• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

State of Elections

William & Mary Law School | Election Law Society

Hide Search

NV special elections

NRS 304

Election Law Society · January 27, 2012 ·

A way to quickly replace Congressmen in the event of a terrorist attack or give Democrats a Nevada Republican stronghold?

by Kaitan Gupta

In the world of battleground elections, Nevada’s 2nd Congressional District never received much attention nor should it have.  Since its creation after the 1980 census, it has always been represented by a Republican.  1992 was the only time the Republican candidate did not receive more than 50% of the vote and yet that year Republican Congressman Vucanovich still won the election by more than 12,000 votes/4 points.  The Democrats thought they were closing the gap in the District in 2008 when Senator McCain only won the District by 88 votes, but popular Congressman Dean Heller proved too popular in this conservative District where he widened his “narrow” 12,575 vote/5 point win in 2006 to a 44,000 vote/10 point win in 2008 and a 82,000/30 point win in 2010.  But Democrats attempt at winning this District (which in the past was seen as futile) would get new life thanks to a Republican’s sex scandal, the Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller, and a Navy war hero.

In May 2011, Senator John Ensign announced his resignation due to an ethics investigation surrounding his extramarital affair with the wife of one of his aids.  Governor Sandoval promptly appointed Dean Heller to fill the rest of Senator Ensign’s term and ordered a special election to be held on September 13, 2011 to elect a new representative for Nevada’s 2nd Congressional District.  But it was Secretary of State Ross Miller’s announcement of how this special election would be run that gave Democrats a chance of winning this Republican stronghold.  One week prior to Governor Sandoval’s announcement, Secretary Miller issued his interpretation of NRS 304.200, the law governing special elections.  He announced that major party candidates could self-nominate and place themselves on the ballot as a major political party candidate whether or not the major political party approved.  Secretary Miller based this interpretation on NRS 304’s language that “no primary election may be held.”   This meant the election would be a free for all and more than 30 candidates were expected to be on the ballot.  Democrats expected many Republicans would file as compared to only a few Democrats making it much easier to elect a Democrat. [Read more…] about NRS 304

Primary Sidebar

Pages

  • About Us
  • Election Law Glossary
  • Staff History
  • Links
  • Archived Pages
    • Citizens United + The States
    • Virginia Redistricting Competition

Search

View Posts by State

Archives

Tags

2016 Election 2020 Election Absentee ballots absentee voting Ballot Access ballot initiative Campaign Finance Citizens United Colorado Disenfranchise disenfranchisement Early Voting Election 2016 Electronic Voting Felon Voting Rights First Amendment Gerrymandering in-depth article judicial elections mail-in voting National Voter Registration Act North Carolina photo ID primary election Redistricting Referendum Registration Secretary of State state of elections Supreme Court Texas Virginia Vote by mail Voter Fraud Voter ID Voter Identification voter registration Voter Turnout voting voting and COVID Voting Machines Voting Rights Voting Rights Act VRA William & Mary

Blogroll

  • Election Law Issues
  • William & Mary Law School
  • Williamsburg Redistricting – "The Flat Hat" article

Friends

  • W&M Election Law Program

Contact Information:

To contact us, send an email to
wmstateofelections@gmail.com

Current Editorial Staff

Brendan W. Clark ’24, Editor-in-Chief
Rachel Clyburn ’24, Editor-in-Chief

State of Elections

Copyright © 2025 · Monochrome Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok