2014 state legislative elections analyzed using a Competitiveness Index

2014 Competitiveness Overview
Primary competition (state comparison)
Incumbents defeated • Victorious challengers • Primary competitiveness
Major party challengers (state comparison)
Candidates with no challenges at all in 2014
Open seats (state comparisons)
Impact of term limits on # of open seats Long-serving senators • Long-serving reps
Chart Comparing 2014 Results
Chart Comparing 2014 Results • Comparisons Between Years
Competitiveness Index • Absolute Index
2014 State Legislative Elections State legislative incumbent turnover in 2014
Competitiveness Studies from Other Years
2007 • 2009 • 2010 • 2011 • 2012 • 2013

All three aspects of Ballotpedia's Competitiveness Index -- the number of open seats, incumbents facing primary opposition and general elections between partisan candidates -- showed poor results compared to the prior election cycle. States with elections in 2014 held fewer general elections between partisan candidates, fewer incumbents faced primary opposition and more incumbents ran for re-election than in recent years.

Since 2010, when the Competitiveness Index was established, there had not been an even-year election cycle to do statistically worse in any of the three categories. See the following chart for a breakdown of those scores between each year.

Of the country's 7,383 state legislative seats, 6,057 were up for election in the November 4, 2014 state legislative elections. This article is an overview of our analysis of the degree of competitiveness in 2014's state legislative elections. The analysis utilized the 3-factor "Competitiveness Index."

3-factor Competitiveness Index

• Incumbents in primaries: Incumbents with a primary challenger in the 2014 state legislative elections
• Major party candidates with no competition: Major party candidates with major party competition in the November 2014 state legislative elections
• Open seats: Open seats in the 2014 state legislative elections
• Summary chart: State legislatures compared by extent of electoral competitiveness in 2014

In 2014, we also took a look at state legislative incumbent turnover. State legislative incumbent turnover in 2014

Competitiveness: Incumbents in primaries

See also: Incumbents with a primary challenger in the 2014 state legislative elections

A total of 1,009 incumbents faced a primary challenger in 2014.

Since 5,026 incumbents ran for re-election in 2014, that means that only 20.1% of them faced a primary challenger. In 2012, 1,175 (24.6%) of incumbents faced a primary opponent.

The remaining 4,017 incumbents (79.9%) that ran for re-election in 2014 had no primary challenger.

Competitiveness: Major party candidates with no competition

See also: Major party candidates with major party competition in the November 2014 state legislative elections

There are 1,972 state senators and 5,411 state representatives. Heading into the election, there were only 72 total third party legislators out of 7,383 total state legislators. Of those 72, 49 were Nebraska State Senators, where all candidates must run as a nonpartisan. Thus, a major party candidate is virtually guaranteed election when facing third parties.

• Given that major party candidates win nearly 100% of the time, a candidate running without any major party opposition is essentially assured election -- even if there are third party candidates.
• There was only one major party candidate in 2,606 (43.02%) of the 6,057 seats up for election in 2014.
• There was more than one major party candidate in 3,451 (56.98%) of the 6,057 seats up for election in 2014. In 2012, 3,709 (61.7%) seats had two or more major party candidates.

Competitiveness: Open seats

See also: Open seats in the 2014 state legislative elections

There was no incumbent running for re-election in 1,030 (17.0%) of the 6,057 seats up for election in 2014, either because he or she voluntarily chose not to run again, faced term limits or was affected by redistricting. This is a decrease from 21.2 percent in 2012.

In 5,027 (83.0%) of the 6,057 seats up for election in 2014, the incumbent ran for re-election.

Incumbent turnover

See also: State legislative incumbent turnover in 2014

In addition to themes previously presented in the Competitiveness Index, Ballotpedia staff analyzed primary results to look for the following circumstances:

• Incumbents who were defeated by primary challengers
• Overall turnover, including defeated incumbents and retirements, and the total number of open seats heading into the general election.

What we found is that while Republicans have a higher degree of turnover, the margin between that turnover and the partisan balance of seats with elections is not great. Furthermore, while Republicans were challenged in the primary at a higher rate, incumbents from both sides advanced past primary elections at similar rates.

• Of the 1,009 partisan incumbents who faced primary opposition, 130 were defeated.

47 Democrats were defeated, with 88.78 percent advancing past the primary.

83 Republicans were defeated while the remaining 85.93 percent advanced.

• Overall, 87.12 percent of incumbents advanced past the primary.
• 1,012 partisan incumbents declined to seek re-election.
• 1,159 incumbents, including nonpartisan incumbents, retired or were defeated, meaning that 19.14 percent of seats were open heading into the general election.
• Republicans accounted for 54.99 percent of overall partisan incumbent turnover, while Democrats made up for 45.01 percent. Of the seats up for election in 2014, 51.6 percent were held by Republicans and 47.5 percent were held by Democrats.

Methodology

Primary competitiveness

Using the official primary candidate lists from each state, staff members analyzed each district's race to look for the following circumstances:

• No incumbent running with only one candidate
• No incumbent running with a contested primary
• Incumbent is running uncontested
• Incumbent is running in a contested primary
• No candidate has declared

General election competitiveness

Using the official candidate lists from each state, staff members analyzed each district's race to look for the following circumstances:

• Incumbent is not running
• Only one major party candidate in the general election

After the raw data was obtained, our staff analyzed the states to determine if there was noticeable partisan difference as well as the difference between states with and without term limits.

Objectives

• To know which states have the most competitive electoral environment and which states have the least competitive electoral environments in 2014. The term "competitive" is not used to declare which states are hotly contested between political parties. Instead, the term is used to indicate competitive environment on a ballot access level. The goal of the Competitiveness Index is to assess the relative competitiveness of state legislative elections by noting where incumbents are being challenged and if opportunities for election bids are being considered by candidates.
• To develop a Competitiveness Index to be used in future years, so that political observers can assess the ebb and flow of state legislative election competitiveness over time.

See also

• State legislative elections, 2014
• Competitiveness Index by year: 2013 • 2012 • 2011 • 2010
• Comparing the competitiveness index for state legislative elections

v • e Competitiveness in State Legislative Elections Background A "Competitiveness Index" for capturing competitiveness in state legislative elections • Creating an absolute measure for the "Competitiveness Index" in state legislative elections • Year-by-year comparison of results • Factors Affecting Competitiveness in State Legislative Elections 2023 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Impact of term limits • Open seats • Contested primaries • Incumbents in contested primaries • Major party competition • Incumbents defeated • Primary statistics 2022 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Impact of term limits • Open seats • Contested primaries • Incumbents in contested primaries • Major party competition • Incumbents defeated • Primary statistics 2021 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Major party competition • Open seats • Impact of term limits • Incumbents in contested primaries • Primary competitiveness • Incumbents defeated 2020 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Major party candidates with major party opposition • Open seats • Impact of term limits • Incumbents in contested primaries • Primary competitiveness • Incumbents defeated 2019 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Major party candidates with major party opposition • Open seats • Impact of term limits • Primary competitiveness • Incumbents defeated 2018 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Major party candidates with major party opposition • Open seats • Aftermath of the 2016 presidential election 2017 Primary competitiveness • Open seats • Incumbents with no primary challenger • Major party candidates with major party opposition • Incumbents defeated 2016 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Open Seats • Incumbents with no primary challenger • Major party candidates with major party opposition • Incumbents defeated 2015 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Open Seats • Incumbents with no primary challenger • Major party candidates with major party opposition • States Compared by Competitiveness • Incumbents defeated • Victorious challengers • List of candidates with no primary or general election opposition 2014 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Open Seats • Incumbents with no primary challenger • Major party candidates with major party opposition • States Compared by Competitiveness • Incumbents defeated • Victorious challengers • List of candidates with no primary or general election opposition 2013 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Open Seats • Incumbents with no primary challenger • Major party candidates with major party opposition • States Compared by Competitiveness • Incumbents with no primary or general election opposition • Incumbents defeated • Victorious challengers • List of candidates with no major party opposition 2012 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Open Seats • Incumbents with no primary challenger • Major party candidates with major party opposition • States Compared by Competitiveness • Incumbents with no primary or general election opposition • Incumbents defeated • Victorious challengers • List of candidates with no major party opposition • Impact of term limits 2011 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Open Seats • Incumbents with no primary challenger • Major party candidates with major party opposition • States Compared by Competitiveness • Incumbents with no primary or general election opposition • Incumbents defeated • Victorious challengers • List of candidates with no major party opposition • Impact of term limits 2010 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Open Seats •Incumbents with no primary challenger • Major party candidates with major party opposition • States Compared by Competitiveness • Incumbents with no primary or general election opposition • Incumbents defeated • Victorious challengers • List of candidates with no major party opposition • Impact of term limits 2009 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Open Seats • Incumbents with no primary challenger • Major party candidates with major party opposition 2007 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page • Open Seats • Incumbents with no primary challenger • Major party candidates with major party opposition

v • e State legislatures Legislatures Alabama (H, S) · Alaska (H, S) · Arizona (H, S) · Arkansas (H, S) · California (A, S) · Colorado (H, S) · Connecticut (H, S) · Delaware (H, S) · Florida (H, S) · Georgia (H, S) · Hawaii (H, S) · Idaho (H, S) · Illinois (H, S) · Indiana (H, S) · Iowa (H, S) · Kansas (H, S) · Kentucky (H, S) · Louisiana (H, S) · Maine (H, S) · Maryland (H, S) · Massachusetts (H, S) · Michigan (H, S) · Minnesota (H, S) · Mississippi (H, S) · Missouri (H, S) · Montana (H, S) · Nebraska · Nevada (A, S) · New Hampshire (H, S) · New Jersey (GA, S) · New Mexico (H, S) · New York (A, S) · North Carolina (H, S) · North Dakota (H, S) · Ohio (H, S) · Oklahoma (H, S) · Oregon (H, S) · Pennsylvania (H, S) · Rhode Island (H, S) · South Carolina (H, S) · South Dakota (H, S) · Tennessee (H, S) · Texas (H, S) · Utah (H, S) · Vermont (H, S) · Virginia (H, S) · Washington (H, S) · West Virginia (H, S) · Wisconsin (A, S) · Wyoming (H, S) 2024 State legislative elections (2024) • State legislative special elections (2024) • Primary dates and filing requirements • 2024 Session Dates 2023 State legislative elections (2023) • State legislative special elections (2023) • Primary dates and filing requirements • 2023 Session Dates Historical elections 2022 •  2021 • 2020 • 2019 • 2018 • 2017 • 2016 • 2015 • 2014 • 2013 • 2012 • 2011 • 2010 • 2009 • 2008 • 2007 • 2006 • 2005 • 2004 • 2003 • 2002 • 2001 • 2000 Features of state legislatures How vacancies are filled in state legislatures • States with a full-time legislature • State legislatures with term limits • Comparison of state legislative salaries • When state legislators assume office after a general election • Population represented by state legislators • State constitutional articles governing state legislatures • State legislative sessions • Resign-to-run law • State legislature candidate requirements by state • Official names of state legislatures • State legislative chambers that use multi-member districts • Factors Affecting Competitiveness in State Legislative Elections State senates Length of terms of state senators • State senators • Partisan composition of state senates • State senators sorted by year first elected State houses Length of terms of state representatives • State representatives • Partisan composition of state houses • State representatives sorted by year first elected Leadership positions President of the Senate • President Pro Tempore • Senate Majority Leader • Senate Minority Leader • House Majority Leader • House Minority Leader • State Speaker of the House