United States House of Representatives elections, 1930

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The U.S. House election, 1930 was an election for the United States House of Representatives in 1930 which occurred in the middle of President Herbert Hoover's term. With the Great Depression in full swing, Hoover's personal popularity was extremely low, and his Republican Party lost a net of 52 seats to the Democratic Party.

Although the Republicans retained a narrow majority from the election, they lost a number of special elections following the deaths of 19 representatives and representatives-elect prior to the reconvening of Congress [1]. This resulted in the new chamber having a four seat Democratic majority.

1 Overall results
2 California
3 References
4 See also

[edit] Overall results

Party	Total Seats (change)		Seat percentage
Republican Party	218	-52	50.1%
Democratic Party	216	+52	49.7%
Farmer-Labor Party	1	+0	0.2%
Totals	435	+0	100.0%

80.1-100% Republican	80.1-100% Democratic
60.1-80% Republican	60.1-80% Democratic

House seats by party holding plurality in state

6+ Republican gain	6+ Democratic gain
3-5 Republican gain	3-5 Democratic gain
1-2 Republican gain	1-2 Democratic gain
no net change	1-2 Progressive gain

[edit] California

District	Incumbent	Party	Elected	Status	Opponent
California 1	Clarence F. Lea	Democratic	1916	Running	Clarence F. Lea (D) (unopposed)
California 2	Harry Lane Englebright	Republican	1926	Running	Harry Lane Englebright (R) (unopposed)
California 3	Charles F. Curry	Republican	1912	Died in office	Charles F. Curry, Jr. (R-W/I) 53.4% J. M. Inman (R) 33.0% Frank H. Buck (D) 11.3% Katherine Braddock 2.2% E. M. Turner 0.1%
California 4	Florence Prag Kahn	Republican	1926	Running	Florence Prag Kahn (R) (unopposed)
California 5	Richard J. Welch	Republican	1926	Running	Richard J. Welch (R) (unopposed)
California 6	Albert E. Carter	Republican	1924	Running	Albert E. Carter (R) (unopposed)
California 7	Henry E. Barbour	Republican	1918	Running	Henry E. Barbour (R) (unopposed)
California 8	Arthur M. Free	Republican	1920	Running	Arthur M. Free (R) (unopposed)
California 9	William E. Evans	Republican	1926	Running	William E. Evans (R) (unopposed)
California 10	Joe Crail	Republican	1926	Running	Joe Crail (R) 75% John F. Dockweiler (D) 25%
California 11	Philip D. Swing	Republican	1920	Running	Philip D. Swing (R) (unopposed)

[edit] References

Susan F. Stevens, "Congressional Elections of 1930: Politics of Avoidance" (Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1980), reports that the depression seems to have not played as much of a role as prohibition, farm policy and the Smoot Hawley Tariff issues. This study focuses on the political environment of the immediate post-Crash period. Contrary to modern anticipation and historical precedent, the first elections after the Stock Market debacle proved remarkably inconclusive. Despite a host of handicaps, of which economic uncertainty was only one, the incumbent Republican party managed to retain control of Congress. The margin, however, was not durable enough to withstand the deepening financial crisis. By the time the 72nd Congress was convened thirteen months later, the Democrats had secured the House of Representatives through a series of by-elections. Contemporary analysis of the 1930-31 period reveals a curious sense of ambivalence which those election results sustain. Newspapers, journals, popular publications and manuscripts have provided the main source of evidence. These subjective accounts have been weighed against the voting tallies in order to determine the context of the most significant campaigns and their results. Surprisingly, the issue of economic depression was a minor concern during the general elections. Prohibition, tariff and farm policy featured far more prominently during the fall of 1930. By 1931, however, the economic issue had become predominant and voters registered their dismay by electing Democrats. This study indicates that the mutual reluctance of either political party to deal with the depression issue, coupled with an initial disinclination by voters to upset a heretofore comfortable status quo, produced an electoral ambivalence unequalled in American congressional politics. Only the continued inability of the Republican administration to reverse economic disruption persuaded voters to embrace the unproven abilities of Democratic legislators.