Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

Electoral competitiveness in Maryland, 1912-2014

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Competitiveness in
state legislatures
2014 badge.jpg
Navigation
Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming

Published in April 2015

The 2014 national election continued the decline in U.S. electoral competitiveness that has occurred since 1972. The decline of electoral competitiveness that has been seen on the national stage, has also been seen in states. The percent of Maryland House of Delegates and Maryland State Senate incumbents running for reelection never dipped below 89 percent from 1970 to 2014.

This page contains electoral competitiveness information at various levels of government in this state up to 2014. For more recent information about state legislative competitiveness nationwide, click here.

The data presented below are part of a larger project on electoral competitiveness, the full report is available in the table to the right. The images below illustrate the changes in the competitiveness of elections in Maryland from 1912 through 2014. The data used to generate these graphs is available in the tables below those images.

Background

Since 1972, electoral competitiveness has tended to decrease across the United States. During that time, people who are members of the same political party have become more likely to live in the same area as one another than in the past. Nationally, the rate at which incumbents won reelection is also close to an all-time high. However, this does not have to do with incumbents deriving more advantages from holding office than before. It is because they are more likely to be in safe districts for their party. In contrast to the high incumbency reelection rate, the rate at which incumbents run for reelection has gone down over time.

Competitiveness is declining. On the national level, the percentage of state legislative elections won by 5 percent or less was nearly the lowest in the 1972 to 2014 period. In an absolute sense, the incidence of such elections was very low. Only 4.9 percent of U.S. residents in districts with elections saw their election won by 5 percent or less. Similarly, more Americans lived in areas with uncontested elections than ever before in the time period studied: 36.7 percent. State legislative primaries were often found to be won by wide margins or not contested at all. The rate at which incumbents won reelection is also close to an all-time high. However, this does not have to do with incumbents deriving more advantages from holding office than before. It is because they are more likely to be in safe districts for their party. In contrast to the high incumbency reelection rate, the rate at which incumbents run for reelection has gone down over time.

Competitiveness in elections in Maryland

Table explanation

The columns in the tables below for both state senates and state houses are as follow:

  • Seats: number of seats in the state legislative chamber.
  • Percent Seats Up: percent of seats in the state legislative chamber that are up in a particular year for the November election.
  • Percent Won By Dem: the percent of seats in the state legislature that were won by a Democrat.
  • Percent Unusable: percent of seats for the state legislative chamber that weren’t usable to compute whether a race was marginal or not for this chamber in this year because of missing data. This column usually says “0.”
  • Percent with 5% margin: percent of seats for a state chamber in a year that were won by 5% or less.
  • Percent with 10% margin: percent of seats for a state chamber in a year that were won by 10% or less.
  • Percent Unusable Other: percent of seats that have missing data that prevent the computation of whether an incumbent won or lost, whether an incumbent ran or not, or whether a race was uncontested. This column usually says “0.”
  • Percent Uncontested: percent of races in a chamber that are uncontested.
  • Percent Incumbent Win: percent of incumbents who ran for a state chamber in a particular year who won.
  • Percent With Incumbent: number of incumbents running for reelection for a state-chamber in one year, divided by the number of seats that are up for election for that state-chamber, multiplied by 100.

The columns for the “Up ballot” tab are as follows:

  • U.S. House Seats: number of U.S. House Seats that a state was apportioned in the year in question.
  • Percent Not Usable: percent of U.S. House Seats in the state and year that aren’t usable to compute marginality or contestation, because of something unusual about the race.
  • Percent With 5% Margin: percent of U.S. House races in the state and year that were won by 5% or less.
  • Percent With 10% Margin: percent of U.S. House races in the state and year that were won by 10% or less.
  • Percent Uncontested: percent of U.S. House races that were uncontested in the state and year.
  • U.S. Senate 1 Margin: difference between the percent obtained by the winner of the U.S. Senate election with the U.S. Senate candidate receiving the second most votes.
  • U.S. Senate 2 Margin: This is only recorded when a second election to the U.S. Senate was held because of a Senator not completing their term. For such elections, this is the difference between the percent obtained by the winner of the U.S. Senate election with the U.S. Senate candidate receiving the second most votes.
  • President margin: difference between the percent of votes obtained by the presidential candidate receiving the most votes in a state minus the percent of votes obtained by the presidential candidate receiving the second most votes in a state.
  • Governor margin: difference between the percent obtained by the winner of the gubernatorial election in a state with the gubernatorial candidate receiving the second most votes.

State Senate

State Senate competitiveness, Maryland
Year Seats % Seats up % Won by Dem % Unusable % With 5% margin % With 10% margin % Unusuable other % Uncontested % Incumbent win % With incumbent % of Dem inc winning % of Repub inc winning
1970 43 100 76.7 0 9.3 14 0 25.6 93.1 67.4 92 100
1974 47 100 83 0 6.4 12.8 0 34 100 57.4 100 100
1978 47 100 85.1 0 4.3 8.5 0 55.3 100 72.3 100 100
1982 47 100 87.2 0 6.4 8.5 0 40.4 100 61.7 100 100
1986 47 100 85.1 0 0 4.3 0 40.4 100 74.5 100 100
1990 47 100 85.1 0 2.1 8.5 0 38.3 97.1 74.5 96.9 100
1994 47 100 68.1 0 8.5 23.4 0 25.5 89.7 61.7 86.4 100
1998 47 100 68.1 0 6.4 10.6 0 38.3 97.4 83 100 90.9
2002 47 100 70.2 0 6.4 8.5 0 31.9 91.7 76.6 92.3 90
2006 47 100 70.2 0 4.3 6.4 0 34 94.6 78.7 100 84.6
2010 47 100 74.5 0 8.5 8.5 0 38.3 97.1 74.5 100 87.5
2014 47 100 70.2 0 10.6 10.6 0 36.2 97.1 74.5 96.6 100

State House

State House competitiveness, Maryland
Year Seats % Seats up % Won by Dem % Unusable % With 5% margin % With 10% margin % Unusuable other % Uncontested % Incumbent win % With incumbent % of Dem inc winning % of Repub inc winning
1970 142 100 85.2 0 12 23.2 0 23.2 91.3 64.8 96.1 68.8
1974 141 100 89.4 0 5.7 9.2 0 37.6 90.4 58.9 97.1 53.8
1978 141 100 88.7 0 5.7 9.9 0 40.4 96.6 63.1 97.4 91.7
1982 141 100 87.9 0 9.9 12.1 0 37.6 93.6 66.7 95.1 83.3
1986 141 100 87.9 0 4.3 7.8 0 42.6 98 70.2 100 92.3
1990 141 100 83 0 5.7 12.8 0 37.6 93.4 75.2 92.6 100
1994 141 100 70.9 0 14.2 23.4 0 24.8 91 55.3 89.2 100
1998 141 100 75.2 0 7.8 13.5 0 36.2 93.1 82.3 98.8 80
2002 141 100 69.5 0 7.8 18.4 0 33.3 92.8 68.8 90.5 100
2006 141 100 73.8 0 10.6 12.8 0 33.3 97.1 72.3 98.6 93.3
2010 141 100 69.5 0 7.8 14.9 0 28.4 98.1 76.6 97.6 100
2014 141 100 64.5 0 3.5 8.5 0 35.5 93 61 90.5 100

Up ballot

Up ballot competitiveness, Maryland
Year U.S. House Seats % Not usable % With 5% margin % With 10% margin % Uncontested U.S. Senate 1 margin U.S. Senate 2 margin President margin Governor margin
1912 32.2
1916 8.2
1920 13.3
1924 4.6
1928 14.8
1932 26.1
1936 25.5
1938 12
1940 31.8 17.6
1942 5.1
1944 23.5 3.7
1946 6 0 33.3 33.3 0 0.5 9.5
1948 6 0 16.7 16.7 0 1.4
1950 6 0 16.7 16.7 0 7.1 14.6
1952 7 0 28.6 42.9 0 5.1 11.6
1954 7 0 14.3 42.9 14.3 8.9
1956 7 0 0 28.6 0 6 20.1
1958 7 0 28.6 28.6 0 2 27.1
1960 7 0 14.3 28.6 0 7.2
1962 8 0 12.5 25 12.5 24.1 11.3
1964 8 0 0 25 12.5 25.6 30.9
1966 8 0 0 25 12.5 9.9
1968 8 0 0 25 0 10 1.9
1970 8 0 12.5 12.5 12.5 2.6 34.1
1972 8 0 0 0 0 24.2
1974 8 0 0 25 12.5 14.7 27
1976 8 0 0 25 12.5 18.6 6.1
1978 8 0 12.5 12.5 25 42
1980 8 0 12.5 12.5 0 32.3 3.2
1982 8 0 0 12.5 0 26.9 24
1984 8 0 12.5 12.5 12.5 5.5
1986 8 0 12.5 25 0 21.4 64.7
1988 8 0 12.5 12.5 12.5 23.6 2.9
1990 8 0 0 0 0 19.5
1992 8 0 12.5 37.5 0 42 16.6
1994 8 0 0 0 0 18.2 0.4
1996 8 0 0 0 0 17.3
1998 8 0 0 0 0 41 4.6
2000 8 0 0 12.5 0 26.5 16.7
2002 8 0 12.5 25 0 3.9
2004 8 0 0 0 0 31.5 13.1
2006 8 0 0 0 25 10.2 6.6
2008 8 0 12.5 12.5 0 25.9
2010 8 0 0 0 0 27 14.8
2012 8 0 0 0 0 36 26.6
2014 8 0 12.5 12.5 0 3.8

Navigation map

Click on a different state below for more detailed data on electoral competitiveness.
http://ballotpedia.org/Competitiveness in STATE state legislative elections
v • e
2014 Elections to State legislatures
State Senate elections
Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kentucky • Maine • Maryland •Massachusetts • Michigan • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming
SLP badge.png
State House elections
Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Missouri • Montana • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming
Election information
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)
SLP badge.png
2025
2024
2023
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
State senates
State houses
Leadership positions
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Electoral_competitiveness_in_Maryland,_1912-2014&oldid=9121385"