State Legislatures 1993-2017

[ElectionsGuy]

Red - Both chambers held by Democrats
Green - One chamber held by Democrats, other by Republicans
Blue - Both chambers held by Republicans
Gold - One chamber tied, one chamber held by Democrats
White - One chamber tied, one chamber held by Republicans

After 1992

After 1994

After 1996

After 1998

After 2000

After 2002

After 2004

After 2006

After 2008

After 2010

After 2012

After 2014

[Ebsy]

Depressing.

[Türkisblau]

Very depressing. Thanks Obama.

[SATW]

This is awesome.

[rbt48]

Thanks for this outstanding effort!  Great work, ElectionsGuy.

[smoltchanov]

Really great work. And, really, VERY depressing for partisan Democrats...

[Mr.Phips]

Very depressing. Thanks Obama.

This is the result of the DNC tearing down the 50 state strategy. That 2010 election is going to haunt Democrats for a long time, much like 1958 had affects for Republicans for decades. 

[smoltchanov]

Very depressing. Thanks Obama.

This is the result of the DNC tearing down the 50 state strategy. That 2010 election is going to haunt Democrats for a long time, much like 1958 had affects for Republicans for decades. 

To continue that policy Democrats needed to run in the South a lot of candidates with views ranging from simply conservative to very conservative. That wouldn't please main Democratic donors from NYC, Los Angeles, Bay Area and so on. And, most important, they needed to "isolate" somehow, say, Alabama's and Mississipi's Democratic parties from national Obama's Administration. That worked half century ago, when conservative candidate could run as "Mississippi's Democrat, not national Democrat", but became more and more difficult with years. Changes in the state Democratic parties were also substantial: for example - the above mentioned southern Democratic parties became more liberal and much more black with years (in some Deep south states every new black vote after initial explosion in late 60-th - early 70th probably cost Democrats 2-3 white votes). That "white bleeding" made Democratic parties almost irrelevant in the South outside black, or (as in Texas or Florida) hispanics areas. Now, the only hope Democrats have in that states are demographic changes, but they happen VERY slowly. So, strategically (say, by 2065) Democrats may have upper hand even in the South, but all "tactical initiative", most likely, belongs to Republicans.

And many members of "hardworking working class" in Appalachian (and similar) areas feel that Democratic partiy cares much more about minorities then about them (a feeling they didn't have in FDR or even LBJ time) and vote ... acoordingly. Many of them were Democrats strictly because of economy, and they don't have (or, at least, they think so) that reason now.

[Flake]

The Republican domination of state legislatures in the country is due to Republicans' very successful organization of these districts and their work has pushed many state legislatures from the Democratic column to the Republican column. Blaming President Obama for this is ignoring the fact that Democrats have completely ignored state legislatures for far too long and never recognized the importance of keeping these chambers for the Democrats.

[smoltchanov]

The Republican domination of state legislatures in the country is due to Republicans' very successful organization of these districts and their work has pushed many state legislatures from the Democratic column to the Republican column. Blaming President Obama for this is ignoring the fact that Democrats have completely ignored state legislatures for far too long and never recognized the importance of keeping these chambers for the Democrats.

Of course. No one would dispute that. Nevertheless, both Obama's personality and his politics played an important role: he is, surely, not among the strongest (and smartest) presidents. FDR will remain an ideal for me on both counts. Obama is not FDR.... (remember "Senator, you are not Jack Kennedy"?)

[Ebsy]

Democrats have been trying to find our next FDR since 1945. We probably just have to accept that it is never going to happen.

[Maxwell]

The Republican domination of state legislatures in the country is due to Republicans' very successful organization of these districts and their work has pushed many state legislatures from the Democratic column to the Republican column. Blaming President Obama for this is ignoring the fact that Democrats have completely ignored state legislatures for far too long and never recognized the importance of keeping these chambers for the Democrats.

Of course. No one would dispute that. Nevertheless, both Obama's personality and his politics played an important role: he is, surely, not among the strongest (and smartest) presidents. FDR will remain an ideal for me on both counts. Obama is not FDR.... (remember "Senator, you are not Jack Kennedy"?)

I'd say Obama is plenty smart, but he's doesn't have a strong stomach for being a Washington Operator, which has reflected in a relative lack of accomplishments.

[Ebsy]

The Republican domination of state legislatures in the country is due to Republicans' very successful organization of these districts and their work has pushed many state legislatures from the Democratic column to the Republican column. Blaming President Obama for this is ignoring the fact that Democrats have completely ignored state legislatures for far too long and never recognized the importance of keeping these chambers for the Democrats.

Of course. No one would dispute that. Nevertheless, both Obama's personality and his politics played an important role: he is, surely, not among the strongest (and smartest) presidents. FDR will remain an ideal for me on both counts. Obama is not FDR.... (remember "Senator, you are not Jack Kennedy"?)

I'd say Obama is plenty smart, but he's doesn't have a strong stomach for being a Washington Operator, which has reflected in a relative lack of accomplishments.

[url]http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/[/img]

[ElectionsGuy]

Number of Southern Legislatures that are Democratic:

1993 - 27/28
1995 - 24/28
1997 - 22/28
1999 - 22/28
2001 - 20/28
2003 - 18/28
2005 - 15/28
2007 - 13/28
2009 - 15/28
2011 - 7/28
2013 - 3/28
2015 - 1/28

Number of overall legislatures held by Democrats:

1993 - 65/99
1995 - 46/99
1997 - 50/99
1999 - 51/99
2001 - 48/99
2003 - 44/99
2005 - 47/99
2007 - 56/99
2009 - 62/99
2011 - 38/99
2013 - 39/99
2014 - 30/99

[smoltchanov]

So, even without South, number of Democratic legislatures fell from 38 in 1993 to 29 in 2015. Not especially good... Though - better then 22 in 1995

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

These state legislatures will fall in line in 2018; when IL; NJ; NM; MI, and MD hopefully will elect Democratic govs. 

[Indy Texas]

Very depressing. Thanks Obama.

This is the result of the DNC tearing down the 50 state strategy. That 2010 election is going to haunt Democrats for a long time, much like 1958 had affects for Republicans for decades. 

Republicans - and particularly technically non-partisan interest groups that support Republicans - very wisely figured out that the "ROI" on downballot legislative races and on judicial races is much higher than chasing after the presidency and governorships.

That strategy really came into full force in the 1990s, but it originated in a letter that Lewis Powell wrote to the US Chamber of Commerce before being nominated to the SCOTUS. Elect "business-friendly" judges in low-level judicial elections that no one else pays attention to; eventually they will serve as the bench for appointments or elections to higher courts. Elect county commissioners, state legislators, etc, and you've got a pipeline of candidates for higher office who you already know will be "reliable."

Democrats very foolishly let their lower level infrastructure coast along on the assumption that unions would do the heavy lifting in the North and the "good ol' boy" network would continue to hold together in the South.

Now they're in the wilderness, and unlike the Republicans in the mid-20th century, the Democrats do not have an army of well-to-do housewives with nothing better to do and true-believing businessmen with plenty of money and connections to throw at their cause.

[Hydera]

Very depressing. Thanks Obama.

This is the result of the DNC tearing down the 50 state strategy. That 2010 election is going to haunt Democrats for a long time, much like 1958 had affects for Republicans for decades. 

Republicans - and particularly technically non-partisan interest groups that support Republicans - very wisely figured out that the "ROI" on downballot legislative races and on judicial races is much higher than chasing after the presidency and governorships.

That strategy really came into full force in the 1990s, but it originated in a letter that Lewis Powell wrote to the US Chamber of Commerce before being nominated to the SCOTUS. Elect "business-friendly" judges in low-level judicial elections that no one else pays attention to; eventually they will serve as the bench for appointments or elections to higher courts. Elect county commissioners, state legislators, etc, and you've got a pipeline of candidates for higher office who you already know will be "reliable."

Democrats very foolishly let their lower level infrastructure coast along on the assumption that unions would do the heavy lifting in the North and the "good ol' boy" network would continue to hold together in the South.

Now they're in the wilderness, and unlike the Republicans in the mid-20th century, the Democrats do not have an army of well-to-do housewives with nothing better to do and true-believing businessmen with plenty of money and connections to throw at their cause.

When democrat's started to decline in rural areas it would be inevitable that they would lose state legislatures much easier than before.

But even  if democrats use the anti-incumbency mid-term advantage when a republican is in power. The decline of support in democrat areas will mean even those would just be temporary euphoria.

For some reason its hard for people to accept that the new deal coalition that made the party dominant in the south is dead and in the dumpster for a very long time.

[Skill and Chance]

Thanks for putting this together.  It basically tells us that the McCain Democrats have finally been wiped out.  It's worth noting that much of this trend happened on maps that were influenced by and even outright controlled by Democrats.  As best I can tell, this is what control of redistricting looked like in 2001.  Note that the one Southern chamber where Democrats have managed to hold on reasonably well, the VA state senate, was drawn by Republicans in 2001.  Green is split control or a deal by the party in control, yellow is non-partisan, 60% shading means one-party control due to veto-proof majority or other special circumstances:

Clearly, redistricting isn't everything.  I fully expect that the bottom will fall out for the downballot GOP in a similar manner in the Bush-Obama states the next time Republicans have full federal control.  The realignment just isn't complete quite yet.

[Mr.Phips]

Thanks for putting this together.  It basically tells us that the McCain Democrats have finally been wiped out.  It's worth noting that much of this trend happened on maps that were influenced by and even outright controlled by Democrats.  As best I can tell, this is what control of redistricting looked like in 2001.  Note that the one Southern chamber where Democrats have managed to hold on reasonably well, the VA state senate, was drawn by Republicans in 2001.  Green is split control or a deal by the party in control, yellow is non-partisan, 60% shading means one-party control due to veto-proof majority or other special circumstances:

Clearly, redistricting isn't everything.  I fully expect that the bottom will fall out for the downballot GOP in a similar manner in the Bush-Obama states the next time Republicans have full federal control.  The realignment just isn't complete quite yet.

Well 2001 had a lot more "fair fight" maps than 2011 and Dems got lucky when the GOP drew a crummy map in.PA.

[Skill and Chance]

Very depressing. Thanks Obama.

This is the result of the DNC tearing down the 50 state strategy. That 2010 election is going to haunt Democrats for a long time, much like 1958 had affects for Republicans for decades. 

Republicans - and particularly technically non-partisan interest groups that support Republicans - very wisely figured out that the "ROI" on downballot legislative races and on judicial races is much higher than chasing after the presidency and governorships.

That strategy really came into full force in the 1990s, but it originated in a letter that Lewis Powell wrote to the US Chamber of Commerce before being nominated to the SCOTUS. Elect "business-friendly" judges in low-level judicial elections that no one else pays attention to; eventually they will serve as the bench for appointments or elections to higher courts. Elect county commissioners, state legislators, etc, and you've got a pipeline of candidates for higher office who you already know will be "reliable."

Democrats very foolishly let their lower level infrastructure coast along on the assumption that unions would do the heavy lifting in the North and the "good ol' boy" network would continue to hold together in the South.

Now they're in the wilderness, and unlike the Republicans in the mid-20th century, the Democrats do not have an army of well-to-do housewives with nothing better to do and true-believing businessmen with plenty of money and connections to throw at their cause.

Really? I'm pretty sure 35-40% of stay-at-home moms still vote Democratic today.  Back in the mid-20th century, when almost everyone who could afford to do that did, it's likely about half were Democrats.  There seems to be a weird conservative housewife obsession on this board.  In Texas, that demographic may be near unanimously R (even there, what about the Hispanic community?), but that's far from the case nationally.

[freepcrusher]

I fully expect that the bottom will fall out for the downballot GOP in a similar manner in the Bush-Obama states the next time Republicans have full federal control.  The realignment just isn't complete quite yet.

I expect those SW Wisconsin seats to go dem next time an R is in the whitehouse.

[Flake]

^ could you edit that so the page doesn't go so long, please?

[Frodo]

Will Kentucky Democrats be able to stop the hemorrhaging once President Obama leaves office, or are there deeper forces at work that will likely doom them ultimately to minority status like their counterparts in Arkansas and West Virginia -regardless of who is elected President next year?

And I am open to answers from anyone other than the one-note Bandit.... 

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Will Kentucky Democrats be able to stop the hemorrhaging once President Obama leaves office, or are there deeper forces at work that will likely doom them ultimately to minority status like their counterparts in Arkansas and West Virginia -regardless of who is elected President next year?

And I am open to answers from anyone other than the one-note Bandit.... 

Kentucky isn't rural enough or Southern enough for the Republicans to win more support - especially since the Kentucky GOP is more extreme than other state GOP's.

The time for the GOP to win the Kentucky House was 2010 or 2014. That ship has sailed.