PPL-US_EAG-LEAL_FM.qxd 5/19/2006 4:06 PM Page i Electing America’s Governors: The Politics of Executive Elections David L. Leal PPL-US_EAG-LEAL_FM.qxd 5/19/2006 4:06 PM Page ii ELECTING AMERICA’S GOVERNORS Copyright © David L. Leal, 2006. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embod- ied in critical articles or reviews. First published in 2006 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN™ 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010 and Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, England RG21 6XS. Companies and representatives throughout the world. PALGRAVE MACMILLAN is the global academic imprint of the Palgrave Macmillan division of St. Martin’s Press, LLC and of Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. Macmillan® is a reg- istered trademark in the United States, United Kingdom and other countries. Palgrave is a registered trademark in the European Union and other countries. ISBN-13: 978-1-4039-7528-7 ISBN-10: 1-4039-7528-0 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Leal, David L. Electing America’s governors: the politics of executive elections/David L. Leal. p. cm. Includes bibliographic references (p.). ISBN 1-4039-7528-0 1. Governors—United States—Election. I. Title. JK2447.L43 2006 324.973—dc22 2006041578 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Design by Macmillan India Ltd. First edition: September 2006 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Printed in the United States of America. PPL-US_EAG-LEAL_FM.qxd 5/19/2006 4:06 PM Page iii Table of Contents List of Figures iv List of Tables v Preface vii 1 Introduction: Why Study How Governors Are Elected? 1 2 Election Outcomes: Campaign Expenditures and Candidate Quality 19 3 Election Outcomes: State and National Economic and Social Conditions 41 4 Voter Turnout: Competition, Candidates, and Conditions 65 5 Candidate Quality Revisited 81 6 Gubernatorial versus Senate Election Dynamics: Progressive Ambition 99 7 Gubernatorial versus Senate Election Dynamics: Electoral Competition and Campaign Intensity 121 8 Gubernatorial versus Senate Election Dynamics: Third-Party and Independent Campaigns 157 9 Conclusions 189 Notes 211 Bibliography 229 PPL-US_EAG-LEAL_FM.qxd 5/19/2006 4:06 PM Page iv List of Figures 7.1 Comparison of partisan outcomes in states with simultaneous open seat gubernatorial and Senate elections 145 7.2 Comparison of partisan outcomes in states with simultaneous incumbent gubernatorial and Senate elections 146 7.3 Comparison of electoral intensity in states with simultaneous open seat gubernatorial and Senate elections 147 7.4 Comparison of electoral intensity in states with simultaneous incumbent gubernatorial and Senate elections 147 8.1 Total gubernatorial nonaligned percentage vote: 1980–1996 175 8.2 Total Senate nonaligned percentage vote: 1980–1996 176 PPL-US_EAG-LEAL_FM.qxd 5/19/2006 4:06 PM Page v List of Tables 2.1 Second stage of 2SLS analysis of incumbent and open seat gubernatorial elections 33 2.2 OLS gubernatorial election models 37 3.1 Second stage of 2SLS regression for retrospective voting in incumbent elections 58 4.1 Incumbent and open seat election turnout models 75 5.1 Models of challenger quality and challenger expenditures 93 6.1 Models of political ambition 115 7.1 Comparison of ratios for gubernatorial and Senate incumbent and open seat races 129 7.2 Number of hard-fought and low-key gubernatorial elections, 1980–1996 131 7.3 Comparing hard-fought and low-key gubernatorial and Senate incumbent and open seat elections, 1980–1996 132 7.4 Average campaign finance expenditures for gubernatorial and Senate candidates in incumbent elections 134 7.5 Challenger profile in incumbent gubernatorial elections, 1980–1996 138 7.6 Challenger profile in open seat gubernatorial races, 1980–1996 139 7.7 Comparing challenger profile in incumbent gubernatorial and Senate races, 1980–1996 141 7.8 Comparing challenger profile in open seat gubernatorial and Senate races, 1980–1996 141 PPL-US_EAG-LEAL_FM.qxd 5/19/2006 4:06 PM Page vi vi LIST OF TABLES 7.9 Success of Democratic gubernatorial and Senate open seat candidates, 1980–1996 144 8.1 Expenditures and vote percentages for 1994 independent and third-party candidates 174 PPL-US_EAG-LEAL_FM.qxd 5/19/2006 4:06 PM Page vii Preface I am happy to publish this book at a time when the study of state pol- itics is coming into its own. Not very long ago, it seemed that few cared about the states. While some outside the field occasionally repeated the well-known phrase that states were “laboratories of democracy,” they rarely said it as if they meant it. My interest in state politics was kindled by the work of a small number of foresighted scholars who carried the flag and waited for the political science discipline to catch up with them. Since that time, we have seen the beginning of a well-respected journal (State Politics & Policy Quarterly), the creation of an annual state politics conference, and a growing state politics organized section in the American Political Science Association (APSA). “Real world” political observers also seem more interested in state politics, state political figures, and state- national relations. I hope that these positive trends continue, as schol- ars and practitioners alike have much to learn from the study of the states and our federal system. I would first like to acknowledge the people who assisted me with this project by discussing ideas, reading drafts, providing comments on chapters and conference papers, sharing data, and generally encouraging my study of state politics. They include Morris Fiorina, Gary King, Steve Ansolabehere, and Thad Beyle, as well as Richard Winters, Jeff Cohen, Jim King, Tom Carsey, Larry Sabato, and Ken Meier. I also acknowledge the more general but no less valuable sup- port and encouragement of the late H. Douglas Price, Michael Shinagel, Jim Campbell, Frank Zagare, Charles Lamb, Frederick Hess, Brad Mann, Maurits van der Veen, Sean Johnson, and David Pervin. I would also like to acknowledge the support of the National Science Foundation, the Mellon Foundation, Harvard University, the State University of New York at Buffalo, and the University of Texas at Austin for helping to make this project possible. This book is dedicated to my mother, Esther Leal, for all she has done for me over the years. My wife, Kelley, deserves innumerable thanks for all her support. My late father and grandfather, Louis and PPL-US_EAG-LEAL_FM.qxd 5/19/2006 4:06 PM Page viii viii PREFACE Pedro, were sources of humor, support, inspiration, and encourage- ment for many years. My grandmother, Marian, a former high school English teacher, provided a very practical assistance by editing much of the manuscript. Because of space considerations, some material could not be included in this book. This includes the first-stage regressions for the two-stage least-squares (2SLS) regression models in Chapters 2 and 3, the descriptive statistics for the dependent and independent vari- ables used in the empirical chapters, and the discussion of the sources and codings of the variables (although the key variables are already discussed in the chapters). This information can be obtained from the author, who can be contacted at [email protected]. One day in 1972, when I was four years old, I announced my sup- port for Richard Nixon in that year’s presidential contest. When my parents asked why, I said it was because he was one of Santa’s rein- deer. I hope that my understanding of the political system has improved over time, but it is up to the reader to decide. PPL-US_EAG-LEAL_ch001.qxd 5/14/2006 10:38 AM Page 1 1 Introduction: Why Study How Governors Are Elected? For the last two decades, political scientists have exhaustively studied congressional elections but have paid much less attention to how gov- ernors are elected.1 This leads to two related questions: What explains this overwhelming attention to House and Senate elections, and Why should we care how governors are elected? A starting point for answering these questions is that the relative importance of state and federal offices has not remained constant over the twentieth century. Since the Great Depression, federal offices have been largely considered more important than state governorships. As Sabato (1983, xiii) pointed out, for decades “most of the significant developments and innovations in government originated in Washington, D.C.” State governments, in contrast, have been perceived by many as backward, lethargic, or in need of federal oversight. Kaplan and O’Brien (1991, vii) noted that in the 1960s and 1970s, doubts that the states could be counted on to make social policy seemed confirmed by reality. Governors and their aides were rarely asked to attend federal policy conferences in Washington. Very few states seemed to care about the tremendous growth in federal aid pro- grams directed at poverty and social-welfare issues. Federal/city rela- tionships supplanted federal/state linkages, constituting, in effect, a de facto constitutional amendment. However, this national distribution of power changed as states, and therefore their governors, regained power vis-à-vis the federal gov- ernment.2 Hanson (1998, 20) wrote that the states “now occupy a central position in domestic policymaking under the New Federalism.”3 As Herzik (1991, 25) put it, “the quality of life enjoyed, and indeed expected, by most Americans is in large part a PPL-US_EAG-LEAL_ch001.qxd 5/14/2006 10:38 AM Page 2 2 ELECTING AMERICA’S GOVERNORS function of state government policy.” State governments have not only grown into active participants in the policy game, but they some- times even drive national policy debates.