An Uncontested Government
A new revolution in civic engagement is needed in Massachusetts
In 1779, in between sojourns abroad to lobby for the American cause, John Adams drafted the Massachusetts Constitution. Tasked by the second constitutional convention, the revolutionary lawyer would craft a document that still today is considered one of the finest examples of constitutional writing.
Approved by the voters the following June, this new state constitution set forth a brilliant vision of a commonwealth that is “formed by a voluntary association of individuals… a social compact, by which the whole people covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people.” And the success of this social compact would depend upon an active citizenry willing to keep power in check, as “the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity and happiness require it.”1
Just a few years shy of a quarter millennium since adoption, a danger has arisen in the practical functions of our representative system, from which I would posit that we need a revolution in civic engagement if we are to correct course.
In the 2024 election cycle, the state of Massachusetts held 241 primaries in which, ostensibly, candidates would be vying for a ballot position in the November general election (52 state senate primaries2 and 189 state house primaries3).
Across the 52 primaries for state senate, only 6 were contested; the other 46 primaries had only one candidate on the ballot. And of the 189 primaries for state house, only 27 were contested. That means, in the entirety of the 2024 primary season, across both political parties, a remarkable 86.3% of candidates ran uncontested.
This has a meaningful impact on voter behavior. In an uncontested state senate primary, we saw a 12.3% median reduction in total voters; meanwhile, in an uncontested state house primary, we saw a median reduction of 34.4%!
Furthermore, largely due to the near-uniparty dynamic of modern Massachusetts politics, a sizable number of seats in the general election were also uncontested. Of the 40 state senate seats and 160 state house seats, 72% were uncontested.
When a general election has only one candidate on the ballot, impacts on voter behavior are just as substantial. In an uncontested state senate election, we saw a 26.4% median reduction in total voters; and in an uncontested state house election, we saw a median reduction of 24.6%! That is a significant number of lost votes, with likely impacts across national elections and ballot questions.
And there are times when these conditions can combine…
Of the 28 state senate seats that went uncontested in the general election, 24 of them also went uncontested in the primary. Assuming districts are roughly proportional to population, that means roughly 4.2 million citizens had, for all practical purposes, no choices in selecting their representative to the state senate.
Of the 116 state house seats that went uncontested in the general election, 103 of them also went uncontested in the primary. Again, assuming districts are roughly proportional to population, that means approximately 3.6 million citizens had, for all practical purposes, no choices in selecting their representative to the state house.
Put more simply, across all 200 seats up for grabs in the state legislature in 2024, 63.5% of them were decided before any ballots were even printed.
This is a remarkable and terrifying lack of citizen participation. And I am casting no specific judgments on any individual candidate— many of these election winners will be wonderful and thoughtful representatives in 2025— but representative democracy cannot truly thrive without choices. A candidate, even an incumbent, that wins an election without any public contest of ideas is, philosophically, if not practically, illegitimate. The voters were given no opportunity to consider alternatives.
As one might expect, this statewide phenomenon has contributed to why Massachusetts has, unfortunately, seen consistent drops in voter turnout for the last several decades. As recently as 1992, we had 84.2% turnout in a Presidential election year; and yet, in 2024, we had 68.3% turnout. And declines in non-Presidential elections years are even more stark, dropping from 75.4% in 1990 to 51.4% in 2022.4
Massachusetts, with an estimated 2024 population of 7.13 million, should have no trouble identifying at least 800 citizens willing to vie for 200 seats (and, in a healthy and thriving democracy, there should be considerably more). Even in districts with a well-liked incumbent likely to be re-elected, it should not be an impossible task to find a few citizens with competing ideas to give the public a chance to reconsider.
In our state, the bar for candidacy is quite low. To participate in a party primary, a candidate need only be a member of the party for 90 days prior to the filing deadline (and be a member of no other political party for one year prior); and collect the requisite number of nominating signatures from their district (150 for a state house seat, and 300 for a state senate seat). That’s it. There is no filing fee, nor does state party leadership need to consent to the nomination. If one wishes to run independent, the bar is even lower, with only the requisite signatures being necessary.
It is not lost on me that serving as a representative is not the simplest of tasks. Massachusetts is a professional legislature (at least in theory), and representatives are expected to provide a full-time commitment to their civic responsibilities. And many of us, for a variety of reasons, are unable to make such a commitment. But I still come back to the numbers, and find it hard to believe that a population of our size and diversity cannot muster solid candidacy across all seats.
A change in civic attitude is required.
As we watch our legislature preparing to try to usurp or circumvent the recent public demand of transparency (in the passage of ballot question one), we must look within ourselves and recognize that our low civic engagement has fostered a culture of poor accountability to the public, which is then a culture ripe for corruption. In the birthplace of the American revolution, Massachusetts will require another revolution, this time in civic participation, in order to right this listing ship. In the years ahead, more of us must find the will to jump into the fray.
As was once well-said by the aforementioned Adams, “the greatest care should be employed in constituting this Representative Assembly. It should be in miniature, an exact portrait of the people at large. It should think, feel, reason, and act like them. That it may be the interest of this Assembly to do strict justice at all times, it should be an equal representation, or in other words equal interest among the people should have equal interest in it. Great care should be taken to effect this, and to prevent unfair, partial, and corrupt elections.”5
Let us demand more from our representation, no matter the difficulties and sacrifices that it may yet require; the people of Massachusetts deserve it.
learn more: www.contesteveryseat.com
Ballotpedia: Massachusetts State Senate elections, 2024
Ballotpedia: Massachusetts House of Representatives elections, 2024
Massachusetts Historical Society: Thoughts on Government