2015→ ←2013
2014 State Legislative Elections
States
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
Other 2014 Election coverage
Ballot access for major and minor party candidates •Statewide elections, 2014 •State Senate elections •State House elections •State executive official elections •2014 ballot measures

All three aspects of Ballotpedia'sCompetitiveness Index -- the number ofopen seats,incumbents facing primary opposition, andgeneral 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 inrecent 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, 6,051 were up for election in the November 4, 2014, state legislative elections. This article is an overview of our analysis of thedegree of competitiveness in 2014's state legislative elections. The analysis utilizedthe 3-factor "Competitiveness Index."

This report is organized into four sections. They are:

• Competitiveness overview
• Open seats
• Incumbents in contested primaries
• Major party competition

Competitiveness overview

Competitiveness refers to the presence of choice throughout the election cycle. A greater level of competitiveness means voters have the ability to make more decisions. A lower level of competitiveness equals fewer choices.

Ballotpedia uses three factors to determine state legislative competitiveness:

• Open seats, those where no incumbents filed to run;
• Incumbents in contested primaries, those who could potentially lose to challengers; and,
• Major party competition — where Democrats and Republicans meet head-to-head in the general election.

These percentages are averaged to produce a State Legislative Competitiveness Index, which can range from zero (least competitive) to 100 (most competitive).

The table below shows the Competitiveness Indices from 2010 to 2014 as well as the three factors used to calculate the indices.Click here to read more about Ballotpedia's methodology used when calculating Competitiveness Indices.

See also:Comparing the competitiveness index for state legislative elections

Open seats

See also:Open seats in state legislative elections, 2014

There were6,051 state legislative seats up for election on November 4, 2014, in 46 states. Of that total, there were1,019 open seats, guaranteeing at least17% of all seats would be won by newcomers. The total number and percentage of open seats was the lowest since Ballotpedia began gathering data in 2010.

Ballotpedia uses the number and percentage of open seats to help determine the overall competitiveness of an election cycle. A greater number of open seats guarantees more newcomers entering legislatures and typically results in more candidates running for office. A smaller number of open seats guarantees fewer newcomers and typically results in fewer candidates running for office.

In 2014:

Historical comparison

The chart below shows a breakdown of open seats from 2010 to 2014. The "Other" value includes seats left open by minor party and independent officeholders. It also includes seats whose previous officeholders could not be determined due to redistricting.

Incumbents in contested primaries

See also:State legislative incumbents in contested primaries, 2014

There were6,051 state legislative seats up for election on November 4, 2014, in 46 states. Overall, 5,041 incumbents filed for re-election and were running at the time of their respective primaries. Of that total,983 incumbents faced contested primaries, representing20% of all incumbents who filed for re-election. This was the same percentage as in 2010 (20%) but lower than in 2012 (23%).

A primary is contested when there are more candidates running than nominations available. When this occurs, and an incumbent is present, it means the incumbent could possibly lose the primary. Learn more about theterms andmethodologies used in this analysis.

Ballotpedia uses the number and percentage of incumbents in contested primaries to help determine the overall competitiveness of an election cycle. A larger number of contested primaries indicates more opportunities for voters to elect a non-incumbent to office. A smaller number indicates fewer of those opportunities.

In 2014:

Historical comparison

The chart below shows a breakdown of incumbents in contested primaries from 2010 to 2014.

All contested primaries

See also:Contested state legislative primaries, 2014

This section shows figures onall contested state legislative primaries, regardless of whether an incumbent was present. There were5,598 state legislative districts up for election nationwide, creating10,949 possible primaries. Of that total, there were1,698 contested primaries, meaning16% of all primaries were contested. This was the lowest number and percentage of contested primaries since Ballotpedia began gathering data in 2010.

In 2014:

The chart below shows a breakdown of contested primaries from 2010 to 2014.

Major party competition

See also:Major party competition in state legislative elections, 2014

There were6,051 state legislative seats up for election on November 4, 2014, in 46 states. Of that total,2,663 (44%) were uncontested and had no major party competition. The remaining 3,388 (56%) were contested by both major parties. This was the largest number and percentage of seats with no major party competition since Ballotpedia began gathering data in 2010.

Ballotpedia uses the level of major party competition to help determine the overall competitiveness of an election cycle. A larger number of seats without major party competition indicates fewer options on the ballot. A smaller number indicates more options.

In 2014:

Historical comparison

The chart below shows a breakdown of major party competition in state legislative elections from 2010 to 2014.

See also

• State legislative elections, 2014
  • Impact of term limits on state legislative elections in 2014
  • Open seats in state legislative elections, 2014
  • Contested state legislative primaries, 2014
  • State legislative incumbents in contested primaries, 2014
  • Major party competition in state legislative elections, 2014
  • Incumbents defeated in state legislative elections, 2014
  • State legislative incumbents without general election challengers, 2014
• Primary election competitiveness in state and federal government, 2014

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 2025 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page •Impact of term limits •Open seats •Contested primaries •Incumbents in contested primaries •Major party competition •Incumbents defeated •Uncontested incumbents •Primary statistics 2024 Competitiveness Analysis Main Page •Impact of term limits •Open seats •Contested primaries •Incumbents in contested primaries •Major party competition •Incumbents defeated •Uncontested incumbents •Primary statistics 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