Ignoring evidence to the contrary, USA Today editorial asserted 1994 "Contract with America" was "effective ... in bringing Republicans to power"

In an October 20 editorial, USA Today asserted that one reason it "would be quite an achievement" if the Democrats were to take control of the House and/or the Senate in the upcoming midterm elections is that the Democrats have "failed to put together a platform as effective as the Contract with America was in bringing Republicans to power in 1994." But contrary to USA Today's claim that the Contract with America was "effective ... in bringing Republicans to power," pre-election, post-election, and, reportedly, exit polls from 1994 indicate that only a small percentage of voters said they were influenced by the Contract -- and that most had not even heard of it. As an April 5 Hill article reported: "Twelve years after the Contract With America and the staggering GOP sweep, architects of the storied manifesto concede it played a more mythical than material role in victory."

Pre-Election:

• According to an October 21, 1994, Wall Street Journal article, a "new" NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found that "Nearly 70% of voters in the survey say they haven't heard about the House GOP Contract With America."
• As noted in a September 12, 2006, McClatchy Newspapers commentary by McClatchy chief Washington political correspondent Steve Thomma, at the time, a Times Mirror Center for the People and the Press (now the Pew Research Center) poll conducted October 20-24, 1994, found that, among registered voters, "The much-ballyhooed Republican Contract With America has failed to do much to improve the prospects of GOP candidates this fall. ... [O]nly three in ten (29%) claimed to have heard about this document signed by over 300 Republican congressional candidates last month. Overall about as many voters say it makes them more likely [7 percent] to vote Republican as say less likely [6 percent]."
• In the January 30, 1999, edition of the National Journal, political analyst Charlie Cook wrote that "[c]ontrary to popular belief, the Contract With America neither elected the Republican Congress in 1994 nor jeopardized it in 1996. Polls consistently showed that by Election Day 1994, less than 30 percent of the American people had ever heard of the Contract With America."

Exit Poll:

• According to the April 5 Hill article: "Exit polls showed that a majority of voters had not heard of the Contract With America on Nov. 8, 1994, when the GOP won 60 races to gain control of the House and Senate."
• Columnist Gene Lyons, in his November 16, 1994, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette column, wrote: "What happened here [in the 1994 midterm elections] is that Republican voters were energized and turned out, Democrats weren't and didn't. The majority of independents let their uneasiness about Clinton govern their choices. As for the famous 'Contract with America,' exit polls showed that only about 18 percent of voters -- mostly committed Republicans -- gave it a second thought."

Post-Election:

• A November 28-29, 1994, Gallup poll (subscription required) reported that, at that point, only 34 percent of adults had heard of the Contract with America.
• A November 27-28, 1994 CBS News poll (via The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research) reported only 28 percent of adults had "heard or read anything about" the Contract.
• A November 11, 1994, Wall Street Journal article reported that, based on a November 9, 1994, NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, "there are signs that voters aren't buying into the full Republican agenda as expressed in the 'Contract with America' program adopted by GOP House candidates." Moreover, the article reported that, based on the poll, "It seems that voters cast out Democrats largely because they simply think government is bloated and working badly. 'This election was almost entirely about the government,' says [Republican pollster Robert] Teeter." Teeter conducted the poll along with Democratic pollster Peter Hart.

From the October 20 USA Today editorial titled "Lessons from off year races already begin to emerge: Dems lead but lack message":

Polls indicate that if the November elections were held today, Democratic candidates would make major gains across the board. The Democrats are within reach of the 15 seats they need to win a majority in the House of Representatives and might even capture control of the Senate. That would be quite an achievement considering the party itself is in disarray.

Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, has been feuding with key members of Congress over how to spend the party's money. Things got so bad this spring that Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the party's point person for picking up House seats, stormed out of a meeting screaming obscenities. Their respective staffs patched together a compromise last month, but only after DNC staffers toyed with demanding a "good behavior" clause requiring Emanuel to stop badmouthing Dean.

At the same time, congressional Democrats failed to put together a platform as effective as the Contract with America was in bringing Republicans to power in 1994.

In 2006, Democrats could win despite themselves. They have the good fortune of running when the war in Iraq and corruption scandals have Republicans on the defensive.