3
take the next step and generate some simple statistics to support their assertions. What are the
general findings with regard to partisanship? Alexander (1916) and Dempsey (1956) argue that
partisanship has always been the overriding factor in deciding contested election cases.
Rammelkamp (1905) and Barnett (1939), on the other hand, argue that partisanship was a
significant factor in the nineteenth century, especially the period after the Civil War, but not in
the twentieth century.
Thus, much work needs to be done to make the contested election process in the House,
and the factors that influence it, transparent. The remainder of this paper will endeavor to be a
first effort in that regard. By the end of the paper, I believe significant strides will be made, both
in developing a fuller understanding of contested elections but also in identifying additional,
related questions to pursue in the future.
II. Background Context
Before proceeding to an analysis of contested elections, and an investigation of the
impact of partisanship on outcomes, I first provide some background context. In the following
three subsections, I describe the historical mode of procedure in contested election cases, present
an overview of contested election cases across time, and recount several interesting and
noteworthy cases.
Mode of Procedure in Contested Election Cases
Shortly after convening in the first session of the First Congress, the House appointed a
standing committee – the Committee on Elections – to devise a procedure for investigating
contested election cases. The Committee on Elections recommended that it play a strictly
clerical role, wherein it would collect all available evidence and report it back to the chamber, so
Convention