Three Professors Publish Preliminary Draft of Article Showing that Sore Loser Laws Increase Congressional Polarization

Two political science professors and one law professor have posted a preliminary copy of their article “Sore Loser Laws and Congressional Polarization” on the Social Science Research Network. The Network permits anyone to read the article free of charge, using this link. The authors are Barry C. Burden, Bradley Jones, and Michael S. Kang. The article will eventually be published in Legislative Studies Quarterly.

The article documents the increase of polarization in Congress, discusses various theories that explain the increased polarization, and then makes the case that one ignored cause of polarization is that almost all states now have “sore loser” laws. As the study explains, these laws were almost unheard of a century ago. The article has a chart, giving the year each state passed its sore loser law. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.


Comments

Three Professors Publish Preliminary Draft of Article Showing that Sore Loser Laws Increase Congressional Polarization — 3 Comments

  1. Anti-Democracy Pack/Crack gerrymanders control most of the USA.

    1/2 votes x 1/2 gerrymander concentration camps = 1/4 CONTROL indirect — nonstop EVIL/VICIOUS oligarchs / monarchs in REAL control of most lawmaking.

    Sore loser stuff is one more distraction.

    Result – destruction of older cities/suburbs, undeclared wars, national bankruptcy, etc. etc.
    —-

    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.

  2. I am dubious.

    There are so few States remaining without sore loser laws that you are looking at other factors. It would be like doing an analysis of the Top 2 primary, without recognizing that you are essentially studying Louisiana politics.

    During the period when most states were enacting their sore loser laws, polarization was increasing in both sore loser and non-sore loser States.

    And there may be a confusion between cause and effect. As ideological factions gain control of a party in the legislature, they may enact sore loser laws, as a perceived way of protecting their power.

  3. Oklahoma is one such state with no sore loser laws. If a sore loser law was passed, the only election it could potentially effect would be the Presidential election.

    Because all other offices must have their candidates filing on the same set of days prior to all primaries, there is no reason to have one for any office other than President.

    With the Presidential elections, the filing for the presidential candidate happens long after the Presidential primaries, which gives failed major party primary candidates time to gain access through a minor party that gained ballot access or by becoming an Independent. Considering both of those options are extremely difficult, it would be fruitless for a failed primary candidate to try.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.