State and Local Elections
GOVT 2306
In this section we look at general
features of elections in the states
and in local governments.
This will set us up for a more
detailed look at elections in Texas
in subsequent sections.
This section also allows us to begin to
bridge over to a discussion of political
institutions.
Elections are generally fought over what types
of things the governing institutions we’ve
discussed previously ought to do. What laws
they should pass, how those laws should be
implemented, and how they should be
adjudicated also.
Elections encourage the development of
political institutions such as political
parties and interest groups.
As we will see, elections in the Texas are
fully controlled by Texas’ two largest
political parties – the Democrats and
Republicans – with the Republicans Party
developing a consistent advantage over the
Democrats over the past couple decades.
Texas is also dominated by certain
types of interest groups, notably
business groups and those
supporting conservative social
policies.
They will also be discussed in a
future section.
It might be a good idea to review the definition
of politics we mentioned earlier this semester.
1- The authoritative allocation of values in
society.
2 - The struggle over who gets what when and
how.
3 - Intrigue or maneuvering within a political
unit in order to gain control or power
Note the last definition especially. It gets to
the heart of what elections are all about.
They offer the opportunity for a political
unit to gain control of the governing
institutions. Doing so allows them to turn
their interests into law. This explains why
election campaigns can be pretty brutal.
Remember that the political
process involves struggle. This
struggle can be seen in the conflict
between parties, interest groups
and the segments of the
population that identifies with
them.
This is different from how we
defined the word government.
This was defined as the institutions that
had the authority to pass, implement and
adjudicate the law. The fact that these
institutions are elected means that the
manner in which they do so is impacted by
the electorate.
Legislative, executive and judicial
institutions in Texas are not
neutral. They are accountable to
the majority of the electorate –
that is, the people who actually
vote in elections in the state.
Elections are also responsible for
providing a sense of legitimacy to
governing institutions.
It allows for the electorate to offer
– or deny – consent to what they
do.
And they also allow for well
organized groups to dominate the
governing process, that is, to
control what laws get passed, how
they are implemented, and how
disputes are adjudicated.
This is what makes elections
important.
Political disputes work their way
into the governing process
Let’s define the term “election”
quickly:
What is an election?
It is a formal means by which a population
(the electorate) can make a decision about
a public matter. This can include who holds
a governmental office or what public
policies ought to be implemented. It is up
to the people who set up each governing
system to determine the extent of
decisions that can be determined by an
election.
Elections are perhaps the central
feature of democratic
governments.
They are the means by which “the
people” can impact the direction of
government and offer – or deny –
consent to whatever it does.
I put the people in quotation marks
because the electorate is not
always opened everyone in a
governing system.
The right to vote is not always
opened to everyone, and even
those eligible to vote in elections
do not necessarily vote.
In GOVT 2305 you would have learned that
the United States Constitution reserves to
the states the power to make laws
regarding elections, including the decision
about who gets to vote.
They can make laws adjusting them, but by
and large elections are governed by each
of the 50 states that conducts them.
Here’s a quick reminder of the
relevant parts of the US
Constitution.
Here are relevant quotes from
Article One – which establishes
Congress.
Section Two: “The House of
Representatives shall be composed
of Members chosen every second
Year by the People of the several
States, and the Electors in each
State shall have the Qualifications
requisite for Electors of the most
numerous Branch of the State
Legislature.”
Remember that the U.S. House of
Representatives was originally the
only institution on the national
level that had a direct connection
with the general population.
As initially written, states determined who was able to
vote without restrictions by the national government,
but this was modified by a series of amendments to the
United States Constitution beginning with the 15th
Amendment which was added following the Civil War.
Here’s the language: The right of citizens of the United
States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the
United States or by any State on account of race, color,
or previous condition of servitude.
Since then, additional
amendments have further
restricted the factors states can use
to limit the ability of people to
vote.
We cover this separately in the
section on suffrage.
Here’s more from Article One,
Section Two:
“When vacancies happen in the
Representation from any state, the
executive authority thereof shall
issue writs of election to fill such
vacancies.”
If there is a vacancy in the U.S. House,
the governor of each state can set an
election so that the people in the
house district can send a replacement.
Note that the decision is made in each
state, by the electorate in each district,
not by the national government.
And still more from Article One, Section
Two as modified by Section Two of the 14th
Amendment:
“Representatives shall be apportioned
among the several states according to their
respective numbers, counting the whole
number of persons in each state, excluding
Indians not taxed.”
This says nothing about what each
representative will in fact represent.
States could choose to have each representative
to represent the state at large, but instead they
have all decided to have them represent single
member districts drawn throughout the state.
Each state is able to draw those districts
themselves. The Texas legislature is responsible
for doing so, but the task is usually delegated to
the Texas Redistricting Council.
We cover redistricting in a separate
section, but it is a very controversial
process.
Texas is commonly accused of
gerrymandering districts, which tends to
reduce the competitiveness of elections in
the state.
Article One, Section Three:
“The Senate of the United States shall
be composed of two Senators from
each state, chosen by the legislature
thereof, for six years; and each Senator
shall have one vote.”
Remember that as originally
designed the U.S. Senate was tied
into the state legislatures. They
made the decision about who
would represent the interests of
the state government nationally.
This was altered by the 17th Amendment:
“The Senate of the United States shall be
composed of two Senators from each state,
elected by the people thereof, for six years;
and each Senator shall have one vote. The
electors in each state shall have the
qualifications requisite for electors of the
most numerous branch of the state
legislatures.”
Section 4: “The Times, Places and
Manner of holding Elections for
Senators and Representatives, shall
be prescribed in each State by the
Legislature thereof; but the
Congress may at any time by Law
make or alter such Regulations,
except as to the Places of chusing
Senators.”
Initially, the most that Congress
could do was to alter election laws
in order to make sure they are held
at the same time.
Each state was responsible for its
own elections laws. As we will see
soon enough, Texas laws can be
found in its election code.
Title 4 of the Texas Election Code
concerns the time and place of
elections.
Chapters 41, 42, and 43.
From Article Two: “Each State shall
appoint, in such Manner as the
Legislature thereof may direct, a
Number of Electors, equal to the
whole Number of Senators and
Representatives to which the State
may be entitled in the Congress.”
Title 11 of the Election Code covers
this process in the state.
Chapter 191 describes how
delegates to presidents are
selected to go to each party’s
national nominating conventions.
Chapter 192 describes how
presidential electors are selected.
Altogether these parts of the US
Constitution state that elections
for the US House, Senate and
Presidency are to be designed by
each state.
These are contained in each state’s
Election Code.
This means that elections in the
United States are largely state
affairs.
In a legal sense, there is no such
thing as a national election in the
United States.
Even the president is elected in a
process that is governed by each of
the 50 states separately. The way
the electoral college votes is up to
each state.
There is such a things as a national
campaign however – but that’s a
different subject.
The national government does have rules
that ensure that the manner in which
elections are run are done in accordance
with the 14th Amendment’s requirement
that people are treated equally before the
law.
The most important of these laws are the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting
Rights Act of 1965.
Title I of the Civil Rights Act of
1964 barred the unequal
application of voter registration
requirements and the use of
literacy tests to screen out voters.
The Voting Rights Act prohibited a
range of tactics used by states and
local governments to restrict access
voting rights of certain populations.
Texas is one of a handful of states that
were put under scrutiny by the federal
government in the act. This as referred to
as pre- clearance, since changes to election
laws had to be pre-cleared by a panel of
federal judges.
The states and local areas affected by the
laws were those that had a history of racial
discrimination. This was the map of area
that were subject to pre-clearance:
Texas and other affected areas worked to
limit its impact on the state. Ultimately
this map was thrown out by the Supreme
Court, though the principle of preclearance
is still legal.
For a look at recent efforts to limit the
impact of the VRA, click here for the
Supreme Court case Shelby v. Holder.
We’ll cover these in a separate
section on voting rights in Texas, as
well as the ongoing controversies
associated with the act.
Neither the Civil Rights or Voting
Rights Acts concern the specifics of
how elections are carried out. They
simply ensure that state and local
election laws do not violate certain
principles established in the United
States Constitution, notably the
14th and 15th Amendments.
The national government has also
passed laws which attempt to
increase voter turnout.
The National Voter Registration Act
This law requires “state governments to offer
voter registration opportunities to any eligible
person who applies for or renews a driver's
license or public assistance, requiring states to
register applicants that use a federal voter
registration form to apply, and prohibiting states
from removing registered voters from the voter
rolls unless certain criteria are met.”
Help America Vote Act
This law did three things:
1 – It replaced punch card and lever-based voting
systems
2 – It created the Election Assistance Commission to
assist in the administration of Federal elections
3 – It established minimum election
administration standards.
The law was passed in the wake of
the multiple problems that
occurred in the state of Florida
during the 2000 presidential
election.
These two laws, respectively, help
states expand the right to vote and
improve the administration of the
laws.
Aside from these, the precise
nature of elections to national and
state office fall under the reserved
powers of the states.
If you remember from a previous
discussion about federalism, states
also have the ability to pass laws –
under its reserved powers – to
charter cities.
City charters also contain sections
that detail how its elections are to
be carried out.
State election laws are contained in
the state election code. We will run
through it in an upcoming section,
as well as the material covered in
area city codes.
For detail about these elections in
area cities, click on the code of
ordinances for the following:
- Alvin
- Houston
- Manvel
- Pearland
Title 9, Chapter 143 of the Texas
Election Code describes how
candidates can apply to run for city
office.
Click here for it.
Since city elections are non-partisan,
all candidates run as independents.
In partisan elections, one has to apply
to run for the party nomination, the
party takes care of getting the
candidate’s name on the general
election ballot.
Title 9, Chapter 144 describes how a
person can becomes a candidate for a
political subdivision other than a
county or city (this refers to single
purpose governments like our own
community college district).
Click here for it.
A quick point:
The design of election laws is
heavily politicized.
Whoever has the ability to
determine what election laws will
be can help determine who wins
elections and – in turn – who gets
to control governing institutions.
Election laws are rarely neutral.
A look through the history of
election laws shows that the
nature of the laws tends to be
benefit the party in power.
Whichever party controls state
government generally designs
election laws in order to stay in
power.
This is especially true in Texas.
In addition, there is a general sense
that Republican candidates are at
an advantage when voter turnout
rates are low and Democratic
candidates are at an advantage
when turnout rates are high.
Obviously then, not everyone
wants to increase voter turnout. It
doesn’t benefit everyone.
But we’ll get more into this when
we discuss voter turnout.
We’ll conclude with a look at a few
key facts about elections state and
local elections.
1 - Texas’ commitment to
Jacksonianism guarantees a large
number of elected positions with
short terms of office.
We covered this basic principle of Texas
government early this semester.
The principle of Jacksonian Democracy
simply holds that the electorate should be
able to control governmental offices
through elections. As we have already seen
in Texas, a large number of constitutional
offices are elected, and terms tend to be
relatively short – though they have become
longer in recent years.
This is opposed to the national
government which has a large
number of indirect elections as
well as an appointed judiciary.
This allows for elite rule on the
national level.
If you took GOVT 2305 already you would have
read through Federalist #10 which warned
about have too close a connection between
government and the general population.
In it James Madison argued that indirect
elections are superior to direct elections. They
allow for public input into the governing
process, but insulate government from the
“instability, uncertainty, and confusion”
common in mass politics.
This argument was not accepted by
the Anti-Federalists. The
Jacksonian movement was based
on the idea that the electorate
should be expanded and the
general population could make
informed decisions about
government.
The large number of elections in
the Texas Constitution was
intended to make elite control
more difficult.
We’ve already covered much of
this in our look at the three
branches of government as well as
local governments. The number of
positions that are elected, rather
than appointed, is pretty large.
These include:
The Legislature:
150 members of the Texas House
31 members of the Texas Senate
The Executive:
6 state-wide executive positions
15 members of the State Board of Education,
each representing a single member district.
3 members of the Railroad Commission, each
position is state-wide.
The Judiciary:
9 members of the Supreme Court
9 members of the Court of Criminal Appeals
80 Justices in the 14 Court of Appeals
456 District Court Judges elected to each of the
456 District courts around the state.
This is in addition to a large
number of local positions, county,
city and single purpose
governments.
I’ll pass on listing these positions.
This places a tremendous burden
on voters if they are to make
rational decisions about each of
these separate races.
Elections are held on all levels of
government.
This point is related to the previous one.
Elections occur on the federal, state and
local level. Local elections include general
(city and county) and single purpose
governments.
As a rule of thumb its best to think that any
level of government that can assess a tax
needs to have an elections so that the
public can offer – or deny – its consent to
the tax.
This also means that there are
many elections.
Which can make the electoral
process both confusing and time
consuming. One is never more
than a few months away from the
next election.
Some argue that this creates voter
fatigue which in turn lowers voter
turnout.
Texas – as we will see – has some
of the lowest voter turnout rates in
the nation.
The Long Ballot
This term is related to the points made
above about both Jacksonianism and the
fact that elections occur on all levels of
government.
As a consequence of the vast number of
elected positions on all levels of
government, the ballots presented to
voters tend to be very long.
Note that each county is responsible for
putting together the ballots for each
election, and that the ballots presented to
each voter is a reflection of which districts
they live in.
Very few voters receive the exact same
ballot because they live in different
electoral districts.
Harris County’s ballot is usually
among the longest in the nation.
This is because the county is very
large which means that a large
number of judicial candidates are
on the ballot. Click here for a story
about the ballot in 2010.
And this does not include any
referenda, or bond elections that
might be on the ballot.
A total of 252 candidates were
running for 142 different positions
throughout the county.
“No Harris County voter has all 252
candidates and 142 election
contests on his individual ballot,
but every one starts with 72
judicial contests.”
The large number of names on the ballot
can lead voters to take a shortcut by voting
straight ticket. This means that you simply
vote “Democrat” or “Republican.” This
option is not always available for minor
parties.
This only works for national, state and
county elections because they contain
party labels. City elections do not.
There are elections every year,
often multiple times in a give year.
Elections in even numbered years
are for national and state offices.
Elections in odd numbered years
are for local offices.
As a rule of thumb, federal and state
elections are held on even numbered
years. This includes elections to county
government, which makes sense since they
are connected to state government.
Municipal elections are held in odd
numbered years. This is generally true also
for special purpose governments as well.
Here’s something to remember:
There is an election on the first
Tuesday in every November, but
some municipal elections are held
on every May of odd numbered
years.
And there are special elections –
for bonds and the occasional local
initiative, referendum and recall –
that can be held at any time.
Elections in the United States and
Texas are “Winner Take All.”
This leads to the development of
two large political parties that
contain various factions within
them.
This is a subtle, but very consequential
point:
Elections are structured in the United
States so that only one position is up for
grabs in each election. There can be only
one winner in each race, so people have a
tendency then to cluster their votes around
dominant candidates.
Over time, this has led to a tendency to
support candidates offered by one of two
major political parties. It just so happens to
be that these two parties are the
Democrats and Republicans, but they can
be any two.
Prior to 1856, the two party system
included – at different times - the Whigs,
Federalists and Democrat-Republicans.
Most other democracies around the world
have a parliamentary system which uses
proportional representation in order to fill
their legislatures.
A political party is given a percentage of
the seats in the legislature that
corresponds to the percentage of the vote
they receive in the most recent election.
For example, 20% of the vote will
result in 20% of the seats in the
legislature.
This is not how elections work in
the United States or Texas. 20% of
the vote is never enough to win in
a winner take all system.
Over time, voters cluster support
around major party candidates and
pull support from smaller parties.
We’ll walk through this logic soon
when we turn our attention to
political parties in Texas.
For now its important to recognize that
parties in a two party system are very
complex. In a multi party system a party
can form around one dominant issue. In a
two party system they contain various
factions that prioritize different issues.
They might even be in conflict with each
other.
They compete among each other to
determine which policies dominate.
Neither of the dominant parties –
the Democrats or Republicans –
are monolithic.
They contain groups that come into
conflict with each other. These will
be discussed further in the section
on political parties.
Below we will briefly discuss
primary elections, and will discuss
them further in a future section.
Primary elections often feature
conflict between the different
factions in each major parties.
This point helps explain why
political parties like the Libertarian
and Green Parties tend to get very
few votes.
A vote for one of their candidates
is a vote lost to one of the major
party candidates.
There are two types of elections:
General and Primary.
Elections to public office – on the
national and state level – are two
stage.
The first stage is the primary election
where candidates compete with other
members of their political party to be the
party’s candidate in the general election,
which is the second stage.
The general election is what
determines who holds the office in
question.
We will have a separate section on
primary elections soon, but the
strategies necessary to win each
are not exactly the same.
In the primary election, the goal is
to appeal to your party’s base
supporters.
In general elections, the goal is to
appeal to the broader electorate.
The contest in party primaries is between
competing factions within a political party.
The competition within political parties can
be as fierce – or even more so – than that
between the major parties.
The victors in primary elections can
determine what the parties stand for.
We will look at this a bit more
when we look at parties in the
state, but for now think of
competition in primary elections
like this:
In Texas, the Republican Party is often split between
business interests that are moderate on social issues
(like abortion, same sex marriage, the legalization of
marijuana and gambling) and religious conservatives
that tend to take a harder line against them.
The battle tends to be between those forces that want
the Republican Party to emphasize personal liberty and
business issues and those that want it to promote
traditional values and focus on social issues.
The Democratic Party generally represents the
interests of minority groups, laborers, and
liberals – which we can define as those who
want to prioritize egalitarian policies and
generally see the government as the most
effective institution to implement these policies.
The specific interest and needs of these groups
can lead to conflict however, especially when it
comes to the separate needs of AfricanAmericans, Latinos, and working class Anglos.
Primary elections pit these forces
against each other.
A plurality necessary to win
general elections. This means that
a candidate has to have more votes
than anyone else in order to win.
A majority necessary to win
primary elections. This means that
a candidate has to have more than
50% of the vote in order to win.
If there is no majority in the
primary election, a run-off is held
between the top two winners.
No run-off is necessary in a general
election.
Also keep in mind that primary
elections are run by the political
parties while general elections are
run by the government.
But each are run according to rules
established by the state of Texas
and found in the Texas Election
Code. More on that soon enough.
In states like Texas with histories of one
party dominance, the real competition is
often in the primary elections of the
dominant party.
This was the case almost across the board
– for all races – when the Democratic Party
dominated the state, and is true currently
for the Republican Party in statewide races.
Primary elections are often more
competitive than general elections.
The primary winner is often the
winner of the general election.
As with elections in general, each
state determines for itself how to
structure primary elections,
including determining who gets to
vote in them.
We’ll look at this more closely in
the section on primary elections,
but there are two general types.
Closed primaries where people have to
register as a party members ahead of time
in order to vote in it, and open primaries
that allow anyone to vote in either party
primary.
Texas has a modified open primary. Voters
can vote in either party primary, but are
then restricted to only participate in that
party’s activities during that electoral cycle.
More detail to follow in the section
on primary elections.
Some elections in the state are
partisan and some are nonpartisan.
In some elections, a candidate’s
party identification is listed on the
ballot. The voter then knows if the
candidate is a Democrat or a
Republican – or a member of a
smaller political party.
These tend to be only for elections
to national and state – including
county - offices.
Elections for municipal and single
purpose governments tend to be
non-partisan.
Its argued that partisan elections allow for
greater coordination of campaigns for
office, and they can also lessen the work
necessary for voters to determine who to
support.
All that is necessary is for the voter to
identify with one of the parties in order to
determine who they should support.
Partisanship can increase contentiousness
in governing institutions however, and for
that reason its argued that races for local
positions – where the issues at stake are
pragmatic, as in how best to run a city – its
best to keep partisan politics out of city
government, as well as special districts
such as independent school districts.
That said – astute participants will
know the partisan affiliations of
candidates for elective office. It
just won’t be listed on the ballot.
The use of non-partisan elections
for local races was one of the many
progressive electoral reforms of
th
the early 20 century.
Initiative,
Referendum,
and Recall
Elections
Some states – not including Texas –
allow for greater citizen input in
the electoral process, including the
ability to put items on the ballot,
or directly voting for legislation.
Initiative, referendum, and recall
elections are three ways to
increase citizen input.
These are based on the idea that
“the average citizen should have
more control over his
government.”
These were more of the
progressive reforms that were
mentioned before.
Here’s a description of each:
Initiative
These elections allow eligible voters to place items on
the ballot directly if they are able to get a sufficient
number of signatures on a petition. Sometimes this can
require a large number of signatures, which means that
these initiatives can require a great deal of organization
and money. Critics claim this defeats the purpose of
initiative elections and simply allows those who can
afford it the opportunity to bypass the legislature to
seek their objectives.
For an example of how they work,
here’s a description of California’s
initiative process, and here are
California’s 2010 ballot
propositions
California is often used as an
example of what is good and bad
about the initiative process. While
it allows for popular input, the
types of policies passed might
prove problematic – and might
contradict others passed in
different elections.
California voters have approved
both tax cuts and spending
increases through initiative
elections – which held lead to
budget crises.
A major criticism of the initiative process is
that only wealthy interests can afford to
organize the petition drives necessary to
get items on the ballot.
This means that the initiatives may not
really represent the interests of the general
population. They just might be convenient
was for wealthy interest to get around the
legislature.
Referendum
Certain types of laws do not take
effect unless they are approved by
a public vote. Tax increase and
bond initiatives for example.
Recall Elections
The voters, by getting enough
signatures on a petition, can
remove an incumbent from office.
The same criticism against
initiative elections applies here as
well.
While Texas adopted some of the
proposals made by the Progressive
Movement, it did not adopt these.
Texas is not a
referendum/initiative state.
Here is an interest group that would
like to change that. Here’s some
history on past attempts. The only
vote Texas voters can cast is for or
against the ratification of amendments
to the Texas Constitution.
This isn’t completely true.
The voters of Texas have to ratify
amendments to the Texas
Constitution. This is a type of
referendum. And the Texas
Constitution explicitly states that an
income tax can only be adopted if
approved by the voters of the state in
referendum.
Cities in Texas do allow for these
elections. They have occurred in
most area cities in the recent past.
That’s enough.