One Word, Big Advantage: Will “Incumbent” Give an Unfair Advantage on the Ballot?

A question about fairness on the ballot is surfacing as Muscogee County voters prepare for the upcoming local election: Should incumbents receive preferential identification on the ballot, and does that designation place challengers at a disadvantage?

The issue has drawn attention in the District 9 race, where Columbus City Councilor John Anker is seeking to retain the seat he currently holds. Under Georgia law, Anker’s name will appear on the ballot with the designation “incumbent,” even though he was appointed to the position rather than elected.

Nancy Boren, director of elections and registration for Muscogee County, said the designation is required by state statute.

“OCGA 21-2-285 gives instructions for ballot preparation,” Boren said. “Paragraph (c) provides, ‘the incumbency of a candidate seeking election for the public office he or she then holds shall be indicated on the ballot.’”

The law does not distinguish between officials who were elected to office and those who were appointed to fill a vacancy. As a result, Anker — who was appointed in March 2025 following the resignation of longtime councilor Judy Thomas — will appear on the ballot as the incumbent.

Anker’s appointment came during a contentious Columbus City Council meeting in which members voted 6–3 to fill the District 9 vacancy the same night Thomas stepped down.

While the designation complies with state law, the situation has renewed discussion around a long-standing but unwritten tradition in Columbus politics. Historically, council members appointed to fill unexpired terms have refrained from running for the same seat in the next election. Though not codified in the city charter or municipal code, the practice has often been viewed as a way to avoid giving unelected appointees the advantages typically associated with incumbency.

At the center of the debate is the influence a single word on the ballot may carry with voters.

For many voters, the label “incumbent” may suggest that a candidate has previously been elected to the position or has a proven record in office. Critics argue that such a designation can create an implicit advantage over challengers who may be equally qualified but lack the benefit of holding the office at the time of the election.

Political research suggests incumbency can significantly influence election outcomes.

According to the political information website Ballotpedia, incumbents often benefit from name recognition and established political networks.

“The incumbent position may be seen as advantageous depending on the current sentiment of the associated constituents,” Ballotpedia notes. “If the constituents feel current circumstances are acceptable, there may be a higher inclination to vote for the incumbent. If the constituents disapprove of the situation resulting from the incumbent’s policies or actions, they may be less inclined to vote for them.”

Ballotpedia also identifies several structural advantages typically enjoyed by incumbents, including greater name recognition, an established donor base, familiarity with campaigning, and the perception of political success. Incumbents also tend to raise more campaign funds, including contributions from lobbyists and established political supporters.

Those factors raise a broader question: whether the ballot itself should provide cues that might influence voter perception before voters evaluate the candidates.

Elections are already difficult contests for challengers attempting to introduce themselves to voters. Some critics argue that labeling a candidate as the incumbent — particularly when that individual was appointed rather than elected — adds another hurdle for newcomers seeking office.

Others contend that transparency about who currently holds the office is important information for voters.

For now, the law is clear. Under Georgia election code, candidates who currently occupy the office they are seeking must be identified as the incumbent on the ballot.

Whether that designation represents useful information for voters or an inherent advantage in the democratic process remains a question that local elections continue to bring into focus.