Political rhetoric in campaigns often includes a challenger attempting to disparage the incumbent by labeling him or her a "Washington insider." Does being an incumbent make a politician more or less effective or corrupt?

Be sure to weigh the pros and cons of incumbency on politicians and society.

Answer: An ideal response will:
1. Recall that incumbents are far more likely to win a given election: over a 90 percent average, even when Republicans retook control of the House.
2. List the advantages of incumbency, including: name recognition, credit claiming, free mail, casework, media access, campaign experience, and redistricting.
3. Note some pitfalls of incumbency that may be used to challenge an incumbent. This could include perceptions of ineffective performance, or perceived character flaws. Party affiliation can be important, such as in the 2010 election, when only 86 percent of House members were reelected. Democrats were viewed more skeptically in the 2010 election.
4. Make an argument on the value of being an incumbent