Sources of Competition in State Legislative Primary Elections

Abstract

Primaries are an important but understudied component of American elections. In this article, I examine competition in state legislative primaries across 25 states during the 1994 and 1996 election cycles. My findings indicate that competition varies greatly and is affected by a number of factors on the state and district levels. The presence of an incumbent reduces competition, but strong district support for a party leads to greater competition in that party's primaries. Population size and social diversity do little to affect competition, but urbanism and unified party control have a positive impact. Further, legislative professionalism is associated with greater competition, particularly in open‐seat races. Overall, the results have important implications for theories about the conditions that enhance or inhibit competition across different types of elections.

Strategic Challenger Entry in a Federal System: The Role of Economic and Political Conditions in State Legislative Competition

“…Conflicting findings may be attributable to the lack of attention given to redistricting principles (Forgette, Garner, and Winkle ). Prior work finds legislators representing majority‐minority or partisan districts are less likely to be challenged (Hogan ; Squire ).…”

Explaining legislators’ positions on outside income limits: Voting on honoraria ceilings in the U.S. Senate, 1981–1983

“…legislators' financial interests on votes on mortgage disclosure, air pollution control and oil company tax rebates). It has also been shown to have a strong influence on the decision about whether to run for, or retire from, office (Fiorina 1994;Hall and Van Houweling 1995;Hibbing 1982;Hogan 2003;Moncrief et al 2001;Moncrief et al 2004;Rosenthal 1974;Squire 1988). I do not suggest that financial self-interest will matter equally for all legislators on all sorts of votes and decisions.…”

Political Consultants and Party-Centered Campaigning: Evidence from the 2010 U.S. House Primary Election Campaigns

“…With respect to electoral rules, I include dichotomous vaiiables for states with closed primaries and the top-two primary, only used by Washington State in 2010. Because whether a primary is open or closed matters less for explaining primary election competition and results than does the possibility of runoff elections to decide the nominee when no candidate wins a majority in the primaiy (Hogan 2003, Glaser 2006, I control for states with runoff election rules. The spending variable is the natural log of the dollars spent by a candidate (plus $1) prior to the primary date.…”