Louisiana’s “Jungle Primary” Election System—Part 1: History and Impact
This is the first installment in a three-part series on Louisiana’s unique electoral system. Read the introduction and find other posts here.
By carefully examining the history of jungle primaries in Louisiana, Part 1 of this series seeks a better understanding of why they were created and implemented and how they have impacted elections in the state.
The jungle primary owes its existence to Gov. Edwin Edwards (D-La.). First elected in 1972, Edwards pushed the reform as a cost-saving measure that could also increase political competition. Louisiana’s party primaries required a majority winner (via runoff, when necessary) to determine the nominee, followed by a general election. Eliminating those separate nomination contests could save candidates and taxpayers the expense of another election. Furthermore, the Democratic primary often served as the decisive election in the largely blue state, effectively shutting out the portion of the electorate who did not participate. Edwards claimed the new system would allow residents to participate fully while voting their conscience.
But contemporaries and historians have speculated that Edwards’ real motives were more selfish. Fewer elections meant less campaigning, less expenditure, and less scrutiny—an appealing prospect for scandal-plagued candidates like Edwards. Winning on the first ballot, as he did in 1975, offered a decidedly quicker and easier path.
Nevertheless, Edwards’ stated reasons proved valid as well. Eliminating extra elections certainly saved taxpayer money, and Republican competitiveness increased as the party won far more offices than it had in the past. Louisiana voters gradually grew accustomed to the unusual system.
However, the jungle primary’s history is not a straight line from 1975 to 2026.
The original law applied only to state and local offices. Congressional elections continued to use closed partisan primaries until an expansion passed in 1976 took effect Jan. 1, 1978, leaving presidential elections the only exception. Democratic State Sen. Sammy Nunez, running for Congress himself, initiated the change. He argued that congressional elections should follow the same process as state elections. The shorter route also held obvious appeal for established politicians: Most of the state’s congressional incumbents avoided multiple elections and a primary fight by winning on the first ballot in the first election cycle following the expansion.
This history helps explain an important difference between Louisiana’s jungle primary and the top-two systems used in California and Washington. In those states, the first round selects two candidates for the general election, even if one has already received a majority. In Louisiana, a majority can end the contest. That distinction is central to a system created partly to spare candidates and their campaigns the expense and political damage of successive elections. While voters gained the freedom to choose candidates across party lines, incumbents and other established politicians gained the chance to win outright without a second campaign and contest. Louisiana’s system offered broader participation alongside a potentially shorter route to election or reelection.
The jungle primary came under increased scrutiny in 1991, when former governor Edwards, seeking his fourth term, found himself in a runoff against Republican David Duke, a notorious white supremacist and former Ku Klux Klan leader. Incumbent governor Buddy Roemer, who had switched from Democrat to Republican earlier that year, finished third.
The open system ultimately benefited Duke’s campaign: A closed Republican primary may have produced a different result, given the unwillingness of many Republicans to back his candidacy. However, he secured second place with just over 31 percent of the vote in the crowded jungle primary, edging out Roemer and other Republican contenders. Edwards nevertheless defeated Duke easily in the runoff, winning more than 61 percent of the vote.
Another change came in 2006, when the legislature voted to exempt congressional candidates from the jungle primary. A 1997 U.S. Supreme Court ruling had prevented Louisiana from electing members of Congress before the federal November election date, thereby pushing congressional runoffs into December. Louisiana’s congressional winners complained that the later runoffs deprived them of networking opportunities, good office space, and chances to secure important committee assignments by delaying their arrival in Washington. Party primaries returned for congressional elections in 2008.
Yet the legislature reversed that decision just two years later. Voters resented the 2006 change, as they had become used to Louisiana’s peculiar system and disliked voting under different rules for different offices.
Louisiana has again tinkered with its jungle primary following even more behind-the-scenes politics. Part 2 of this series will address this latest chapter in the history of the Pelican State’s distinctive electoral system.