A New Look at the Republican Advantage in Nonpartisan Elections

Abstract

Conventional wisdom has long held that Republicans are advantaged when partisan labels are removed from the ballot. However, in this article, the authors argue that the advantage gained from nonpartisan elections favors the minority party because the low-cost partisan cue is hidden from voters who otherwise would be inclined to support majority party candidates. The authors test this hypothesis using aggregate-level data from state legislative races in nonpartisan Nebraska and partisan Kansas, mayoral races in nonpartisan Phoenix and partisan Tucson, and California statewide races including the nonpartisan contest for superintendent of public instruction. Findings indicate that nonpartisan elections have partisan consequences but that the effect is in favor of the minority party rather than the Republican Party.

TRENDS: How Does Partisanship Influence Policy Diffusion?

“…2 The average age of participants was fifty-six, with nearly three-fourths of the sample having at least a Bachelor’s degree. Finally, 75.1 percent came from municipalities with non-partisan ballots, which closely mirrors the estimated national averages of 75 to 80 percent (Schaffner, Streb, and Wright 2007).…”

Ballot Photographs as Cues in Low‐Information Elections

“…For example, the presence of party labels on the ballot has been the subject of numerous studies. A recent example, relying on nonexperimental data, suggests that the absence of party labels advantages nonincumbent parties (Schaffner, Streb, & Wright, 2007).…”

Party Splits, Not Progressives

“…Single, large factions find it easy to dominate these contests by presenting common slates (Calabrese, 2000). A long line of work probes the extent to which these factions were Republican or simply the local minority party Schaffner, Streb, & Wright, 2007;Williams & Adrian, 1959). Yet reform coalitions with many distinct factions would have had reason to choose PR over plurality.…”