By ALAN FRAM, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON — Hardly anybody likes Congress. Yet despite public disgust with the gridlock between lawmakers and President Barack Obama that has dominated the past two years, Republicans remain in position to continue controlling the House for the next two years, probably by about the same margin as now.
Democrats had been hoping to add the 25 seats on Election Day that they would need to run the chamber, or at least gain a healthy number of districts. Now, after both sides' House candidates and their allies spent a record $1.1 billion campaigning, it appears Democrats may pick up a handful of seats or even lose some strength in Tuesday's voting.
Though all 435 House seats were in play, only around 60 featured truly competitive races.
Democrats targeted many of the 87 members of the GOP's tea party-backed freshman class of 2010 that swept the party to House control. Only about two dozen faced threatening challenges.
As Obama's lead over GOP challenger Mitt Romney shriveled to a near draw as Election Day approached, Democrats' expectations for coattails that would boost their House candidates shrunk as well. Republicans, building off their enhanced control of statehouses, also did a robust job of protecting their incumbents and weakening Democrats when congressional district lines were redrawn after the 2010 census, especially in states like Pennsylvania and North Carolina.
The economy and jobs dominated the presidential campaign, but there was little evidence either party had harnessed those issues in a decisive way at the House level. Both sides agreed that this year's election lacked a nationwide wave that would give either side sweeping strength – as occurred when Democrats seized control in 2006 and expanded their majority in 2008, and Republicans snatched the chamber back in 2010.
Democrats had predicted that waning public support for the tea party movement and disgust with gridlock between Congress and Obama would cost Republicans seats. They also said the House GOP budget and its reshaping of the popular Medicare health care program would wound House Republican candidates – especially after the fiscal blueprint's author, GOP Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, became his party's vice presidential nominee.
From coast to coast, Democrats flooded the airwaves with TV spots linking GOP candidates to the tea party and to crusades to abolish Medicare and slash taxes for the rich. Republicans responded by tying Democratic candidates to Obama and his economic stimulus and health care overhaul laws, especially in areas where he is less popular.
Going into Tuesday's voting, Republicans controlled the House 242-193, including vacancies in two formerly GOP-held and three Democratic seats.
Turnover was inevitable, and a large number of newcomers will be sworn into the House in January no matter what.
There were 62 districts where no incumbents were running at all, either because they had retired or lost earlier party primaries or because the seats were newly created to reflect the census.
When combined with likely losses by incumbents, the number of new House members in the next Congress could match the 91 freshmen who started serving in 2011 – a number unmatched since 1993.
Polls underscored the public sentiment that Democrats had hoped they could use to their advantage.
A CBS News-New York Times poll late last month showed just 15 percent of Americans approved of how Congress was handling its job, near its historic lows. And an Associated Press-GfK poll in August showed that 39 percent approved of congressional Democrats while just 31 percent were satisfied with congressional Republicans.
Republicans, however, enjoyed a significant financial edge.
Republican House candidates, the GOP and allies like Karl Rove's American Crossroads political committee and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spent a combined $664 million on House races through October, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
Democrats and their backers like labor and environmental groups spent a total of $506 million.