No Contest Elections Report Series

No Contest Elections is FairVote Minnesota's investigation into the lack of competitiveness in Minnesota's legislative elections.

Gridlock! No Contest Elections 2004

From the report:
"America's winner-take-all, two-party system together with the development of strongly Democratic or strongly Republican legislative districts over most of our nation and state have resulted in situations in which: a) minority party voters see little point in bothering to go to the polls; and b) elected officials see little point in responding to the concerns of their minority constituents. FairVote Minnesota's latest study, Gridlock! persuasively demonstrates how the current system subverts true democracy and suggests common-sense ways by which the problem can be effectively addressed."

Click here to read the full report (PDF).

AttachmentSize
gridlock.pdf291.56 KB

So How'd We Do? A report on No Contest Elections 2004 predictions

From the report:
"Based on the experience of two previous reports, we believed we could predict the results of over 85 percent of the 2004 state house races with at least 85 percent accuracy. We exceeded our own expectations. Our model accurately predicted 90 percent of the seats where there was at least a 3 percent spread between the average party strength of the DFL and Republican candidates."

Click here to read the full report (PDF).

AttachmentSize
so_how_did_we_do.pdf135.93 KB

No Contest Elections 2002

From the report:
"This report is the second in a biennial series. The inaugural 1999 report faulted noncompetitive elections as undemocratic, failing to provide adequate accountability, creating imbalance in political power, Balkanizing the state, excluding most voters from the campaign debate, and taking away incentives to vote. This report adds discussion of the trade-offs associated with 'minority opportunity' districts that show themselves in this districting plan."

Click to view the entire report (PDF).

 

AttachmentSize
nce2002.pdf1.32 MB

We Told You So! A report on No Contest Elections 2002 predictions

For immediate release
November 8, 2002
Contact: Tony Solgard, (612) 724-5540,

tony@solgard.com

Minneapolis, MN -- The results of over half of state
legislative races were a foregone conclusion. That was the prediction of
FairVote Minnesota's No-Contest Elections 2002, released a month before
the elections. It turns out that the predictions were accurate nearly 100
percent of the time.

"At the same time that the entire nation was watching the
nail-biter for the U.S. Senate seat in Minnesota, there was a non-event taking
place farther down the ballot," said Tony Solgard, author of the report.

The report found that 55 percent of Senate seats and 56
percent of House seats are "safe" for one party or the other based on difference
between DFL and GOP average party strength measured by a sample of statewide
elections. Some are so secure as to be virtually "Untouchable," and the "Most
Untouchable" legislators were identified in the report.

All of the "Untouchable" legislators were reelected. Most
of the "Vulnerable" legislators were defeated. More significantly, the report
accurately predicted the winners in 35 out of 37 noncompetitive Senate elections
and in 73 out of 75 noncompetitive House races, an accuracy rate of 94.6 percent
and 97.3 percent, respectively. The report said a month ahead of the election
that the prospects for the Republicans were bright. Now we know that this
prediction was on the mark. In fact, the predictions were cautious and could
have been more aggressive without sacrificing accuracy, as the correlation
between party strength and election victory held firm well below the 10 percent
spread used to make the predictions.

In open seats, the report was right in 20 out of 21 House
elections (95.2%) and 11 out of 11 Senate seats -- 100%! In the incumbent pairings
due to redistricting, the report "batted a thousand" in predicting three House
pairings and the only Senate incumbent match-up.

What's the point? Competitive elections are important to
the quality of our democracy. If we don't have them, we sacrifice several
important principles.

  • Voters should be able to affect the outcome of an
    election. A shift in voter sentiment should result in a corresponding shift in
    the composition of the legislature. That does not happen very clearly or
    directly in noncompetitive elections.
  • Legislators elected from noncompetitive districts are not
    structurally accountable to the voters and can become unresponsive to the
    interests of constituents.
  • Political power is tied to geography, penalizing
    competitive areas and the state as a whole.
  • The state becomes Balkanized into political regions where
    one party has no motivation to consider the interests of areas dominated by
    the rival party.
  • The real campaign is directed toward swing voters in
    swing districts, leaving most voters feeling like politics is not about issues
    that affect them.
  • Taken together, these effects of noncompetitive elections
    reduce voter turnout.

The report is available at

../resources/publications/nce2002.pdf
.

FairVote Minnesota is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization
working for better representation, accountability, discourse, and participation
by educating Minnesotans about the impact voting systems have on the quality of
our democracy. The organization promotes voting systems that have been
demonstrated to improve the quality of democracy as measured by criteria such as
political competitiveness. These include instant runoff voting in single-winner
elections and proportional representation for councils, legislatures, and the
Congress. For more information, see

http://www.FairVoteMN.org
.

FairVote Minnesota works closely with the Washington
DC-based Center for Voting and Democracy, whose Monopoly Politics report
assessing the competitiveness of U.S. Congressional elections inspired
No-Contest Elections. The Center's report is available at

http://www.fairvote.org
.

Number of
races predicted

Number of
correct predictions

Percent
accuracy

For all seats

 

 

House

75

73

97.3%

Senate

37

35

94.6%

For open seats

 

 

House

21

20

95.2%

Senate

11

11

100.0%

For paired incumbents

 

 

House

3

3

100.0%

Senate

1

1

100.0%

 

House

Senate

Most ‘Untouchable’ legislators elected

10 out of 10

5 out of 5

Most Vulnerable legislators defeated

5 out of 8*

3 out of 5**

*Two of the ten representatives
originally listed in this category (Richard Mulder in 20A and John Tuma in 25B)
were not on the general election ballot, though their party caucus reported to
us that they were. Thus, only eight could be included in this analysis.

**One of the senators in the Most
Vulnerable category who was reelected in spite of being statistically vulnerable
was Sheila Kiscaden, who merited a large footnote in the report's discussion
section.


House
District

Incumbent's party, open seat, or paired incumbents


Predicted
Winner


Accuracy

01A

GOP

Not called

Not called

01B

DFL

Not called

Not called

02A

Open

Not called

Not called

02B

Open

Not called

Not called

03A

DFL

DFL

Right

03B

DFL

DFL

Right

04A

GOP

Not called

Not called

04B

GOP

Not called

Not called

05A

DFL

DFL

Right

05B

DFL

DFL

Right

06A

Open

DFL

Right

06B

DFL

DFL

Right

07A

DFL

DFL

Right

07B

Paired

DFL

Right

08A

DFL

DFL

Right

08B

DFL

Not called

Not called

09A

Open

Not called

Not called

09B

DFL

Not called

Not called

10A

GOP

GOP

Right

10B

Open

GOP

Right

11A

GOP

Not called

Not called

11B

DFL

Not called

Not called

12A

GOP

Not called

Not called

12B

GOP

Not called

Not called

13A

Open

Not called

Not called

13B

DFL

Not called

Not called

14A

Open

Not called

Not called

14B

GOP

Not called

Not called

15A

GOP

GOP

Right

15B

DFL

Not called

Not called

16A

GOP

Not called

Not called

16B

Paired

GOP

Right

17A

GOP

Not called

Not called

17B

Open

Not called

Not called

18A

GOP

GOP

Right

18B

Open

Not called

Not called

19A

GOP

GOP

Right

19B

Open

GOP

Right

20A

Open

DFL

Right

20B

Open

Not called

Not called

21A

GOP

Not called

Not called

21B

Open

GOP

Right

22A

DFL

Not called

Not called

22B

GOP

Not called

Not called

23A

Paired

Not called

Not called

23B

DFL

Not called

Not called

24A

GOP

Not called

Not called

24B

Open

Not called

Not called

25A

Open

Not called

Not called

25B

Open

Not called

Not called

26A

GOP

GOP

Right

26B

GOP

Not called

Not called

27A

GOP

Not called

Not called

27B

Open

DFL

Wrong

28A

GOP

Not called

Not called

28B

GOP

GOP

Right

29A

Open

GOP

Right

29B

GOP

GOP

Right

30A

Open

GOP

Right

30B

GOP

GOP

Right

31A

DFL

Not called

Not called

31B

GOP

Not called

Not called

32A

GOP

GOP

Right

32B

GOP

GOP

Right

33A

GOP

GOP

Right

33B

GOP

GOP

Right

34A

Open

GOP

Right

34B

Open

GOP

Right

35A

Open

GOP

Right

35B

GOP

GOP

Right

36A

GOP

GOP

Right

36B

Open

Not called

Not called

37A

GOP

GOP

Right

37B

GOP

GOP

Right

38A

GOP

GOP

Right

38B

Open

GOP

Right

39A

DFL

Not called

Not called

39B

Open

Not called

Not called

40A

GOP

GOP

Right

40B

DFL

GOP

Wrong

41A

GOP

GOP

Right

41B

GOP

GOP

Right

42A

Open

GOP

Right

42B

GOP

GOP

Right

43A

GOP

GOP

Right

43B

GOP

GOP

Right

44A

Paired

Not called

Not called

44B

Open

Not called

Not called

45A

DFL

Not called

Not called

45B

DFL

Not called

Not called

46A

GOP

Not called

Not called

46B

DFL

Not called

Not called

47A

Paired

GOP

Right

47B

Open

GOP

Right

48A

GOP

GOP

Right

48B

GOP

GOP

Right

49A

Open

GOP

Right

49B

GOP

Not called

Not called

50A

DFL

Not called

Not called

50B

DFL

GOP

Right

51A

GOP

Not called

Not called

51B

DFL

Not called

Not called

52A

GOP

Not called

Not called

52B

GOP

GOP

Right

53A

GOP

GOP

Right

53B

Open

Not called

Not called

54A

DFL

Not called

Not called

54B

GOP

Not called

Not called

55A

DFL

Not called

Not called

55B

DFL

Not called

Not called

56A

GOP

GOP

Right

56B

Open

GOP

Right

57A

Open

DFL

Right

57B

Open

Not called

Not called

58A

DFL

DFL

Right

58B

Open

DFL

Right

59A

DFL

DFL

Right

59B

DFL

DFL

Right

60A

DFL

DFL

Right

60B

Open

DFL

Right

61A

DFL

DFL

Right

61B

DFL

DFL

Right

62A

DFL

DFL

Right

62B

DFL

DFL

Right

63A

Open

Not called

Not called

63B

DFL

Not called

Not called

64A

DFL

DFL

Right

64B

DFL

DFL

Right

65A

Open

DFL

Right

65B

DFL

DFL

Right

66A

Open

DFL

Right

66B

DFL

DFL

Right

67A

DFL

DFL

Right

67B

DFL

DFL

Right


Senate
District


Incumbent's
party, open seat, or paired incumbents


Predicted
winner


Accuracy

01

DFL

Not called

Not called

02

Open

Not called

Not called

03

Open

DFL

Right

04

Open

Not called

Not called

05

DFL

DFL

Right

06

Open

DFL

Right

07

DFL

DFL

Right

08

DFL

DFL

Right

09

DFL

Not called

Not called

10

GOP

GOP

Right

11

DFL

Not called

Not called

12

DFL

Not called

Not called

13

DFL

Not called

Not called

14

GOP

Not called

Not called

15

GOP

Not called

Not called

16

Open

Not called

Not called

17

DFL

Not called

Not called

18

GOP

Not called

Not called

19

GOP

GOP

Right

20

Open

DFL

Right

21

GOP

GOP

Right

22

DFL

Not called

Not called

23

DFL

Not called

Not called

24

DFL

Not called

Not called

25

GOP

Not called

Not called

26

GOP

Not called

Not called

27

GOP

Not called

Not called

28

DFL

Not called

Not called

29

Open

GOP

Right

30

IND

GOP

Wrong

31

GOP

Not called

Not called

32

GOP

GOP

Right

33

GOP

GOP

Right

34

Open

GOP

Right

35

GOP

GOP

Right

36

GOP

GOP

Right

37

GOP

GOP

Right

38

DFL

GOP

Right

39

DFL

Not called

Not called

40

GOP

GOP

Right

41

Open

GOP

Right

42

Open

GOP

Right

43

Open

GOP

Right

44

DFL

Not called

Not called

45

DFL

Not called

Not called

46

DFL

Not called

Not called

47

DFL

GOP

Wrong

48

Open

GOP

Right

49

GOP

GOP

Right

50

DFL

Not called

Not called

51

DFL

Not called

Not called

52

Paired

GOP

Right

53

GOP

GOP

Right

54

DFL

Not called

Not called

55

DFL

Not called

Not called

56

DFL

GOP

Right

57

Open

Not called

Not called

58

DFL

DFL

Right

59

DFL

DFL

Right

60

Open

DFL

Right

61

DFL

DFL

Right

62

Open

DFL

Right

63

DFL

Not called

Not called

64

DFL

DFL

Right

65

DFL

DFL

Right

66

DFL

DFL

Right

67

DFL

DFL

Right

No Contest Again: No Contest 2000 results

From the report:
"FairVote Minnesota today released a comparison of predictions of state legislative elections made one year ago with actual results from the November 7 election. Predicting winners in twothirds of the districts, the actual results showed the predictions to be over 90 percent accurate in the Senate and nearly 95 percent accurate in the House of Representatives."

Click here to read the full report (PDF).

AttachmentSize
No-Contest_Elections--results_released.pdf94.32 KB

No Contest Elections 2000

From the report:
"In this report, we contend that Minnesota has non-competitive elections. Before we demonstrate that, let's ask the question, 'What's wrong with non-competitive elections?' Our answer: 'Plenty!' "

Click to read the full report (PDF)

AttachmentSize
nce.pdf1.26 MB