The Increasing Nationalization of Local Elections: The Case of Prosecutors

• Published date: 01 September 2024
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/10659129241256604
• Author: Jamie L. Carson,Damon Cann,Jeffrey L. Yates,Ronald F. Wright
• Date: 01 September 2024
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

Political Research Quarterly

2024, Vol. 77(3) 1026–1036

© The Author(s) 2024

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/10659129241256604

journals.sagepub.com/home/prq

The Increasing Nationalization of Local

Elections: The Case of Prosecutors

Jamie L. Carson

1

, Damon Cann

2

, Jeffrey L. Yates

3

, and

Ronald F. Wright

4

Abstract

To what extent are local races across the country being increasingly driven by politics at the national level? In this article,

we examine the nationalization of elections for state executive branches’primary front line legal actors in the criminal

courts—local prosecutors. We seek to better understand the factors inf‌luencing prosecutor election outcomes and why

these types of elections have become more nationalized in recent years. More specif‌ically, we aim to evaluate what effect

this greater nationalization has had on the electoral fates of incumbent prosecutors seeking re-election. To date, there is

a paucity of scholarship on prosecutor election outcomes within political science despite their importance historically

and in light of recent events. This article seeks to f‌ill an important gap in our understanding of what drives prosecutor

elections in the United States. More broadly, we believe this research helps us better understand how even these local

elections can be impacted by national events.

Keywords

prosecutors, elections, nationalization, state politics, president, law

During the past few decades, elections in the United States

have becoming increasingly nationalized (Carson,

Sievert, and Williamson 2024;Hopkins 2018;Jacobson

2015). Whereas electoral politics throughout much of the

twentieth century focused primarily on local factors, it is

more common today to view events through the lens of

national politics.

1

Gone are the days when factors such as

candidate experience, incumbency, ties to local political

elites and media, personal characteristics or popularity

(branding) were largely inf‌luential in determining the

outcome of individual elections. Now, alignment with the

party’s presidential candidates on specif‌ic national issues

such as abortion rights, inf‌lation, or aff‌irmative action

(among others) are driving the outcome of a growing

number of subnational electoral races. This trend has been

further magnif‌ied by the enormous sums of money

f‌lowing from outside a given region or state, especially

when races are perceived as being electorally competitive

(Baker 2022;Carson and Jacobson 2024).

This phenomena of increasing nationalization is not

limited to federal elections, however. Indeed, this pattern

of nationalization has begun affecting statewide and local

races as well. One prominent example of this trend is with

respect to races for the state executive branches’primary

f‌ield level legal off‌icers—local prosecutors around the

country. Prosecutors exercise extraordinary power within

our criminal justice system and the United States is the

only country in which these important off‌icials are elected

(Ellis 2012). With the greater saliency of issues such as

sentencing, racial incarceration disparity, and violent

crime (e.g., Heise 2015;Levine 2020;Shepherd 2002),

increasing attention has been devoted to campaigns for

local prosecutors since they play such a prominent and

inf‌luential role in the criminal justice system. This is

especially the case among the new group of what has been

termed “progressive prosecutors”who seek to rely less on

the traditional broad use of incarceration and more on

alternative forms of accountability and prevention.

Among the wealthiest donors supporting this progressive

agenda during the past few years, billionaire philan-

thropist George Soros has been singled out as leading the

University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

2

Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA

3

Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY, USA

4

Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, USA

Corresponding Author:

Jamie L. Carson, Department of Political Science, University of Georgia,

180 Baldwin Hall, Athens, GA 30602-1615, USA.

Email: carson@uga.edu