Journalists and fundraisers will tell you almost every congressional district under the sun is "competitive," but you need look no further than 2012 to see that's just not true. Incumbency is king and gerrymandering has left only a handful of congressional districts truly competitive.

Our goal is to help voters see past the hype and quickly and effectively determine which districts are deserving of attention and resources. We're driven by the fact that across the country, candidates in uncompetitive districts are able to raise tens of millions of dollars for races with foregone conclusions. What's going on?

Take a look at 2012, when $3.7 billion was spent on congressional races, close to $1 billion more than the cost of the presidential race:
  • The average House race in 2012 cost general election candidates $2.1 million.
  • Only three of the ten most expensive House races (which ranged in cost from $7 million to $23 million) were decided by five percentage points or less.
  • In 29 of the 85 congressional districts that were widely considered by the news media to be competitive, a candidate won by ten or more percentage points.
Ballotpedia calls these 29 not-so-competitive-after-all districts "Moneymakers." The total cost of these 29 uncompetitive races was over $100 million, which is $40 million more than the cost of 29 average races in 2012. Each "Moneymaker" race cost an average of $3.5 million, which is $1.4 million more than the typical 2012 race. And these are districts where candidates won by 10%, 15%, 20%, and more!  In other words, these races were hardly nail-biters.

Intrigued by these "Moneymaker" districts, Ballotpedia devised five criteria for labeling 2014 races as truly competitive. Our analysis yielded 26 races which we believe to be the most competitive congressional races of 2014. They reflect just 6% of all House elections.

Do you live in one of the 26 most competitive districts? You can see the full list here.

As always, please don't hesitate to get in touch!