its narrow House majority, the party needs the national environment — particularly consumer sentiment — to improve between now and November.

• While the rising cost of goods and services weigh on the GOP’s poll numbers, the party has at least one lever it can pull that could materially change the economic picture, an unusual dynamic in an election year. That’s because much of the increase in energy prices, in particular, stems from the conflict in Iran and the related closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Should the latest efforts to cement a ceasefire lead to a swift reopening of the strait, oil prices could fall quickly, eventually providing relief at the pump.
• That change alone won’t solve all of the GOP’s woes, but lower gas prices and the end of the conflict would remove two key factors known to weigh on President Trump and the party’s approval ratings. Possible catalysts for a broader rebound in consumer confidence include the passage of a bipartisan housing reform bill this summer, a robust job market, and a broad deceleration of inflation. As fall approaches, consumer sentiment readings, the president’s approval rating, and economic indicators will provide clear signals of whether conditions are trending in the GOP’s direction.
• At a micro level, how the House GOP’s most vulnerable members are faring in their races, and whether the party appears set to gain ground in any closely contested Democratic-held seats, will signal whether the party can hold its majority. Nationwide, the GOP will be looking for a reversal of the generic ballot, which measures which party voters would prefer if the election were held today. On a race-by-race basis, polling of Representative Mike Lawler’s (R-NY) race will provide a strong signal as to the status of vulnerable GOP incumbents. A GOP lead over Representative Tom Suozzi (D-NY) in New York’s third district would be a clear sign that the party has a chance to make gains in Democratic territory.

The Median Outcome: A Modest Democratic Flip. If conditions remain the same through the fall, political analysts project that the likeliest outcome would be a modest Democratic House majority, given the GOP’s redistricting advantage and Democrats’ generic-ballot edge.

• Democrats began the year with history and the fundamentals on their side. Since World War II, the president’s party has lost House seats in all but two midterms, both of which occurred under atypical circumstances. That historical advantage is reflected in the fundamentals: low consumer sentiment and President Trump’s declining approval rating translate into a roughly five- to seven-point lead for Democrats on the generic ballot, depending on the aggregator.
• Democrats’ current generic ballot lead is in line with the party’s 2018 lead at this same point in the cycle – a dynamic that resulted in a net gain of 40 seats for the party that November. However, the GOP’s redistricting gains make a 2018 repeat less likely. Analysts at Sabato’s Crystal Ball note that the median House district this year would have voted for President Trump by about five points in 2024, making the House map about two points redder than it was two years ago. Analysts at Decision Desk HQ applied the current generic-ballot polling swing to the House map, producing a 222-213 Democratic House majority.
• Beyond monitoring the generic ballot, the clearest signal of only a modest House flip will come from Democratic leads in key toss-up races, but continued GOP resilience in the districts that President Trump carried by double digits in 2024. The former category includes Virginia’s second district, New Jersey’s seventh district, and California’s 22nd district, while the latter includes Washington’s third district.

What a Democratic Wave Looks Like. If the national environment continues to improve for Democrats this summer, a 2018-style midterm wave could materialize as enthusiasm among Democratic voters outweighs the limitations of the House map.

• The clearest indication of a potential wave building would be a continued expansion of Democrats’ lead on the generic ballot. A handful of high-quality pollsters have found higher-than-average leads for Democrats in recent weeks. Since the party out of power often growsits lead on the generic ballot in the months leading up to the election, Democrats may well still be short of their ceiling.
• Because there are fewer competitive districts this year, a Democratic wave would require the party to flip districts that Trump won by double digits in 2024. Polling showing the Democratic candidate leading in North Carolina’s 11th district, where incumbent Republican Representative Chuck Edwards faces a difficult re-election campaign, or in Arizona’s 2nd congressional district, where incumbent Republican Representative Eli Crane faced a spirited challenge in 2024, would be canaries in the coal mine for a significant Democratic overperformance.

How to Regulate AI

A Shift in AI Policy on the Federal Level. President Trump’s recent executive order (EO) on AI changes the debate over federal regulation of the technology.

• The EO establishes a voluntary process for a 30-day federal review of frontier AI models before their public release and sets up an AI cybersecurity clearinghouse to address vulnerabilities. While the review is voluntary, this is a significant departure from the White House’s previous hands-off approach to AI. The introduction of federal oversight, even if nonbinding, creates a new paradigm.
• The Trump administration’s clash with Anthropic over control of its technology entered a new chapter with the announcement of export restrictions on the firm’s most powerful models. This is also a notable shift given the White House’s previous laissez-faire attitude towards exporting the US AI stack.
• President Trump’s orbit is divided over AI regulation. According to reporting from Politico, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Emil Michael want more control over AI models, while Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent favor voluntary rules. Former AI and crypto czar David Sacks represents the opposite end of the spectrum and the initial postponement of Trump’s EO is a sign of his continued influence.
• Representatives Jay Obernolte (R-CA) and Lori Trahan (D-MA) kicked off the debate over AI regulation in Congress with a comprehensive AI proposal, though its preemption of state AI laws is likely to be a point of contention.

States Continue to Lead. In the absence of binding federal AI rules, blue and red states are charging ahead in targeting AI.

• On the left, Illinois late last month passed an AI safety bill to require frontier AI firms to develop catastrophic risk plans. Going beyond California and New York’s laws, the Illinois measure would also mandate third-party safety audits. In California, the state Assembly recently passed a bill to enact biosecurity guardrails similar to former President Biden’s 2023 AI executive order and a bill to enact chatbot safety protections, including age verification, parental controls, restrictions on targeted advertising to children, and a ban on certain harmful interactions with children. The state Senate also passed a similar chatbot bill.
• On the right, Florida has emerged as a leader in cracking down on AI. The Sunshine State’s GOP Attorney General James Uthmeier sued OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, alleging that the company offered a harmful product and violated state product liability law. (The case is separate from a criminal investigation into OpenAI that Uthmeier opened in April that touched on an alleged mass shooter’s interaction with ChatGPT). Representative Byron Donalds (R-FL), the frontrunner in the state’s Republican gubernatorial primary, said at a press conference this past week that he disagreed with Trump on regulating AI and supported creating protections for children, ensuring parents had more control over their children’s digital experiences, and establishing guardrails for name, image, and likeness. If elected, he may pick up the torch on AI regulation from Florida’s term-limited Republican Governor Ron DeSantis.
• State laws on AI can create a patchwork of rules for businesses, increasing compliance costs and incentivizing simplification by following the toughest standards even beyond state borders. Major states like California are able to effectively set national standards which can inspire smaller states to follow suit.

The Politics of the World Cup

Washington’s Complicated Welcome. The World Cup is spotlighting several political pressure points for the Trump administration, including immigration enforcement, geopolitics, and public health.

• As the World Cup brings an influx of travelers from around the world, the White House’s push for more aggressive border enforcement has created a few flashpoints for fans, players, and a Somali referee whose visa was denied. Players have so far had no issues being admitted to the US. However, Iranian officials have had visas denied, and fans from countries covered by the Trump administration’s travel bans have experienced high visa denial rates.
• In addition to tension over the US’s current immigration policies, geopolitical tensions could be exacerbated if leaders look to seize on-field victories as political messaging moments. Not only do tensions over the Iran conflict remain, but relationships among the host nations have not been perfect. The US, Canada, and Mexico are currently working to renegotiate their trilateral trade deal, a process that could become complicated if tensions among them grow further.
• Lastly, the current Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo, one of the tournament’s participants, has put a spotlight on public health responses to ensure there is no risk of an outbreak in the US. Even more than any specific threats, officials note that the expected increase in visitors across the continent poses infection risks, with leaders looking to leverage tools and strategies honed during the Covid response to minimize these dangers.

The Local Burden. As much as there is a challenge for federal officials to manage the event at the macro level, many of the micro-level challenges, such as those surrounding match days, will be primarily tackled by state and local officials.

• One of the biggest flash points around the World Cup has been the strain it will place on many local mass transit systems. To avoid placing the burden of increased expenses on their taxpayers, officials have, in some cases, responded by significantly raising fares. The resulting public outcry prompted some reduction in the unusually high transit prices, but often still not to a level comparable to a regular fare, with officials citing a lack of support from FIFA as one reason the cost is being passed on to attendees.
• The other significant question about pricing has focused on ticket pricing, with several state attorneys general launching investigations into FIFA’s ticket sales process. Questions have focused primarily on how ticket prices were determined, with tickets often priced many times higher than equivalent tickets at previous World Cups. The high prices have also collided with the political attention on affordability issues, leading some would-be attendees to feel that they have been priced out of the event.
• Another challenge for match-day management will be security at each game, which has been compared to the planning needed for a Super Bowl. A particular focus has been put on anti-drone technology, with state and local officials receiving training from the FBI. There has also been concern about bomb threats, many of which have so far been identified as fake but can still create disruptions. These challenges are compounded by the tournament’s spread across 78 matches over 39 days in 11 US cities, with teams’ base camps even further distributed.

Share

Share this...

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Linkedin