The Better Question
The Value of Experience
By Grant Fredericks — The LeClaire Report
A reader of The LeClaire Report wrote in recently with a comment that provoked some thought and deserves a response. “I really like Carmela Conroy,” the reader said, “she knows the issues. But she lost the last election.” The reader continued, “I think we need someone new. I’m going to research the other candidates before making up my mind.”
I was surprised by the comment. The reader knows and likes Conroy. Her campaign appears to have succeeded with this reader. It established name recognition, trust, and likability. So why search for a new name, a new face, an unknown?
The reader’s comment reflects the Democratic kryptonite for WA-5.
No Democrat Since Foley
No Democrat has represented WA-5 since Speaker Thomas Foley lost to George Nethercutt in 1994.1 In the elections since, Democrats have repeatedly nominated candidates who introduce themselves to the district for the first time, only to replace them after one loss. The habit of retiring a nominee after a single defeat has left the seat in Republican hands for a generation.
The approach has not produced a Democratic win in more than thirty years.
Conroy’s 2024 result was consistent with recent first-time Democratic nominees. She drew 39.29 percent against Michael Baumgartner.2 Two years earlier, Natasha Hill drew 40.34 percent.3 Two years before that, Dave Wilson drew 38.54 percent.4 Conroy did not run behind her predecessors. What separates her today is not the previous vote count; it’s that she can now leverage name recognition and a more experienced campaign organization. And, she faces a known incumbant with a broadly unpopular record.
Not Starting From Scratch
A candidate who loses a congressional race keeps real assets. The reader’s e-mail illustrates the most valuable asset of all: the reader already knows and likes Conroy.
Political scientists have measured what that recognition is worth. Research published in the American Journal of Political Science found that merely recognizing a candidate’s name raises the support voters give that candidate, largely because recognition serves as a signal of viability.5 Research published in the American Political Science Review reached a similar conclusion in congressional elections. Challengers gain ground as voters come to recognize them because an unknown challenger gives voters little on which to base a decision.6 A first campaign turns an unknown into a known quantity. That work is expensive, and Conroy has already done it.
Recognition is not the only legacy of a past campaign. Conroy entered this race7 with an organization already assembled, supporters already identified, donors already contacted, and a year of travel behind her across a district that runs from Spokane through the Palouse to the rural counties along the Canadian border. None of that guarantees she will win. But it does mean that she is positioned better than each of the ten first-time competitors who are challenging Baumgartner, most of whom are still unknown to the electorate.8
Losing First, Winning Later
The reader’s instinct, one loss and move on, treats a first defeat as disqualifying. But an audit of current House members who won their seat after a previous loss shows that the reader’s instinct misses the value of campaign experience.
Angie Craig lost in Minnesota, then won. Anna Paulina Luna lost in Florida, then won. Derrick Van Orden lost in Wisconsin, then won. Monica De La Cruz lost in Texas, then won. They are Democrats and Republicans from suburban and rural districts. What they share is a first campaign that ended in defeat and a second that did not.9
This list of House members doesn’t prove that losing causes winning, but it does suggest that a first campaign often lays the groundwork for the second.
The Question Worth Asking
The reader who prompted this response raised an issue and then quickly resolved it by vowing to consider the other candidates before voting. No one is owed a nomination, and a serious voter should consider each candidate’s record. So, it is worth looking at what the record already shows about the race.
Conroy leads it. As of the last week’s FEC filings, she had raised more financial support than all of the other challengers combined, and her campaign holds more cash heading into the primary.
A stronger measure of her candidacy comes from the analysis of where the money comes from. Conroy’s filings list more donors who live in WA-5, giving more district dollars than any of the other challengers to Baumgartner.10 That financial support means that Eastern Washington is funding a campaign it will vote for. Money from outside the district is aimed at influencing voter decision making, but it cannot vote.
Conroy also brings a team that has already run a district-wide race. Her campaign has an established network of supporters across the district, and she enjoys the name recognition the reader acknowledged. Taken together, hers is the strongest campaign among the alternatives.
2024 was not her liability; it was her introduction.
Endnotes
1. NBC News, “Former GOP Rep. George Nethercutt, who defeated House Speaker Tom Foley in 1994, dies at 79,” June 17, 2024. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/george-nethercutt-defeated-speaker-tom-foley-1994-dies-79-rcna157653
2. Washington Secretary of State, “2024 General Election Results, Congressional District 5, U.S. Representative” (Michael Baumgartner 60.57%, Carmela Conroy 39.29%). https://results.vote.wa.gov/results/20241105/congressional-district-5-us-representative.html
3. Washington Secretary of State, “2022 General Election Results, Congressional District 5, U.S. Representative” (Cathy McMorris Rodgers 59.66%, Natasha Hill 40.34%). https://results.vote.wa.gov/results/20221108/congressional-district-5-us-representative.html
4. Washington Secretary of State, “2020 General Election Results, Congressional District 5, U.S. Representative” (Cathy McMorris Rodgers 61.31%, Dave Wilson 38.54%). https://results.vote.wa.gov/results/20201103/congressional-district-5-us-representative.html
5. Cindy D. Kam and Elizabeth J. Zechmeister, “Name Recognition and Candidate Support,” American Journal of Political Science, 2013. DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12034. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ajps.12034
6. Gary C. Jacobson, “The Effects of Campaign Spending in Congressional Elections,” American Political Science Review, 1978. DOI: 10.2307/1954105. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/effects-of-campaign-spending-in-congressional-elections/A4D6F1D5E7D94274EBFE4A6C4C38500D
7. Spokesman-Review, “Congressional candidates debate immigration, electability, Israel and trans rights in S-R forum,” July 5, 2026, confirming the Baumgartner-Conroy rematch. https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2026/jul/05/congressional-candidates-debate-immigration-electa/
8. Washington’s 5th Congressional District 2026 top-two primary candidate field (Michael Baumgartner and eleven challengers), Ballotpedia and Cheney Free Press, May 2026. https://ballotpedia.org/Washington’s_5th_Congressional_District_election,_2026_(August_4_top-two_primary) ; https://www.cheneyfreepress.com/story/2026/05/14/news/baumgartner-draws-12-challengers/44022.html
9. First-campaign losses followed by election to the current House are documented in each member’s Ballotpedia profile: Angie Craig (Minnesota’s 2nd, lost 2016, won 2018), Anna Paulina Luna (Florida’s 13th, lost 2020, won 2022), Derrick Van Orden (Wisconsin’s 3rd, lost 2020, won 2022), and Monica De La Cruz (Texas’s 15th, lost 2020, won 2022).
10. Federal Election Commission filings, 2026 election cycle: Conroy for Congress, total receipts $300,714, including $215,305 from 765 donors residing in WA-5, and $149,244 cash on hand.
https://www.fec.gov/