(FORTUNE Magazine) – Nightmare question for the late 1990s: What if there were an election, and only incumbents ran? We're about to find out. Yes, the candidates are organizing fundraisers and phone banks galore, and the polls will be open as usual in November. But many lawmakers face no contest. It's already clear that 52 Republicans and 34 Democrats will have no major party opposition--20% of the entire House. And that number will likely climb as candidate-filing deadlines pass this summer. By November, 100 lawmakers may be running without serious opposition.

Consider the six biggest states. California has nine unopposed House members; New York as many as 19; Texas, 11; Florida, 16; Pennsylvania, four; and Illinois, four. In 1992, Florida was one of the most bitter congressional battlegrounds, with 21 contested House elections; this year it has just seven, despite a high-profile gubernatorial race involving Republican Jeb Bush. In New York, 60% of the House delegation is running unopposed. Even if a few challengers belly up by the July 16 filing deadline, no big names will be running against Republicans Michael Forbes, who sits in a marginal Long Island district with zippo support from the GOP leadership; Vito Fosella, who won his seat in a special election on Staten Island only months ago; and Sue Kelley, whose tenure in her Hudson Valley district has never been secure.

This is an electoral curiosity, to be sure, but it's more than that. These lawmakers are now acting as free agents, without any worries about the consequences of their actions. They can line up on important issues like campaign-finance overhaul without pressure from voters; the only voices they need heed are those of special interests. The pols might not covet votes right now, but they always covet dollars.

The great American reelection bonanza underlines an often ignored element of politics: Most elections are over before they start, and increasingly, the only competition in House races is for openings created when incumbents step down. Even the biggest earthquake in modern political history, the Republican takeover of the House in 1994 after four decades of Democratic rule, was just a tremor; 90.2% of the people seeking reelection won. The last time fewer than 90% of House incumbents won was in the 1946 election that propelled a new generation of World War II veterans, including Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy, into the House.

Recruiters for both parties say it's harder than ever to find challengers. Sen. Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, the Democrats' chief recruiter, says that of 30 incumbents running in November, "maybe eight" are in competitive races. "There's hardly an election," agrees Rep. John Linder of Georgia, who heads the House GOP campaign committee. "Times are good, and there aren't many issues."

Many state and local politicians shy away from House races because they're worried they might lose--and they know that if they win, their worries are just beginning. "The only thing worse than running is winning, which means you have to live in Washington and stew in incivility," says Sandy Maisel, a Colby College political scientist studying why people don't run for office--and still smarting after finishing fourth in a four-way House primary in Maine 20 years ago. "The normal person figures he can get more done as a volunteer or on a school board. It's not an irrational decision." And so, this fall more than ever, incumbents will rule in Washington.

DAVID SHRIBMAN is Washington bureau chief of the Boston Globe and a Pulitzer Prize-winning political reporter.