Minnesota House of Representatives elections, 2016
From Ballotpedia - Reading time: 23 min
 |
Presidential • U.S. House • State Senate • State House • State judges • Local judges • State ballot measures • School boards • Candidate ballot access |
 |
| 2016 Minnesota House Elections | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Primary | August 9, 2016 |
| General | November 8, 2016 |
| 2016 Election Results | |
| 2014・2012・2010・2008 2006・2004・2002・2000 | |
| 2016 Elections | |
|---|---|
| Choose a chamber below: | |
All 134 seats in the Minnesota House of Representatives were up for election in 2016. Republicans strengthened their majority in the chamber after the November 2016 election by gaining three seats.
A Ballotpedia analysis identified the Minnesota State House as one of 20 battleground chambers in the November 2016 election. These are the chambers where one party might have, realistically, toppled the other party from its position of majority control.
This election was one of Ballotpedia's top 10 state-level races in 2016.
Click here to read the full list.
Contents
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Majority control
- 3 Incumbents retiring
- 4 2016 election competitiveness
- 5 Races we watched
- 6 List of candidates
- 7 General election
- 8 Primary election
Introduction[edit]
Elections for the Minnesota House of Representatives took place in 2016. The primary election took place on August 9, 2016, and the general election was held on November 8, 2016. The candidate filing deadline was May 31, 2016.
Context[edit]
The House had been identified by the Republican Legislative Campaign Committee (RLCC) as a defensive target since Republicans sought to defend their majority. The state Senate had been identified by RLCC as an offensive target since Republicans sought to gain control of that chamber.
In the 2012 presidential election, Republicans lost majorities in both houses by at least the previous margin of control. Democrats have argued that higher turnout in presidential elections tends to benefit their candidates, whereas Republicans claimed that this year's presidential race would negatively affect candidates in rural legislative districts, which they saw as battlegrounds. Larry Jacobs, professor of political science at the University of Minnesota, said that Democrats would "have an advantage" due to higher turnout, though with Hillary Clinton as their nominee, they would not see the same level of turnout caused by voter enthusiasm for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012.[2]
In early 2015, Minnesota Democrats launched the Minnesota Rural Initiative, a program seeking to train rural candidates following criticism of an "autopsy report" on the 2014 election for not acknowledging rural voters. State Rep. Jeanne Poppe (D) said that the program could be "the playbook for 2018 and beyond" in other states.[3]
On February 9, 2016, Chad Anderson (R) defeated Andrew Carlson (D) in a special election for a seat which was previously held by Ann Lenczewski (D). President Barack Obama (D) carried this district in 2012 with 57 percent of the vote. Lenczewski was re-elected in 2014 with a margin of victory of 31 percent. According to the Daily Kos, since Obama only won 50.7 percent of the state House seats in 2012, if the Democrats wanted to regain control of the chamber they would need to win every seat that Obama won or win some Republican seats.[4]
Incumbents in Minnesota have especially strong advantages in primary contests because Minnesota's political parties play a larger role in legislative districts than they do in other states. Because of this, potential primary challengers tend to drop out of races early if they are unable to secure endorsements from activist groups. Low voter turnout outside of activist or endorsement groups further emphasizes the importance of the political support these groups provide to candidates.[5]
Majority control[edit]
- See also: Partisan composition of state houses
Heading into the election, the Republican Party held the majority in the Minnesota House of Representatives:
| Minnesota House of Representatives | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Party | As of November 7, 2016 | After November 8, 2016 | |
| Democratic Party | 61 | 57 | |
| Republican Party | 73 | 76 | |
| Vacancy | 0 | 1 | |
| Total | 134 | 134 | |
Incumbents retiring[edit]
Fifteen incumbents did not run for re-election in 2016. Those incumbents were:
| Name | Party | Current Office |
|---|---|---|
| David Hancock |  Republican |
House District 2a |
| Carly Melin |  Democratic |
House District 6a |
| Erik Simonson | Democratic |
House District 7b |
| Mark Anderson | Republican |
House District 9a |
| Tim Kelly | Republican |
House District 21a |
| Kim Norton | Democratic |
House District 25b |
| Jerry Newton | Democratic |
House District 37a |
| Tim Sanders | Republican |
House District 37b |
| Carolyn Laine | Democratic |
House District 41b |
| Jason Isaacson | Democratic |
House District 42b |
| Yvonne Selcer | Democratic |
House District 48a |
| Joe Atkins | Democratic |
House District 52b |
| Dan Schoen | Democratic |
House District 54a |
| Denny McNamara | Republican |
House District 54b |
| Tara Mack | Republican |
House District 57a |
2016 election competitiveness[edit]
Minnesota sees improvement in electoral competitiveness.
Ballotpedia conducts a yearly study of electoral competitiveness in state legislative elections. Details on how well Minnesota performed in the study are provided in the image below. Click here for the full 2016 Competitiveness Analysis »
- In the Minnesota State Senate, there were 39 Democratic incumbents and 28 Republican incumbents. Three incumbents faced primary opposition in the Democratic Party. There was just one primary challenge in the Republican primary.
- In the House, there were 61 Democratic incumbents and 73 Republican incumbents. Four state representatives faced primary opposition in the Democratic Party. There were three primary challenges in the Republican primary.
- Overall, 18.6 percent of Democratic incumbents and 21.4 percent of GOP incumbents faced primary opposition in all of the state legislatures with elections in 2016.
- The cumulative figure for how many state legislative candidates faced no major party opposition in November in these states was 41.8 percent. This compares to 32.7 percent in 2010, 38.3 percent in 2012, and 43.0 percent in 2014.
- More details on electoral competitiveness in Minnesota can be found below.
Races we watched[edit]
Ballotpedia identified seven notable Minnesota state legislative races in 2016, three of which were state House contests. One of these House contests was a primary, and can be viewed by clicking on the "Primary election" tab below.
Click here to read more about Ballotpedia's coverage of notable Minnesota races »
General election contests[edit]
- A Democratic former lawmaker challenged the Republican incumbent to a rematch.
- ☑ Jim Knoblach (Inc.) ☐ Zach Dorholt
- A Democratic former lawmaker challenged the Republican incumbent to a rematch.
- ☑ Dave Baker (Inc.) ☐ Mary Sawatzky
List of candidates[edit]
General election[edit]
Primary election[edit]
Primary contests[edit]
- Four Democratic candidates competed for the open seat vacated by a Democratic incumbent.
- ☑ Julie Sandstede ☐ Tom Whiteside ☐ Ben DeNucci ☐ Mike Thompson
Margins of victory[edit]
The average margin of victory for contested races in the Minnesota House of Representatives in 2016 was lower than the national average. Out of 133 races in the Minnesota House of Representatives in 2016, 129 were contested, meaning at least two candidates competed for that seat in the general election. The average margin of victory across these races was 26.6 percent. Across contested single-winner state legislative elections in 2016, the average margin of victory was 29.01 percent.[7]
| Democratic candidates in the Minnesota House of Representatives saw larger margins of victory than Republican candidates in 2016. Democrats won 57 races. In the 55 races where a winning Democrat faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 30.6 percent. Republicans won 76 races in 2016. In the 74 races where a winning Republican faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 23.7 percent. |
| More Republican candidates than Democratic candidates saw margins of victory that were less than 10 percentage points. 21 of the 129 contested races in 2016—16.3 percent—saw margins of victory that were 10 percent or less. 11 races saw margins of victory that were 5 percent or less. Republicans won 12 races with margins of victory of 10 percent or less. |
Minnesota House of Representatives: 2016 Margins of Victory Less than 10 Percent District Winning Party Margin of Victory District 4B D 7.8 percent District 5A R 7.9 percent District 14A R 9.5 percent District 14B R 2.7 percent District 19A D 5.5 percent District 20B D 8.4 percent District 25B D 3.7 percent District 27B D 7.3 percent District 28B R 9.2 percent District 37A D 2.7 percent District 37B R 0.7 percent District 42A R 8.2 percent District 44A R 8.2 percent District 48A D 3.5 percent District 49A R 2.3 percent District 50B D 7.4 percent District 52B R 0.6 percent District 54A R 3.0 percent District 56B R 4.9 percent District 57A D 4.7 percent District 57B R 7.5 percent
| The average margin of victory for incumbents in the Minnesota House of Representatives who ran for re-election and won in 2016 was lower than the national average. 110 incumbents who ran for re-election in 2016 won. The average margin of victory for the 106 winning Minnesota House of Representatives incumbents who faced a challenger in 2016 was 28.7 percent. The average margin of victory for all winning incumbents in contested single-winner state legislative elections in 2016 was 31.8 percent. |
| Democratic incumbents in the Minnesota House of Representatives saw larger margins of victory than Republican incumbents. 46 Democratic incumbents won re-election. In the 44 races where a winning Democratic incumbent faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 32.6 percent. 64 Republican incumbents won re-election. In the 62 races where a winning Republican incumbent faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 25.9 percent. |
Minnesota House of Representatives: 2016 Margin of Victory Analysis Party Elections won Average margin of victory[8] Races with incumbent victories Average margin of victory for incumbents[8] Unopposed incumbents Unopposed races Percent unopposed Democratic 57 30.6 percent 46 32.6 percent 2 2 3.5 percent Republican 76 23.7 percent 64 25.9 percent 2 2 2.6 percent Total 133 26.6 percent 110 28.7 percent 4 4 3.0 percent
Click [show] on the tables below to see the margin of victory in Minnesota House of Representatives districts in 2016.
| Minnesota House of Representatives: 2016 Margin of Victory by District | ||
|---|---|---|
| District | Winning Party | Margin of Victory |
| District 1A | R | 48.6 percent |
| District 1B | R | 29.6 percent |
| District 2A | R | 28.3 percent |
| District 2B | R | 22.0 percent |
| District 3A | D | 26.8 percent |
| District 3B | D | 19.3 percent |
| District 4A | D | 24.5 percent |
| District 4B | D | 7.8 percent |
| District 5A | R | 7.9 percent |
| District 5B | R | 11.6 percent |
| District 6A | D | 18.2 percent |
| District 6B | D | 21.0 percent |
| District 7A | D | 41.0 percent |
| District 7B | D | 42.0 percent |
| District 8A | R | 30.5 percent |
| District 8B | R | 29.9 percent |
| District 9A | R | 37.3 percent |
| District 9B | R | 44.7 percent |
| District 10A | R | 18.8 percent |
| District 10B | R | 26.4 percent |
| District 11A | D | 19.5 percent |
| District 11B | R | 21.0 percent |
| District 12A | R | 21.0 percent |
| District 12B | R | Unopposed |
| District 13A | R | 32.1 percent |
| District 13B | R | 39.4 percent |
| District 14A | R | 9.5 percent |
| District 14B | R | 2.7 percent |
| District 15A | R | 27.7 percent |
| District 15B | R | 37.9 percent |
| District 16A | R | 36.3 percent |
| District 16B | R | 46.3 percent |
| District 17A | R | 18.1 percent |
| District 17B | R | 19.2 percent |
| District 18A | R | Unopposed |
| District 18B | R | 35.8 percent |
| District 19A | D | 5.5 percent |
| District 19B | D | 19.4 percent |
| District 20A | R | 21.8 percent |
| District 20B | D | 8.4 percent |
| District 21A | R | 10.1 percent |
| District 21B | R | 30.6 percent |
| District 22A | R | 44.0 percent |
| District 22B | R | 39.1 percent |
| District 23A | R | 36.4 percent |
| District 23B | R | 34.0 percent |
| District 24A | R | 13.9 percent |
| District 24B | R | 16.9 percent |
| District 25A | R | 20.0 percent |
| District 25B | D | 3.7 percent |
| District 26A | D | 19.9 percent |
| District 26B | R | 18.4 percent |
| District 27A | R | 23.5 percent |
| District 27B | D | 7.3 percent |
| District 28A | D | 26.5 percent |
| District 28B | R | 9.2 percent |
| District 29A | R | 39.4 percent |
| District 29B | R | 31.2 percent |
| District 30A | R | 37.3 percent |
| District 30B | R | 40.5 percent |
| District 31A | R | 40.9 percent |
| District 31B | R | 33.1 percent |
| District 32A | R | 26.3 percent |
| District 33A | R | 35.8 percent |
| District 33B | R | 20.9 percent |
| District 34A | R | 32.0 percent |
| District 34B | R | 11.9 percent |
| District 35A | R | 22.9 percent |
| District 35B | R | 29.6 percent |
| District 36A | R | 16.7 percent |
| District 36B | D | 11.6 percent |
| District 37A | D | 2.7 percent |
| District 37B | R | 0.7 percent |
| District 38A | R | 22.9 percent |
| District 38B | R | 14.0 percent |
| District 39A | R | 23.0 percent |
| District 39B | R | 18.1 percent |
| District 40A | D | Unopposed |
| District 40B | D | 39.2 percent |
| District 41A | D | 21.0 percent |
| District 41B | D | 26.8 percent |
| District 42A | R | 0.5 percent |
| District 42B | D | 14.0 percent |
| District 43A | D | 10.1 percent |
| District 43B | D | 19.3 percent |
| District 44A | R | 8.2 percent |
| District 44B | D | 10.0 percent |
| District 45A | D | 13.9 percent |
| District 45B | D | 36.5 percent |
| District 46A | D | 28.1 percent |
| District 46B | D | 37.8 percent |
| District 47A | R | 43.2 percent |
| District 47B | R | 25.0 percent |
| District 48A | D | 3.5 percent |
| District 48B | R | 24.7 percent |
| District 49A | R | 2.3 percent |
| District 49B | D | 11.0 percent |
| District 50A | D | 26.7 percent |
| District 50B | D | 7.4 percent |
| District 51A | D | 15.7 percent |
| District 51B | D | 13.2 percent |
| District 52A | D | 26.8 percent |
| District 52B | R | 0.6 percent |
| District 53A | D | 18.3 percent |
| District 53B | R | 12.8 percent |
| District 54A | R | 3.0 percent |
| District 54B | R | 10.8 percent |
| District 55A | R | 11.8 percent |
| District 55B | R | 38.3 percent |
| District 56A | R | 12.1 percent |
| District 56B | R | 4.9 percent |
| District 57A | D | 4.7 percent |
| District 57B | R | 7.5 percent |
| District 58A | R | 21.5 percent |
| District 58B | R | 29.7 percent |
| District 59A | D | 62.5 percent |
| District 59B | D | 54.0 percent |
| District 60A | D | 48.4 percent |
| District 60B | D | 61.2 percent |
| District 61A | D | 58.8 percent |
| District 61B | D | 61.2 percent |
| District 62A | D | 77.6 percent |
| District 62B | D | Unopposed |
| District 63A | D | 71.2 percent |
| District 63B | D | 53.0 percent |
| District 64A | D | 59.8 percent |
| District 64B | D | 49.9 percent |
| District 65A | D | 66.3 percent |
| District 65B | D | 54.7 percent |
| District 66A | D | 37.0 percent |
| District 66B | D | 60.2 percent |
| District 67A | D | 53.4 percent |
| District 67B | D | 44.9 percent |
Important dates and deadlines[edit]
- See also: Minnesota elections, 2016
The calendar below lists important dates for political candidates in Minnesota in 2016.
| Dates and requirements for candidates in 2016 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Deadline | Event type | Event description | |
| February 1, 2016 | Campaign finance | 2015 year-end report of receipts and expenditures due | |
| May 17, 2016 | Ballot access | Candidate filing period opens | |
| May 31, 2016 | Ballot access | Candidate filing period closes | |
| July 25, 2016 | Campaign finance | First report of receipts and expenditures due (covering January 1 through July 18) | |
| August 9, 2016 | Election date | Primary election | |
| October 31, 2016 | Campaign finance | Second report of receipts and expenditures due (covering January 1 through November 24) | |
| November 8, 2016 | Election date | General election | |
| January 31, 2017 | Campaign finance | 2016 year-end report of receipts and expenditures due | |
| Sources: Minnesota Secretary of State, "Filing Periods," accessed June 12, 2015 Minnesota Votes, "2016 Election Dates," accessed June 12, 2015 Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, "2016 Disclosure Calendar," accessed October 28, 2015 | |||
Competitiveness[edit]
Candidates unopposed by a major party[edit]
In five of the 134 seats that were up for election in 2016, there was only one major party candidate running for election. A total of three Democrats and two Republicans were guaranteed election barring unforeseen circumstances.
Two major party candidates faced off in the general election in 129 (96.2 percent) of the 134 seats up for election.
Primary challenges[edit]
Seven incumbents faced primary competition on August 9. Fifteen incumbents did not seek re-election and another 112 incumbents advanced past the primary without opposition. The following incumbents were defeated in the primary election:
- District 31B: Tom Hackbarth (R)
- District 59A: Joe Mullery (D)
- District 60B: Phyllis Kahn (D)
Retired incumbents[edit]
Fifteen incumbents did not run for re-election, while 119 (88.8 percent) ran for re-election. A list of those incumbents, nine Democrats and six Republicans can be found above.
Results from 2014[edit]
There were 6,057 seats in 87 chambers with elections in 2014. All three aspects of Ballotpedia's Competitiveness Index—the number of open seats, incumbents facing primary opposition, and general 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. Additionally, fewer incumbents faced primary opposition and more incumbents ran for re-election than in recent 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.
| Overall Competitiveness | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 2012 | 2014 | |
| Competitiveness Index | 36.2 | 35.8 | 31.4 |
| % Open Seats | 18.6% | 21.2% | 17.0% |
| % Incumbent with primary challenge | 22.7% | 24.6% | 20.1% |
| % Candidates with major party opposition | 67.3% | 61.7% | 57.0% |
The following table details Minnesota's rates for open seats, incumbents that faced primary challenges, and major party competition in the 2014 general election.
| Minnesota Legislature 2014 Competitiveness | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % Open Seats | % Incumbent with primary challenge | % Candidates with major party opposition | Competitiveness Index | Overall rank |
| 11.2% | 4.2% | 93.3% | 36.2 | 14 |
Historical context[edit]
Uncontested elections: In 2014, 32.8 percent of Americans lived in states with an uncontested state senate election. Similarly, 40.4 percent of Americans lived in states with uncontested house elections. Primary elections were uncontested even more frequently, with 61 percent of people living in states with no contested primaries. Uncontested elections often occur in locations that are so politically one-sided that the result of an election would be a foregone conclusion regardless of whether it was contested or not.
Open seats: In most cases, an incumbent will run for re-election, which decreases the number of open seats available. In 2014, 83 percent of the 6,057 seats up for election saw the incumbent running for re-election. The states that impose term limits on their legislatures typically see a higher percentage of open seats in a given year because a portion of incumbents in each election are forced to leave office. Overall, the number of open seats decreased from 2012 to 2014, dropping from 21.2 percent in 2012 to 17.0 percent in 2014.
Incumbent win rates: Ballotpedia's competitiveness analysis of elections between 1972 and 2014 documented the high propensity for incumbents to win re-election in state legislative elections. In fact, since 1972, the win rate for incumbents had not dropped below 90 percent—with the exception of 1974, when 88 percent of incumbents were re-elected to their seats. Perhaps most importantly, the win rate for incumbents generally increased over time. In 2014, 96.5 percent of incumbents were able to retain their seats. Common convention holds that incumbents are able to leverage their office to maintain their seat. However, the high incumbent win rate may actually be a result of incumbents being more likely to hold seats in districts that are considered safe for their party.
Marginal primaries: Often, competitiveness is measured by examining the rate of elections that have been won by amounts that are considered marginal (5 percent or less). During the 2014 election, 90.1 percent of primary and general election races were won by margins higher than 5 percent. Interestingly, it is usually the case that only one of the two races—primary or general—will be competitive at a time. This means that if a district's general election is competitive, typically one or more of the district's primaries were won by more than 5 percent. The reverse is also true: If a district sees a competitive primary, it is unlikely that the general election for that district will be won by less than 5 percent. Primaries often see very low voter turnout in comparison to general elections. In 2014, there were only 27 million voters for state legislative primaries, but approximately 107 million voters for the state legislative general elections.
Campaign contributions[edit]
The following chart shows how many candidates ran for State House in Minnesota in past years and the cumulative amount of campaign contributions in State House races, including contributions in both primary and general election contests.[9]
| Minnesota House of Representatives Donations | ||
|---|---|---|
| Year | Candidates | Amount |
| 2014 | 282 | $5,406,536 |
| 2012 | 311 | $6,498,719 |
| 2010 | 293 | $6,355,423 |
| 2008 | 317 | $8,350,494 |
| 2006 | 287 | $7,500,840 |
State comparison[edit]
The map below shows the average contributions to 2014 candidates for state houses. The average contributions raised by state house candidates in 2014 was $59,983. Minnesota, at $19,172 per candidate, is ranked 37 of 45 for state house chambers with the highest average contributions. Hover your mouse over a state to see the average campaign contributions for that state’s house candidates in 2014.[9][10]
Qualifications[edit]
To be eligible to run for the Minnesota House of Representatives, a candidate meet the following criteria:[11]
- be eligible to vote in Minnesota;
- not have filed for more than one office for the upcoming primary or general election;
- be at least 21 years old;
- be a resident of Minnesota for at least one year; and
- be a resident of the legislative district for at least six months prior to the general election date.
See also[edit]
External links[edit]
Footnotes[edit]
- ↑ Under Ballotpedia's competitiveness criteria, districts that have a margin of victory of less than 5 percent are considered highly competitive. Districts that have a margin of victory from 5 to 10 percent are considered mildly competitive.
- ↑ MinnPost, "Why 2016 will be unlike any Minnesota election in over a decade," July 22, 2015
- ↑ The Hill, "Minnesota Democrats target rural vote for 2016 state legislative fights," December 11, 2015
- ↑ Daily Kos, "Democrats want to retake the Minnesota state House, but the GOP just scored a key pickup," accessed February 12, 2016
- ↑ A Ballotpedia staff member received information about this topic from an email conversation with a Minnesota-based political writer.
- ↑ This seat was filled in a special election on February 14, 2017.
- ↑ This calculation excludes chambers that had elections where two or more members were elected in a race. These chambers are the Arizona House, the New Hampshire House, the North Dakota House, the South Dakota House, the Vermont House, the Vermont Senate, and the West Virginia House.
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 Excludes unopposed elections
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 followthemoney.org, "Contributions to candidates and committees in elections in Minnesota," accessed July 28, 2015
- ↑ This map relies on data collected in July 2015.
- ↑ Minnesota Secretary of State, "Filing for Office," accessed June 23, 2014
EncycloReader
is supported by the 
KSF