Welcome to the Friday, July 25, Brew.
By: Briana Ryan
Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
- Five states hold elections on a day other than Tuesday
- Election timing and building an engaged electorate, by Leslie Graves, Ballotpedia Founder and CEO
- 206 years ago, Maine voters approved a ballot measure for separation from Massachusetts
Five states hold elections on a day other than Tuesday
Regular Daily Brew readers know elections don’t always fall on a Tuesday. Today, we’re taking a closer look at the five states that hold certain elections on a day other than Tuesday. We’ll also give you some background on why one of those states—Tennessee—is the only state to hold elections on a Thursday.
Before we dig into the Volunteer State, let’s check out the other four states that all hold certain elections on Saturdays:
- Hawaii holds statewide primary elections on the second Saturday in August.
- Louisiana holds second-round elections on Saturdays if necessary. Additionally, the Democratic and Republican parties can choose to hold their presidential primaries on Saturdays.
- South Carolina also allows the Democratic and Republican parties to hold their presidential primaries on Saturdays.
- Texas holds some municipal elections on the first Saturday in May, and the general runoffs for those elections happen on the first Saturday in June.
Tennessee holds primary elections for governor, U.S. Congress, and the Tennessee General Assembly on the first Thursday in August. On this date, the state also holds municipal and county general elections and retention elections for the Tennessee Supreme Court and intermediate appellate courts. Presidential primaries in Tennessee happen on Super Tuesday.
Tennessee’s Thursday election date originated in the first state constitution, drafted in 1796. The unique requirement for Thursday elections remained in the state’s second constitution, written in 1834, and the current constitution, written after the Civil War in 1870.
According to PBS, “Researchers at the Tennessee State Library and Archives said they looked back at the journals from the state’s constitutional convention and could find no reasoning for establishing Thursday as election day.” Tennessee state librarian Charles Sherrill said, “I can’t find any rationale for why Thursday was in [the state Constitution].”
Election dates and deadlines vary across the country and at different levels of government. See our elections calendar for a list of upcoming elections nationwide.
Click here to check out more information about Tennessee’s Thursday elections.
Election timing and building an engaged electorate
Outside of those elections, and the always high-profile New York City mayoral race, voters, the media, and (almost) everyone else tend to tune out politics in odd years.
Our experience is vastly different. What we’ve learned in covering elections, particularly at the local level, is that there’s no such thing as an “off-year” in politics.
As I noted in a previous column, our local elections editor said that we’ve covered at least one election every week so far this year. Our last week without an election to report on was Dec. 23, 2024 (because even politics takes time off for the holidays).
That streak of weekly election coverage won’t end until Aug. 11.
In that time, we’ll have covered more than 22,000 local races and 41,641 local candidates. In the entire 2024 presidential election year, with high-profile races going on across the country and up and down the ballot, we covered 37,000 local races and more than 44,000 local candidates.
But here’s the thing about this year’s very busy elections calendar: overall voter turnout will be significantly less than it was in 2024.
There are a number of reasons for this drop — a lack of connection between voters and local politics, for example, and the continued erosion of local media election coverage. There’s another factor, too: an absence of candidates for local offices. As our analysis of uncontested elections in the first half of the year showed, 58 percent of the nearly 22,745 elections we covered in 38 states were uncontested — meaning there was either only one candidate on the ballot, or in the worst case, no candidates at all.
It’s not uncommon for off-year local elections to be canceled in such circumstances. We’ve found this to be particularly true for local school board elections, which are held in off-years in half the country.
Uncompetitive elections, cancelled elections, low voter turnout … for anyone interested in ensuring that more people take active, engaged roles in civic life — as voters and as candidates — these are troubling signs. There are some who believe that the way to reverse low turnout and increase voter engagement is to move state and local elections on-cycle, which means holding them at the same time, in the same years, as congressional and presidential elections.
The Virginia General Assembly passed a joint resolution this year that will study the pros and cons of shifting the state’s elections calendar from off- to on-cycle years. Virginia has had off-year elections for its statewide office and the General Assembly since the mid-19th century. Any proposal to move the state’s elections from off- to on-cycle would require a voter-approved constitutional amendment, meaning that it could be the end of the decade before any such change might occur.
In recent years, we’ve covered several local ballot measures to move municipal off-cycle elections from odd-numbered years to presidential and midterm election years. Thirteen such measures were passed in 2022 in California, Colorado, Florida, and Washington. One was passed in St. Paul, Minnesota, last year. Miami, Florida’s city commission is debating a change this year, and voters in New York, New York will decide on such a measure on Nov. 4.
Moving the timing of elections may indeed boost voter turnout. It might also spur more candidates to run for office. These would all be good starts toward reviving interest in local politics.
But it’s essential that the people heading to the polls understand who the candidates are and what they stand for. Yes, we want more people to vote! But we also want those people to cast an informed, confident vote that accurately reflects their values and concerns. Their candidate might not win, but the act of becoming an informed voter will tend to make them more aware of, sensitive to, and willing to participate in the democratic process.
This is the way to build a healthy civil society that’s engaged every day, in odd and even years alike.
206 years ago, Maine voters approved a ballot measure for separation from Massachusetts
Before Maine became the 23rd state on March 15, 1820, voters weighed in on six ballot measures over three decades regarding separation from Massachusetts. Voters approved the final measure 71% to 29% 206 years ago on July 26, 1819.
After the American Revolution, Maine was part of Massachusetts. In Creating an American Identity: New England, 1789–1825, Stephanie Kermes wrote, “The movement for separation [from Massachusetts] began shortly after the American Revolution in 1784… The social, religious, and political gap between Massachusetts and the district of Maine widened during the early years of the republic.”
Kermes also wrote that there was often a divide between coastal and inland Maine, as coastal communities relied on trade with Massachusetts, while inland communities “felt deprived of their liberties by Massachusetts’ proprietors and the Congregationalists church establishment.”
On May 7, 1792, voters defeated the first separation measure 55% to 45%. The measure was on the ballot again in 1797, but voters approved it 54% to 46% this time. However, the Massachusetts General Court did not act on the results, with legislators citing low voter turnout. In 1807, voters defeated the third measure 74% to 26%.
Kermes wrote that the War of 1812 contributed to increased support for separation: “In the War of 1812, British occupation lasting for almost the duration of the war caused even bigger economic losses in Maine. Disappointed by Massachusetts’ failure to protect the district from the British, and frustrated with their economic situation, Mainers felt more and more enthusiastic about separating from the Bay State.”
In 1816, voters approved a measure 62% to 38%, requesting that the General Court approve the separation of Maine from Massachusetts. In response, the General Court authorized a convention to discuss the issue and draft a constitution. However, the legislation was amended to require a second measure on Sept. 2, 1816, with approval needing a five-to-four vote or approximately 55.6%. The question received 53.6% of the vote, falling short of the requirement, and the General Court dissolved the convention.
In 1819, the General Court approved legislation for another measure, scheduled for July 26. The legislation provided that, with voter approval, an election for constitutional convention delegates would happen on Sept. 21, and the convention would convene in Portland on Oct. 12. Voters would then need to approve the drafted constitution, and the U.S. Congress would need to grant statehood to Maine.
Voters decided on the sixth and final measure, with 71% voting for statehood. On Dec. 6, 1819, voters approved a proposed constitution.
In December 1819, legislation to grant statehood was introduced in Congress and became tied to the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Speaker of the House Henry Clay (Democratic-Republican) proposed that Missouri be admitted as a slave state and Maine be admitted as a free state, preserving a balance between free and slave states in the U.S. Senate. Maine was admitted as a state on March 15, 1820.
Click here to read more about the 1819 measure and here for more information on statehood ballot measures.Five states hold elections on a day other than Tuesday