Tennessee House of Representatives elections, 2016
 |
Presidential • U.S. House • State Senate • State House • State judges • Local judges • State ballot measures • School boards • Candidate ballot access |
 |
| 2016 Tennessee House Elections | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Primary | August 4, 2016 |
| General | November 8, 2016 |
| 2016 Election Results | |
| 2014・2012・2010・2008 2006・2004・2002・2000 | |
| 2016 Elections | |
|---|---|
| Choose a chamber below: | |
All 99 seats in the Tennessee House of Representatives were up for election in 2016. Republicans gained one seat in the chamber after the November 2016 election.
Introduction
Elections for the Tennessee House of Representatives took place in 2016. The primary election was held on August 4, 2016, and the general election was held on November 8, 2016. The candidate filing deadline was April 7, 2016.
Majority control
- See also: Partisan composition of state houses
Heading into the election, the Republican Party held the majority in the Tennessee House of Representatives:
| Tennessee House of Representatives | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Party | As of November 7, 2016 | After November 8, 2016 | |
| Democratic Party | 25 | 25 | |
| Republican Party | 72 | 74 | |
| Vacancy | 2 | 0 | |
| Total | 99 | 99 | |
Retired incumbents
Five incumbent representatives did not run for re-election in 2016. Those incumbents were:
| Name | Party | Current Office |
|---|---|---|
| Jon Lundberg | House District 1 | |
| Richard B. Womick | House District 34 | |
| David Shepard | House District 69 | |
| Billy Spivey | House District 92 | |
| Jamie Jenkins | House District 94 |
Note: Incumbent Joe Armstrong (D-15) was removed from the general election ballot after his conviction on August 8, 2016, of filing a false tax return. He was replaced on the ballot by Rick Staples. Armstrong resigned from the state House on September 12, 2016.
Note: Incumbent Jeremy Durham (R-65) was expelled from the legislature on September 13, 2016. He was defeated in the Republican primary.
Races we watched
Ballotpedia identified three notable Tennessee state legislative races in 2016, all three of which were state House contests.
Click here to read more about Ballotpedia's coverage of notable Tennessee races »
Primary contests
- A Republican candidate challenged the Republican incumbent to a rematch.
- ☑ Martin Daniel (Inc.) ☐ James Corcoran ☐ Bryan Dodson ☐ Steve Hall
- Three Republican candidates competed to challenge the Democratic incumbent in a closely divided district.
- ☑ Paul Sherrell ☐ Sam Elder ☐ Bob Robinson
General election contests
- A Democratic candidate challenged the Republican incumbent to a rematch.
- ☑ Eddie Smith (Inc.) ☐ Gloria Johnson
List of candidates
General election
| 2016 Tennessee House general election candidates | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| District | Other | ||
| 1 | No candidate | John Crawford |
|
| 2 | J. S. Moore: 4,940 | Bud Hulsey: 20,334 (I) |
|
| 3 | No candidate | Timothy Hill: 19,316 (I) |
Gary Kawula: 3,129 (Ind.) |
| 4 | No candidate | John Holsclaw Jr. (I) |
|
| 5 | No candidate | David Hawk (I) |
|
| 6 | John Baker: 6,807 | James Van Huss: 18,213 (I) |
|
| 7 | Nancy Fischman: 6,840 | Matthew Hill: 14,385 (I) |
|
| 8 | No candidate | Art Swann (I) |
|
| 9 | No candidate | Gary Hicks: 15,536 (I) |
John Neubert: 4,516 (Ind.) |
| 10 | No candidate | Tilman Goins (I) |
|
| 11 | Marjorie Ramsey: 4,374 | Jeremy Faison: 15,318 (I) |
|
| 12 | No candidate | Dale Carr (I) |
|
| 13 | Gloria Johnson: 11,011 | Eddie Smith: 11,162 (I) |
|
| 14 | Scott Hacker: 9,235 | Jason Zachary: 24,849 (I) |
|
| 15 | Rick Staples: 9,242 |
No candidate | Pete Drew: 4,968 (Ind.) |
| 16 | No candidate | Bill Dunn (I) |
|
| 17 | No candidate | Andrew Farmer (I) |
|
| 18 | Brandi Price: 10,742 | Martin Daniel: 15,572 (I) |
|
| 19 | No candidate | Harry Brooks (I) |
|
| 20 | No candidate | Robert Ramsey: 19,106 (I) |
Sam Duck: 4,669 (Ind.) |
| 21 | Pamela Weston: 5,447 | Jimmy Matlock: 21,087 (I) |
William Vandever: 916 (Ind.) |
| 22 | Anna Miller Grabowski: 4,486 | Dan Howell: 20,064 (I) |
|
| 23 | No candidate | John W. Forgety: 19,998 (I) |
Daniel Housley: 3,337 (Ind.) |
| 24 | No candidate | Kevin Brooks (I) |
|
| 25 | Judy Barnett: 6,077 | Cameron Sexton: 22,335 (I) |
|
| 26 | No candidate | Gerald McCormick (I) |
|
| 27 | Steve Gordon: 8,142 | Patsy Hazlewood: 20,995 (I) |
|
| 28 | Joanne Favors (I) |
No candidate | |
| 29 | No candidate | Mike Carter (I) |
|
| 30 | Katie R. Cowley: 8,622 | Marc Gravitt: 17,044 (I) |
Patrick Hickey: 916 (Ind.) |
| 31 | No candidate | Ron Travis (I) |
|
| 32 | Corey B. Stafford: 3,409 | Kent Calfee: 15,627 (I) |
Tyler Overstreet: 5,836 (Ind.) |
| 33 | Michael S. McKamey: 8,057 | John Ragan: 15,743 (I) |
|
| 34 | Laura Bohling: 9,939 | Tim Rudd: 19,962 |
|
| 35 | No candidate | Jerry Sexton (I) |
|
| 36 | Bob Fannon: 5,297 | Dennis Powers: 13,944 (I) |
|
| 37 | Becky Goff: 9,640 | Dawn White: 14,744 (I) |
|
| 38 | F. Mike Campbell: 3,841 | Kelly Keisling: 16,988 (I) |
|
| 39 | Nancy Silvertooth: 7,522 | David Alexander: 15,920 (I) |
|
| 40 | Gayla Colvert Hendrix: 7,450 | Terri Lynn Weaver: 20,364 (I) |
|
| 41 | John Windle: 12,238 (I) |
Ed Butler: 10,021 | |
| 42 | Amos Powers: 5,986 | Ryan Williams: 17,486 (I) |
|
| 43 | Kevin Dunlap: 10,213 (I) | Paul Sherrell: 11,692 |
|
| 44 | Lloyd Dunn: 5,642 | William G. Lamberth: 18,009 (I) |
|
| 45 | No candidate | Courtney Rogers (I) |
|
| 46 | Amelia Morrison Hipps: 6,589 | Mark Pody: 19,785 (I) |
|
| 47 | No candidate | Judd Matheny (I) |
|
| 48 | Justin Miller: 8,726 | Bryan Terry: 16,381 (I) |
|
| 49 | Brandon Thomas: 8,604 | Mike Sparks: 13,531 (I) |
|
| 50 | Bo Mitchell: 15,188 (I) |
Nathan Massey: 13,861 | |
| 51 | Bill Beck (I) |
No candidate | |
| 52 | Mike Stewart (I) |
No candidate | |
| 53 | Jason Powell: 12,457 (I) |
Davette Blalock: 9,208 | |
| 54 | Brenda Gilmore: 19,782 (I) |
No candidate | Robert Sawyers, Sr.: 3,251 (Ind.) |
| 55 | John Ray Clemmons (I) |
No candidate | |
| 56 | Chris Moth: 15,224 | Beth Harwell: 21,069 (I) |
|
| 57 | Trisha Farmer: 10,870 | Susan Lynn: 24,444 (I) |
|
| 58 | Harold M. Love (I) |
No candidate | |
| 59 | Sherry Jones (I) |
No candidate | |
| 60 | Darren Jernigan: 15,103 (I) |
Steve Glover: 11,799 | |
| 61 | No candidate | Charles Sargent, Jr. (I) |
|
| 62 | Sharon Kay Edwards: 4,824 | Pat Marsh: 15,954 (I) |
|
| 63 | Courtenay Rogers: 11,125 | Glen Casada: 28,390 (I) |
|
| 64 | No candidate | Sheila Butt: 19,984 (I) |
James Gray: 7,516 (Ind.) |
| 65 | Holly McCall: 8,947 | Sam Whitson: 21,649 |
|
| 66 | Larry Proffitt: 6,589 | Sabi Kumar: 18,432 (I) |
|
| 67 | Joe Pitts: 10,564 (I) |
No candidate | Mike Warner: 6,562 (Ind.) |
| 68 | No candidate | Curtis Johnson (I) |
|
| 69 | Dustin Evans: 7,391 | Michael Curcio: 14,144 |
|
| 70 | Calvin Moore: 5,645 | Barry Doss: 15,365 (I) |
Roy Waldrop: 2,000 (Ind.) |
| 71 | No candidate | David Byrd (I) |
|
| 72 | No candidate | Steve McDaniel (I) |
|
| 73 | No candidate | Jimmy Eldridge (I) |
|
| 74 | Andy Porch: 8,021 | Jay Reedy: 11,260 (I) |
|
| 75 | Daniel Powell: 5,771 | Tim Wirgau: 14,816 (I) |
James Hart: 1,917 (Ind.) |
| 76 | Angela Callis: 4,327 | Andrew H. Holt: 13,038 (I) |
Bennie Castleman: 3,215 (Ind.) |
| 77 | No candidate | Bill Sanderson: 16,326 (I) |
Tom Reasons: 3,809 (Ind.) |
| 78 | Travis S. Staten: 6,539 | Mary Littleton: 18,679 (I) |
|
| 79 | No candidate | Curtis Halford (I) |
|
| 80 | Johnny Shaw (I) |
No candidate | |
| 81 | Deborah K. Reed: 4,842 | Debra Moody: 15,535 (I) |
|
| 82 | Craig Fitzhugh: 10,443 (I) |
Andy Cole: 8,220 | |
| 83 | Lawrence Pivnick: 9,506 | Mark White: 16,900 (I) |
|
| 84 | Joe Towns, Jr. (I) |
No candidate | |
| 85 | Johnnie Turner (I) |
No candidate | |
| 86 | Barbara Cooper: 14,945 (I) |
George T. Edwards: 5,442 | |
| 87 | Karen Camper (I) |
No candidate | |
| 88 | Larry Miller: 14,918 (I) |
No candidate | Orrden Williams, Jr.: 2,834 (Ind.) |
| 89 | Heather C. Hensley: 8,305 | Roger Kane: 19,735 (I) |
|
| 90 | John DeBerry, Jr. (I) |
No candidate | |
| 91 | Raumesh Akbari: 14,580 (I) |
Samuel Watkins: 3,125 | |
| 92 | Tamra King: 5,693 | Thomas R. Tillis: 16,475 |
|
| 93 | G.A. Hardaway: 13,832 (I) |
No candidate | William King: 2,666 (Ind.) |
| 94 | Daniel Harris: 6,088 | Ron M. Gant: 20,006 |
|
| 95 | No candidate | Mark Lovell |
|
| 96 | Dwayne Thompson: 14,150 |
Stephen McManus: 13,785 (I) | |
| 97 | No candidate | Jim Coley (I) |
|
| 98 | Antonio Parkinson (I) |
No candidate | |
| 99 | No candidate | Ron Lollar (I) |
|
| Notes | • An (I) denotes an incumbent. | ||
| • Candidate lists can change frequently throughout an election season. Ballotpedia staff update this list monthly. To suggest changes, click here to email our State Legislature Project. | |||
Primary election
Margins of victory
The average margin of victory for contested races in the Tennessee House of Representatives in 2016 was higher than the national average. Out of 99 races in the Tennessee House of Representatives in 2016, 62 were contested, meaning at least two candidates competed for that seat in the general election. The average margin of victory across these races was 40.7 percent. Across contested single-winner state legislative elections in 2016, the average margin of victory was 29.01 percent.[2]
| Republican candidates in the Tennessee House of Representatives saw larger margins of victory than Democratic candidates in 2016. Republicans won 74 races. In the 49 races where a winning Republican faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 42.8 percent. Democrats won 25 races in 2016. In the 13 races where a winning Democrat faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 32.9 percent. |
| More Democratic candidates than Republican candidates saw margins of victory that were less than 10 percentage points. Five of the 62 contested races in 2016—8.1 percent—saw margins of victory that were 10 percent or less. Three races saw margins of victory that were 5 percent or less. Democrats won three races with margins of victory of 10 percent or less. |
Tennessee House of Representatives: 2016 Margins of Victory Less than 10 Percent District Winning Party Margin of Victory District 13 R 0.7 percent District 41 D 10.0 percent District 43 R 6.8 percent District 50 D 4.6 percent District 96 D 1.3 percent
| The average margin of victory for incumbents in the Tennessee House of Representatives who ran for re-election and won in 2016 was higher than the national average. 89 incumbents who ran for re-election in 2016 won. The average margin of victory for the 54 winning Tennessee House of Representatives incumbents who faced a challenger in 2016 was 42.1 percent. The average margin of victory for all winning incumbents in contested single-winner state legislative elections in 2016 was 31.8 percent. |
| Republican incumbents in the Tennessee House of Representatives saw larger margins of victory than Democratic incumbents. 66 Republican incumbents won re-election. In the 43 races where a winning Republican incumbent faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 43.7 percent. 23 Democratic incumbents won re-election. In the 11 races where a winning Democratic incumbent faced a challenger, the average margin of victory was 36 percent. |
Tennessee 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 25 32.9 percent 23 36.0 percent 12 12 48.0 percent Republican 74 42.8 percent 66 43.7 percent 23 25 33.8 percent Total 99 40.7 percent 89 42.1 percent 35 37 37.4 percent
Click [show] on the tables below to see the margin of victory in Tennessee House of Representatives districts in 2016.
| Tennessee House of Representatives: 2016 Margin of Victory by District | ||
|---|---|---|
| District | Winning Party | Margin of Victory |
| District 1 | R | Unopposed |
| District 2 | R | 60.9 percent |
| District 3 | R | 72.1 percent |
| District 4 | R | Unopposed |
| District 5 | R | Unopposed |
| District 6 | R | 45.6 percent |
| District 7 | R | 35.6 percent |
| District 8 | R | Unopposed |
| District 9 | R | 55.0 percent |
| District 10 | R | Unopposed |
| District 11 | R | 55.6 percent |
| District 12 | R | Unopposed |
| District 13 | R | 0.7 percent |
| District 14 | R | 45.8 percent |
| District 15 | D | 30.1 percent |
| District 16 | R | Unopposed |
| District 17 | R | Unopposed |
| District 18 | R | 18.4 percent |
| District 19 | R | Unopposed |
| District 20 | R | 60.7 percent |
| District 21 | R | 57.0 percent |
| District 22 | R | 63.5 percent |
| District 23 | R | 71.4 percent |
| District 24 | R | Unopposed |
| District 25 | R | 57.2 percent |
| District 26 | R | Unopposed |
| District 27 | R | 44.1 percent |
| District 28 | D | Unopposed |
| District 29 | R | Unopposed |
| District 30 | R | 31.7 percent |
| District 31 | R | Unopposed |
| District 32 | R | 39.4 percent |
| District 33 | R | 32.3 percent |
| District 34 | R | 33.5 percent |
| District 35 | R | Unopposed |
| District 36 | R | 44.9 percent |
| District 37 | R | 20.9 percent |
| District 38 | R | 63.1 percent |
| District 39 | R | 35.8 percent |
| District 40 | R | 46.4 percent |
| District 41 | D | 10.0 percent |
| District 42 | R | 49.0 percent |
| District 43 | R | 6.8 percent |
| District 44 | R | 52.3 percent |
| District 45 | R | Unopposed |
| District 46 | R | 50.0 percent |
| District 47 | R | Unopposed |
| District 48 | R | 30.5 percent |
| District 49 | R | 22.3 percent |
| District 50 | D | 4.6 percent |
| District 51 | D | Unopposed |
| District 52 | D | Unopposed |
| District 53 | D | 15.0 percent |
| District 54 | D | 71.8 percent |
| District 55 | D | Unopposed |
| District 56 | R | 16.1 percent |
| District 57 | R | 38.4 percent |
| District 58 | D | Unopposed |
| District 59 | D | Unopposed |
| District 60 | D | 12.3 percent |
| District 61 | R | Unopposed |
| District 62 | R | 53.6 percent |
| District 63 | R | 43.7 percent |
| District 64 | R | 45.3 percent |
| District 65 | R | 41.5 percent |
| District 66 | R | 47.3 percent |
| District 67 | D | 23.4 percent |
| District 68 | R | Unopposed |
| District 69 | R | 31.4 percent |
| District 70 | R | 42.2 percent |
| District 71 | R | Unopposed |
| District 72 | R | Unopposed |
| District 73 | R | Unopposed |
| District 74 | R | 16.8 percent |
| District 75 | R | 40.2 percent |
| District 76 | R | 42.3 percent |
| District 77 | R | 62.2 percent |
| District 78 | R | 48.1 percent |
| District 79 | R | Unopposed |
| District 80 | D | Unopposed |
| District 81 | R | 52.5 percent |
| District 82 | D | 11.9 percent |
| District 83 | R | 28.0 percent |
| District 84 | D | Unopposed |
| District 85 | D | Unopposed |
| District 86 | D | 46.6 percent |
| District 87 | D | Unopposed |
| District 88 | D | 68.1 percent |
| District 89 | R | 40.8 percent |
| District 90 | D | Unopposed |
| District 91 | D | 64.7 percent |
| District 92 | R | 48.6 percent |
| District 93 | D | 67.7 percent |
| District 94 | R | 53.3 percent |
| District 95 | R | Unopposed |
| District 96 | D | 1.3 percent |
| District 97 | R | Unopposed |
| District 98 | D | Unopposed |
| District 99 | R | Unopposed |
Important dates and deadlines
- See also: Tennessee elections, 2016
The calendar below lists important dates for political candidates in Tennessee in 2016.
| Dates and requirements for candidates in 2016 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Deadline | Event type | Event description | |
| December 1, 2015 | Ballot access | Filing deadline for presidential primary candidates | |
| February 23, 2016 | Campaign finance | Pre-primary campaign financial disclosure reports for March county primary due | |
| March 1, 2016 | Election date | Presidential preference primary election | |
| April 7, 2016 | Ballot access | Filing deadline for partisan primary candidates and independent general election candidates | |
| April 11, 2016 | Campaign finance | First quarter campaign financial disclosure reports due | |
| April 26, 2016 | Campaign finance | Pre-primary campaign financial disclosure reports for May primary due | |
| May 3, 2016 | Election date | County primary election (if applicable) | |
| July 11, 2016 | Campaign finance | Second quarter campaign financial disclosure reports due | |
| July 28, 2016 | Campaign finance | Pre-primary campaign financial disclosure reports for August primary due | |
| July 28, 2016 | Campaign finance | Pre-general campaign financial disclosure reports for August general due | |
| August 4, 2016 | Election date | State primary and county general election (if applicable) | |
| October 11, 2016 | Campaign finance | Third quarter campaign financial disclosure reports due | |
| November 1, 2016 | Campaign finance | Pre-general campaign financial disclosure reports for November general due | |
| November 8, 2016 | Election date | General election | |
| January 25, 2017 | Campaign finance | Fourth quarter campaign financial disclosure reports due | |
| Source: Tennessee Secretary of State, "2016 Election Calendar," accessed June 12, 2015 | |||
Competitiveness
Candidates unopposed by a major party
In 48 (48.4%) of the 99 seats that were up for election in 2016, there was only one major party candidate running for election. A total of 17 Democrats and 31 Republicans were guaranteed election barring unforeseen circumstances.
Two major party candidates faced off in the general election in 51 (51.5%) of the 99 seats up for election.
Primary challenges
Twenty-seven incumbents faced primary competition on August 4. Five incumbent did not seek re-election and another 67 incumbents advanced past the primary without opposition. The following incumbents were defeated in the primary election:
- District 65: Jeremy Durham (R)
- District 95: Curry Todd (R)
Retired incumbents
Six incumbent representatives did not run for re-election, while 93 ran for re-election. Joe Armstrong (D-15) initially ran for re-election, but was removed from the ballot after his tax fraud conviction. A list of those incumbents, four Republicans and two Democrats, can be found above.
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 Comparison between years | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 2012 | 2014 | |
| Competitiveness Index | 36.2 | 35.8 | 31.4 |
| % Open Seats | 18.6% | 21.2% | 17.0% |
| % Inc that did face primary | 22.7% | 24.6% | 20.1% |
| % Candidates that did face major party opp | 67.3% | 61.7% | 57.0% |
The following table details Tennessee's rates for open seats, incumbents that faced primary challenges, and major party competition in the 2014 general election.
| Tennessee General Assembly 2014 Competitiveness | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % Open Seats | % Inc that did face primary | % Candidates that did face major party opp | Competitiveness Index | Overall rank |
| 10.3% | 25.0% | 38.5% | 24.6 | 33 |
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 Tennessee in past years and the cumulative amount of campaign contributions in State House races, including contributions in both primary and general election contests.[4]
| Tennessee House of Representatives Donations | ||
|---|---|---|
| Year | Candidates | Amount |
| 2014 | 190 | $11,155,869 |
| 2012 | 237 | $12,125,464 |
| 2010 | 219 | $9,677,792 |
| 2008 | 196 | $8,420,841 |
| 2006 | 223 | $8,380,307 |
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. Tennessee, at $58,715 per candidate, is ranked 16 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
To be eligible to serve in the Tennessee House of Representatives, a candidate must be:[6]
- A U.S. citizen
- 21 years old before the general election
- A three-year resident of Tennessee before the general election
- A county resident for 1 year prior to the general election
- A qualified voter
- The following situations would eliminate a candidate from qualifying for office:
- Those who have been convicted of offering or giving a bribe, or of larceny, or any other offense declared infamous by law, unless restored to citizenship in the mode pointed out by law;
- Those against whom there is a judgment unpaid for any moneys received by them, in any official capacity, due to the United States, to this state, or any county thereof;
- Those who are defaulters to the treasury at the time of the election, and the election of any such person shall be void;
- Soldiers, seamen, marines, or airmen in the regular army or navy or air force of the United States; and
- Members of congress, and persons holding any office of profit or trust under any foreign power, other state of the union, or under the United States.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 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.
- ↑ 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 Tennessee," accessed July 28, 2015
- ↑ This map relies on data collected in July 2015.
- ↑ Qualifications for running for Tennessee House of Representatives
