Michigan House of Representatives elections, 2016
 |
Presidential • U.S. House • State House • State judges • Local judges • State ballot measures • School boards • Recalls • Candidate ballot access |
 |
| 2016 Michigan House Elections | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Primary | August 2, 2016 |
| General | November 8, 2016 |
| 2016 Election Results | |
| 2014・2012・2010・2008 2006・2004・2002・2000 | |
| 2016 Elections | |
|---|---|
| Choose a chamber below: | |
All 110 seats in the Michigan House of Representatives were up for election in 2016. No changes occurred to the partisan balance of the chamber.[1]
A Ballotpedia analysis identified the Michigan State House as one of 20 battleground chambers in the November 2016 election. These were the chambers where one party might have, realistically, toppled the other party from its position of majority control. The Republican Legislative Campaign Committee (RLCC) identified the chamber as a defensive target, as Republicans looked to maintain their 16-seat majority.
This election was one of Ballotpedia's top 10 state-level races in 2016.
Click here to read the full list.
Introduction
Elections for the Michigan House of Representatives took place in 2016. The primary election was held on August 2, 2016, and the general election was held on November 8, 2016. The candidate filing deadline was April 19, 2016.
Context
Ahead of the 2020 census, the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC) targeted the state for redistricting purposes. The DLCC set the goal of raising $20 million for 2016 state legislative races. Following the 2010 election, when Republicans gained control of the governor's office and the House, Michigan's congressional boundaries were redrawn by the legislature; though Republicans did not gain seats in 2012, Democrats lost one seat in the state's congressional delegation.
In 2014, six districts were considered competitive or mildly competitive. That year, Republicans gained four seats.
Majority control
- See also: Partisan composition of state houses
Heading into the election, the Republican Party held the majority in the Michigan House of Representatives:
| Michigan House of Representatives | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Party | As of November 7, 2016 | After November 8, 2016 | |
| Democratic Party | 45 | 47 | |
| Republican Party | 62 | 63 | |
| Vacancy | 3 | 0 | |
| Total | 110 | 110 | |
Retired incumbents
Forty incumbent representatives did not run for re-election in 2016. Those incumbents were:
Note: District 11, District 28, and District 106 were vacant at the time of the 2016 general election. The seats were previously held by Julie Plawecki (D), Derek Miller (D), and Peter Pettalia (R).
2016 election competitiveness
Michigan saw improvement in electoral competitiveness.
Ballotpedia conducts a yearly study of electoral competitiveness in state legislative elections. Details on how well Michigan performed in the study are provided in the image below. Click here for the full 2016 Competitiveness Analysis »
- In the House, there were 47 Democratic incumbents and 63 Republican incumbents. Fourteen state representatives faced primary opposition in the Democratic Party. There were nine 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 Michigan can be found below.
Races we watched
Ballotpedia identified four notable Michigan state legislative races in 2016, all four of which were state House contests.
Click here to read more about Ballotpedia's coverage of notable Michigan races »
General election contests
- A Democratic candidate challenged the Republican incumbent in a swing district.
- ☑ Tom Barrett (Inc.) ☐ Theresa Abed
- A Democratic candidate challenged the Republican incumbent in a swing district.
- ☑ Holly Hughes (Inc.) ☐ Collene Lamonte
List of candidates
General election
Primary election
- Four Republican candidates competed for the open seat vacated by the Republican incumbent.
- ☑ Sue Allor ☐ David Chandler ☐ Jackie Krawczak ☐ Jesse Osmer
- Three Republican candidates competed for the open seat vacated by the Republican incumbent.
- ☑ Beau LaFave ☐ Alan Arcand ☐ Darryl Shann
Margins of victory
The average margin of victory for contested races in the Michigan House of Representatives in 2016 was higher than the national average. Out of 110 races in the Michigan House of Representatives in 2016, 110 were contested, meaning at least two candidates competed for that seat in the general election. The average margin of victory across these races was 31.8 percent. Across contested single-winner state legislative elections in 2016, the average margin of victory was 29.01 percent.[2]
| Democratic candidates in the Michigan House of Representatives saw larger margins of victory than Republican candidates in 2016. Democrats won 47 races. In the 47 races where a winning Democrat faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 40.9 percent. Republicans won 63 races in 2016. In the 63 races where a winning Republican faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 25.1 percent. |
| More Republican candidates than Democratic candidates saw margins of victory that were less than 10 percentage points. 19 of the 110 contested races in 2016—17.3 percent—saw margins of victory that were 10 percent or less. Four races saw margins of victory that were 5 percent or less. Republicans won 13 races with margins of victory of 10 percent or less. |
Michigan House of Representatives: 2016 Margins of Victory Less than 10 Percent District Winning Party Margin of Victory District 17 R 8.0 percent District 20 R 7.2 percent District 23 D 0.7 percent District 25 D 8.2 percent District 30 R 7.7 percent District 39 R 8.2 percent District 40 R 7.0 percent District 48 D 7.6 percent District 50 D 4.1 percent District 52 D 7.8 percent District 61 R 4.7 percent District 62 R 0.6 percent District 66 R 8.5 percent District 67 D 9.3 percent District 91 R 5.7 percent District 99 R 9.1 percent District 101 R 8.0 percent District 104 R 8.2 percent District 108 R 5.5 percent
| The average margin of victory for incumbents in the Michigan House of Representatives who ran for re-election and won in 2016 was higher than the national average. 67 incumbents who ran for re-election in 2016 won. The average margin of victory for the 67 winning Michigan House of Representatives incumbents who faced a challenger in 2016 was 36.2 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 Michigan House of Representatives saw larger margins of victory than Republican incumbents. 31 Democratic incumbents won re-election. In the 31 races where a winning Democratic incumbent faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 46.4 percent. 36 Republican incumbents won re-election. In the 36 races where a winning Republican incumbent faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 27.3 percent. |
Michigan House of Representatives: 2016 Margin of Victory Analysis Party Elections won Average margin of victory[3] Races with incumbent victories Average margin of victory for incumbents[3] Unopposed incumbents Unopposed races Percent unopposed Democratic 47 40.9 percent 31 46.4 percent 0 0 N/A Republican 63 25.1 percent 36 27.3 percent 0 0 N/A Total 110 31.8 percent 67 36.2 percent 0 0 N/A
Click [show] on the tables below to see the margin of victory in Michigan House of Representatives districts in 2016.
| Michigan House of Representatives: 2016 Margin of Victory by District | ||
|---|---|---|
| District | Winning Party | Margin of Victory |
| District 1 | D | 36.7 percent |
| District 2 | D | 43.7 percent |
| District 3 | D | 93.6 percent |
| District 4 | D | 86.8 percent |
| District 5 | D | 85.0 percent |
| District 6 | D | 85.1 percent |
| District 7 | D | 95.2 percent |
| District 8 | D | 91.5 percent |
| District 9 | D | 88.6 percent |
| District 10 | D | 66.6 percent |
| District 11 | D | 30.1 percent |
| District 12 | D | 34.2 percent |
| District 13 | D | 21.5 percent |
| District 14 | D | 23.7 percent |
| District 15 | D | 23.6 percent |
| District 16 | D | 27.9 percent |
| District 17 | R | 8.0 percent |
| District 18 | D | 26.6 percent |
| District 19 | R | 22.8 percent |
| District 20 | R | 7.2 percent |
| District 21 | D | 18.9 percent |
| District 22 | D | 25.7 percent |
| District 23 | D | 0.7 percent |
| District 24 | R | 10.1 percent |
| District 25 | D | 8.2 percent |
| District 26 | D | 18.7 percent |
| District 27 | D | 53.6 percent |
| District 28 | D | 33.2 percent |
| District 29 | D | 45.8 percent |
| District 30 | R | 7.7 percent |
| District 31 | D | 17.3 percent |
| District 32 | R | 27.3 percent |
| District 33 | R | 40.0 percent |
| District 34 | D | 77.1 percent |
| District 35 | D | 67.6 percent |
| District 36 | R | 43.7 percent |
| District 37 | D | 24.9 percent |
| District 38 | R | 15.3 percent |
| District 39 | R | 8.2 percent |
| District 40 | R | 7.0 percent |
| District 41 | R | 12.9 percent |
| District 42 | R | 31.2 percent |
| District 43 | R | 30.9 percent |
| District 44 | R | 37.1 percent |
| District 45 | R | 24.2 percent |
| District 46 | R | 38.6 percent |
| District 47 | R | 41.2 percent |
| District 48 | D | 7.6 percent |
| District 49 | D | 36.9 percent |
| District 50 | D | 4.1 percent |
| District 51 | R | 26.7 percent |
| District 52 | D | 7.8 percent |
| District 53 | D | 64.2 percent |
| District 54 | D | 50.0 percent |
| District 55 | D | 38.7 percent |
| District 56 | R | 19.5 percent |
| District 57 | R | 12.8 percent |
| District 58 | R | 50.7 percent |
| District 59 | R | 33.5 percent |
| District 60 | D | 44.3 percent |
| District 61 | R | 4.7 percent |
| District 62 | R | 0.6 percent |
| District 63 | R | 27.5 percent |
| District 64 | R | 25.0 percent |
| District 65 | R | 26.0 percent |
| District 66 | R | 8.5 percent |
| District 67 | D | 9.3 percent |
| District 68 | D | 51.5 percent |
| District 69 | D | 36.7 percent |
| District 70 | R | 31.2 percent |
| District 71 | R | 11.1 percent |
| District 72 | R | 17.0 percent |
| District 73 | R | 31.4 percent |
| District 74 | R | 33.8 percent |
| District 75 | D | 52.8 percent |
| District 76 | D | 18.0 percent |
| District 77 | R | 31.6 percent |
| District 78 | R | 35.0 percent |
| District 79 | R | 20.4 percent |
| District 80 | R | 39.3 percent |
| District 81 | R | 37.9 percent |
| District 82 | R | 37.9 percent |
| District 83 | R | 29.2 percent |
| District 84 | R | 30.2 percent |
| District 85 | R | 21.8 percent |
| District 86 | R | 25.3 percent |
| District 87 | R | 39.0 percent |
| District 88 | R | 50.1 percent |
| District 89 | R | 26.8 percent |
| District 90 | R | 45.7 percent |
| District 91 | R | 5.7 percent |
| District 92 | D | 36.4 percent |
| District 93 | R | 29.2 percent |
| District 94 | R | 29.5 percent |
| District 95 | D | 47.8 percent |
| District 96 | D | 16.0 percent |
| District 97 | R | 29.7 percent |
| District 98 | R | 20.3 percent |
| District 99 | R | 9.1 percent |
| District 100 | R | 34.5 percent |
| District 101 | R | 8.0 percent |
| District 102 | R | 38.1 percent |
| District 103 | R | 16.6 percent |
| District 104 | R | 8.2 percent |
| District 105 | R | 40.1 percent |
| District 106 | R | 26.5 percent |
| District 107 | R | 34.2 percent |
| District 108 | R | 5.5 percent |
| District 109 | D | 28.2 percent |
| District 110 | D | 22.1 percent |
Important dates and deadlines
- See also: Michigan elections, 2016
The calendar below lists important dates for political candidates in Michigan in 2016.
| Dates and requirements for candidates in 2016 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Deadline | Event type | Event description | |
| February 12, 2016 | Campaign finance | Pre-election report due | |
| February 23, 2016 | Election date | Election | |
| March 21, 2016 | Ballot access | Deadline for incumbent judges seeking re-election to file for the state primary | |
| March 24, 2016 | Campaign finance | Post-election report due | |
| April 19, 2016 | Ballot access | Deadline for partisan and nonpartisan candidates (other than incumbent judges) to file for the state primary | |
| April 22, 2016 | Campaign finance | Pre-election report due | |
| May 3, 2016 | Election date | Election | |
| June 2, 2016 | Campaign finance | Post-election report due | |
| July 21, 2016 | Ballot access | Deadline for unaffiliated candidates to file for the general election | |
| July 22, 2016 | Campaign finance | Pre-election report due | |
| August 2, 2016 | Election date | Primary election | |
| September 1, 2016 | Campaign finance | Post-election report due | |
| October 28, 2016 | Campaign finance | Pre-election report due | |
| November 8, 2016 | Election date | General election | |
| December 8, 2016 | Campaign finance | Post-election report due | |
| Sources: Michigan Secretary of State, "2015 and 2016 Campaign Finance Filing Schedule," accessed July 1, 2015 Michigan Secretary of State, ,"2016 Michigan Election Dates," accessed January 16, 2016 | |||
Competitiveness
Candidates unopposed by a major party
In all 110 districts up for election in 2016, candidates from both major parties faced off in the general election.
Primary challenges
Twenty-three incumbents faced primary competition on August 2. Forty-two seats were open, leaving 45 incumbents that advanced past the primary without opposition.
Retired incumbents
Forty incumbent representatives did not run for re-election and two seats were vacant at the time of the 2016 general election. Sixty-eight incumbents ran for re-election. A list of those retiring incumbents, 27 Republicans and 13 Democrats, can be found above.
Impact of term limits
- See also: State legislatures with term limits
The Michigan House of Representatives has been a term-limited state house since Michigan voters approved Proposal B in 1992. Proposal B created Section 54 of Article IV of the Michigan Constitution. It says that state representatives are limited to three two-year terms. As with five other states, this is a lifetime limit.
There are 110 members of the Michigan House of Representatives. In 2016, 38 members, eleven Democrats and 27 Republicans, were ineligible to run again in November.
The state representatives who were term-limited in 2016 were:
|
|
|
|
|
Results from 2014
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 Michigan's rates for open seats, incumbents that faced primary challenges, and major party competition in the 2014 general election.
| Michigan Legislature 2014 Competitiveness | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % Open Seats | % Incumbent with primary challenge | % Candidates with major party opposition | Competitiveness Index | Overall rank |
| 33.8% | 24.7% | 100% | 52.8 | 3 |
Historical context
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
The following chart shows how many candidates ran for state House in Michigan in past years and the cumulative amount of campaign contributions in state House races, including contributions in both primary and general election contests.[4]
| Michigan House of Representatives Donations | ||
|---|---|---|
| Year | Candidates | Amount |
| 2014 | 422 | $20,656,601 |
| 2012 | 398 | $17,546,599 |
| 2010 | 543 | $17,085,798 |
| 2008 | 502 | $15,546,812 |
| 2006 | 432 | $16,077,386 |
State comparison
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. Michigan, at $48,949 per candidate, is ranked 20 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.[4][5]
Qualifications
Section 7 of Article 4 of the Michigan Constitution states: "Each senator and representative must be a citizen of the United States, at least 21 years of age, and an elector of the district he represents. The removal of his domicile from the district shall be deemed a vacation of the office. No person who has been convicted of subversion or who has within the preceding 20 years been convicted of a felony involving a breach of public trust shall be eligible for either house of the legislature."[6]
See also
Footnotes
- ↑ Democrats reclaimed two seats left vacant prior to the election. Republicans reclaimed a single vacant seat.
- ↑ 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.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Excludes unopposed elections
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 followthemoney.org, "Contributions to candidates and committees in elections in Michigan," accessed July 28, 2015
- ↑ This map relies on data collected in July 2015.
- ↑ Michigan State Legislature, "Michigan Constitution," accessed March 28, 2014
