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.
Beck, Paul Allen, Russell J. Dalton, Audrey Haynes, and Robert Huckfeldt .1997. Presidential campaigning at the grassroots. Journal of Politics59 (4): 1264-75.
2.
Bibby, John F., Cornelius P. Cotter, James L. Gibson, and Robert J. Huckshorn .1990. Parties in state politics . In Politics in the American states, 5th ed., ed. VirginiaGray, Herbert Jacob, and Robert B. Allbritton. New York: HarperCollins.
3.
Cotter, Cornelius P., James L. Gibson, John F. Bibby, and Robert J. Huckshorn .1984. Party organization in American politics. New York: Praeger.
4.
DeNardo, James.1980. Turnout and the vote: The joke's on the Democrats. American Political Science Review74 (2): 406-20.
5.
DeSantis, Victor S., and Tari Renner.1991. Contemporary patterns and trends in municipal government structure. In The municipal yearbook. Washington, DC: International City/ County Management Association.
6.
Elazar, Daniel J.1984. American federalism: A view from the states. 3rd ed. New York: Harper & Row.
7.
Erikson, Robert S., Gerald C. Wright, and John P. McIver.1993. Statehouse democracy: Public opinion and policy in American states. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Eulau, Heinz, Betty H. Zisk, and Kenneth Prewitt .1967. Latent partisanship in nonpartisan elections: Effects of political milieu and mobilization. In The election process, ed. M. Kent Jennings and L. Harmon Zeigler, 208-37. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
9.
Gibson, James L., Cornelius P. Cotter, John F. Bibby, and Robert J. Huckshorn .1985. Whither the local parties?American Journal of Political Science29 (1): 139-60.
10.
Gibson, James L., John P. Frendreis, and Laura L. Verts.1989. Party dynamics in the 1980s: Change in county party organizational strength, 1980-1984. American Journal of Political Science33 (1): 67-90.
11.
Gilbert, Charles E.1962. Some aspects of nonpartisan elections in large cities . Midwest Journal of Political Science6 (4): 345-62.
12.
Hagensick, A. Clarke.1964. Influences of partisanship and incumbency on a nonpartisan election system. Western Political Quarterly17 (1): 117-24.
13.
Hammond, William F.2003. Charter panel distortion charged. New York Sun, October 28, p. 3.
14.
Hawley, Willis D.1973. Nonpartisan elections and the case for party politics . New York: John Wiley.
15.
Hershey, Marjorie Randon.2007. Party politics in America. 12th ed. New York: Longman.
16.
Hogan, Robert E.2004. Party activists in election campaigns. In Southern political party activists, ed. John A. Clark and Charles L. Prysby.Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.
17.
Hord, Bill.1997. Speaker race could test GOP clout. Omaha World- Herald, January 4, p. 37.
18.
Kamin, L.J.1958. Ethnic and party affiliations of candidates as determinants of voting. American Journal of Political Science12:205-12.
19.
King, Gary, Bradley Palmquist, Greg Adams, Micah Altman, Kenneth Benoit, Claudine Gay, Jeffrey B. Lewis, Russ Mayer, and Eric Reinhardt.1997. The record of American democracy, 1984-1990. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA [producer]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].
20.
Lee, Eugene C.1960. The politics of nonpartisanship. Berkeley : University of California Press.
21.
Lodge, Milton, and Ruth Hamill.1986. A partisan schema for political information processing . American Political Science Review80:505-19.
22.
Lorinkas, R.A., B.W. Hawkins, and S.D. Edwards.1969. The Persistence of ethnic voting in urban and rural areas: Results from a controlled election method. Social Science Quarterly49:891-99.
23.
Miller, Joanne M., and Jon A. Krosnick .1998. The impact of candidate name order on election outcomes. Public Opinion Quarterly62 (3): 291-330.
24.
Orleans, Peter.1968. Urban politics and the nonpartisan ballot: A metropolitan case. In The new urbanization, ed. Scott Greer, Dennis McElrath, David Minar, and Peter Orleans.New York: St. Martin's.
25.
Rahn, Wendy M.1993. The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates. American Journal of Political Science37:472-96.
26.
Rogers, Chester B., and Harold D. Arman .1971. Nonpartisanship and election to city office. Social Science Quarterly51 (1): 941-45.
27.
Salisbury, Robert H., and Gordon Black.1963. Class and party in partisan and non-partisan elections: The case of Des Moines. American Political Science Review57 (3): 584-92.
28.
Schaffner, Brian F., and Matthew J. Streb .2002. The partisan heuristic in low-information elections. Public Opinion Quarterly66 (4): 559-81.
29.
Schaffner, Brian F., Matthew Streb, and Gerald Wright.2001. Teams without uniforms: The nonpartisan ballot in state and local elections. Political Research Quarterly54 (1): 7-30.
30.
Squire, Peverill, and Eric R.A.N. Smith.1988. The effect of partisan information on voters in nonpartisan elections. Journal of Politics50 (1): 169-79.
31.
Verba, Sidney, and Norman H. Nie.1972. Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. New York: Harper & Row.
32.
Welch, Susan, and Timothy Bledsoe.1986. The partisan consequences of nonpartisan elections and the changing nature of urban politics. American Journal of Political Science30 (1): 128-39.
33.
Wildavsky, Aaron.1964. Leadership in a small town. Totowa, NJ: Bedminster.
34.
Williams, Oliver, and Charles Adrian.1959. The insulation of local politics under the nonpartisan ballot. American Political Science Review53 (4): 1052-63.
