The vanishing voter.

ACCORDING to a poll taken four weeks before election day, only 27 per cent of the American people think Congress is doing a good job, and two-thirds believe it's time to throw the rascals out. But if recent history is any guide, few congressmen need worry about their re-election prospects:

Only seven incumbent congressmen-1.5 per cent of those seeking re-election-lost in 1988. Five were involved in issues of moral turpitude, leaving at most two rejected on the basis of policy issues.

In fact, winning votes seems to be less important here than strengthening institutions that make voters irrelevant. Creative redistricting on the part of state legislatures has given rise to the "safe seat": one in four House members will be unopposed by a major-party candidate this year, as will four senators. Thanks to gerrymandering, Democrats were able to win 60 per cent of House seats in 1988 with only 53 per cent of the total vote.

Re-election science took a quantum leap forward in 1974. That year's campaign-finance law limited individual campaign contributions to $1,000, sharply restricting the ability of political unknowns to raise funds. Political-action committees, supposed to neutralize the role of money in political campaigns, have instead tilted the playing field further in the incumbents' favor. In 1986, for example, PAC money represented 26 per cent of the campaign funds of the average Democrat, versus 10 per cent for the average Republican.

To limit PAC influence Congress seems inclined to have congressional campaigns partly or wholly financed by tax money. Unfortunately, neither spending limits nor public financing will deprive incumbents of a massive edge. Congressmen already receive public financing in the form of franked mail and staff support worth more than $1.5 million in this election cycle (1989-90), according to the Heritage Foundation. The postal privilege alone will cost taxpayers $136 million ($311,000 per congressman), dwarfing the $102 million donated by PACs and exceeding the $130 million contributed by individuals to all House candidates during the last election cycle. The average incumbent spends more on postage than the average challenger spends on his entire election campaign.

In the long run the biggest threat to political competition is voter apathy. During the last off-year election two-thirds of potential voters stayed at home. Of course, that was before the S&L scandal, a weakening economy, and "read my hips." If 1982 is any indication, the bad times will bring forth a significantly larger voter turnout. Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that that will change appreciably the rate at which incumbents are returned to office.