The Battle for the House sits in the Suburbs

As the 2026 midterms approach, the cost of living is poised to become a central battlefield in the fight for control of the House—where only 3 seats sit between Democrats and the Republicans. A recent internal analysis done with help from Matthew Lipka, highlights how Democrats are zeroing in on suburban swing districts where economic anxiety over healthcare, childcare, and daily essentials is high.

Republicans, defending a narrow majority, are targeting denser, often Hispanic-majority districts, especially in high-cost states like California, New York, and Florida. A close look at Democrat's target lists and district demographics shows how cost-of-living issues could drive the outcome in 2026.

The Density Divide

Our analysis reveals a pattern in the district targeting strategies of both parties. When we examine the data through the lens of the District Density Index, a clear picture emerges:

• 69% of districts Democrats are targeting are suburban districts

• Republicans are targeting (and Democrats defending) denser districts, with 73% being suburban to urban-suburban mix

Looking more closely at the density distribution of targeted seats, the contrast becomes even more pronounced:

The implications for campaign strategy are clear. The battlefield for House control in 2026 will be fought primarily in suburban districts of varying densities. For Democrats, this means focusing particularly on the sparse suburban districts where they’re targeting 16 Republican-held seats. These areas—which typically feature single-family homes, longer commutes, and more car dependency—have distinct economic concerns that differ from both urban cores and rural communities.

The suburban voter has become increasingly pivotal in recent elections, often swinging between parties based on economic concerns and quality of life issues. Democrats appear to be calculating that these voters will be receptive to messaging centered around affordability and economic security, particularly in a midterm environment where these kitchen-table issues typically take precedence over national security or cultural concerns that might dominate presidential cycles.

The Incumbent Quality Gap

Perhaps the most significant advantage for Democrats heading into these midterms lies in the quality of their incumbents. Using WAR (Wins Above Replacement) metrics from Split Ticket, we can quantify how candidates perform relative to expectations in their districts.

The median WAR of Republican incumbents being targeted by the DCCC stands at -3.4, meaning these Republicans ran an average of 3.4 percentage points worse than a generic Republican would have been expected to perform in their districts. By contrast, Democratic incumbents targeted by the NRCC have a median WAR of +2.85, indicating they outperformed a generic Democrat by nearly three percentage points.

This difference is stark and meaningful. Most of the Democrats targeted by the NRCC performed significantly better than a generic candidate would have, while Republican incumbents consistently underperformed their districts' partisan fundamentals.

Even more telling: Trump won 20 of the 25 seats Republicans are targeting by more than 5 points—meaning their House candidates ran 5 or more points behind the President when he was on the ballot. This reflects superior candidate quality among Democratic House incumbents that could prove decisive in close races where personal performance makes the difference between victory and defeat. This incumbent quality advantage gives Democrats a crucial edge in what will likely be cost-focused campaigns, as stronger candidates are better positioned to build trust with voters on economic issues and credibly champion solutions to suburban affordability concerns.

The Trump Factor

The shadow of the 2024 presidential election looms large over these targeted districts. Our analysis reveals that Trump won 32 of the DCCC's 35 targets, representing 88% of Democrats' offensive opportunities. This reflects a strategic calculation that Trump's absence from the ballot in 2026 will create openings in districts where he drove Republican performance.

By comparison, Trump won only 13 of the NRCC's 25 targets (52%), giving Republicans a more balanced portfolio of opportunities. This stark contrast highlights a fundamental dynamic: Democrats are betting heavily on the midterm bump traditionally enjoyed by the party out of power.

What's particularly noteworthy is Trump's improvement over his 2020 performance, which could make some races appear more viable for Republicans than they actually will be. Meanwhile, 9 of the seats Republicans are targeting (36%) saw a 10-20 point, (CA-09, +14, CA-13 +17,FL-09 +14, FL-23 +11, NJ-09 +20, NY-03 +16, NY-04 +13, TX-28 +14, TX-34 +20), improvement for Trump over the prior cycle. This raises a critical question: Is there much room left for Republicans to gain further, especially with Trump not on the ballot? There are very few seats where Trump didn't improve over 2024 (only one Republican, VA-01, and one Democratic target, WA-03, and in each case Trump's performance only fell by 1 percentage point).

The Suburban Strategy and Cost of Living Focus

The density data reveals the centerpiece of the Democratic strategy for 2026: win back suburban America with candidates that can focus on the issues that matter in these specific localities—especially affordability. The concentration of Democratic targets in suburban districts isn't merely geographic, it represents a bet that suburban voters' concerns about healthcare costs, childcare expenses, housing affordability, and everyday economic pressures will drive their voting decisions.

To win back these crucial suburban battlegrounds, Democrats must move beyond vague promises and campaign slogans to champion specific, actionable policies that directly address the cost-of-living crisis squeezing middle-class families. As the tables above demonstrates, these competitive districts span different types of suburban environments - from denser urban-suburban mix areas (where Democrats currently hold 9 seats) to sparse suburban communities (where Republicans hold 16 seats). Each requires a tailored approach to cost-of-living issues.

Earlier this year, we published a comprehensive policy roadmap that outlined solutions Democrats could champion to address cost-of-living pressures. With the 2026 battleground now clearly centered on suburban districts, these policy approaches have become even more valuable:

Housing Affordability: Congressional Democrats should champion federal zoning reform incentives that reward localities for eliminating barriers to housing construction, (allowing accessory dwelling units and duplexes in single-family zones, reducing minimum lot size requirements, simplifying approval processes for housing development, eliminating parking minimums that drive up housing costs.) Additionally, Democrats should support modernizing federal building codes to allow innovations like mass timber construction and modular housing, which can reduce construction costs by 20-30% without compromising quality or safety. The Expansion of Attainable Homeownership Through Manufactured Housing Act offers one pathway to increasing affordable homeownership options in suburban markets.

Healthcare Access: A federal agenda to expand healthcare access while reducing costs would resonate strongly with suburban voters. Key components should include:

• Removing the outdated cap on medical residencies to address the looming shortage of 124,000 physicians

• Expanding scope of practice for pharmacists to provide more direct care services, building on lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic

• Reforming FDA approval processes for health monitoring devices and technologies

• Small wins like updating sunscreen regulations to allow access to superior products available in Europe and Asia

These supply-side healthcare reforms would increase access points, reduce wait times, and lower costs for suburban families without requiring massive new spending programs or government expansion. Combatting the current rhetoric that Republican counterparts are spearheading, such as work requirements for Medicaid as well as mass benefit reduction, is also a helpful strategy.

Childcare and Family Costs: Childcare represents one of the most acute cost pressures for suburban families with young children. A focused approach should include:

• An expanded Child Tax Credit targeting families with children under six, building on the proven success of the 2021 temporary expansion

• Streamlining the process for importing formula from countries with robust safety standards

• Implementing universal free school meals to eliminate administrative waste and reduce family expenses

• Rescinding caps on au pair program growth to expand childcare options

See also a two-part series, Gary Winslett has authored highlighting 10 principles Democrats should focus on. Democrats should highlight Republican attempts to cut SNAP, which helps low-income families afford food, and make a strong case for protecting this essential program. (Hint: It’s not hard. Poor kids deserve food.)

Energy and Infrastructure: To address energy costs while supporting climate goals, Democrats should advocate for:

• Comprehensive permitting reform to accelerate clean energy deployment

• Expanding domestic critical mineral production to reduce clean tech costs

• Supporting clean energy tax credits that directly lower utility bills for middle-class households

Each of these proposals addresses a key cost pressure for suburban families without requiring massive new spending programs. By focusing on supply expansion rather than simply subsidizing demand, Democrats can offer a fiscally responsible approach to affordability that contrasts with Trump's tariff-focused agenda, which would raise prices on everything from cars to consumer goods.

The question becomes whether Democrats will engage in what Matthew Yglesias has called "dog whistle moderation"—talking about reaching out to swing voters without actually changing policy preferences—or whether they'll make substantive adjustments to appeal to suburban voters. As Rahm Emmanuel said back in February: “Clinton and Obama, the only two Democratic presidents to be reelected since Franklin D. Roosevelt, took stances that were in the mainstream of political sentiment, and both were willing to confront allied interest groups demanding fidelity and orthodoxy to out-of-touch positions despite the attendant criticism.” Hard choices about messaging and policy priorities may be necessary to win in these targeted districts.

Emanuel's argument reads as a direct challenge to Democrats eyeing these suburban battlegrounds. Winning these districts will require more than candidate recruitment and messaging tweaks, it will also demand substantive policy positions that directly address middle-class economic anxieties, even when those policies face resistance from traditional Democratic constituencies.

The suburban districts that will determine House control in 2026 will serve as the ultimate testing ground for whether Democrats can move beyond rhetorical pleas to embrace substantive positions that speak directly to cost-of-living concerns.

Affordability Wins Votes

In the end, the road to a House majority in 2026 runs through America’s suburbs. With control hanging in the balance, both parties are adapting their strategies to reflect the new geography of political competition—one shaped by lived economic realities. Democrats have a fair shot wagering that a focused, state and federal-level push on affordability, backed by credible incumbents and grounded policy proposals, can win back ground in swing districts. Republicans are leaning on demographic shifts and cultural momentum, but face vulnerabilities without Trump on the ballot, while inflation persists under the current administration. As the cost of living crisis deepens, the party that delivers tangible relief to suburban families—not just rhetoric—will be best positioned to emerge with the majority.