{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016159695817490494, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0038022813688212928, 'mean_word_length': 6.02, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Prospects for professional parliaments in Russia's regions

The executive–legislative framework employed in the republic of Udmurtia throughout the 1990s distinguished it from other regions in Russia, making it a crucial case for analysis. While Udmurtia's parliamentary executive should have dampened incumbency rates in the republic, the number of incumbent legislators winning re-election has increased significantly over time. At the same time, the proportion of business and industrial interests in parliament has also increased. With this set of politicians representing broader societal interests in the republic, these findings provide some hope for the rise of minimally responsive, increasingly professionalized regional legislatures in Russia, as opposed to government by apparatchiks. In this context, Putin's decision to appoint governors should spur political conflict in Russia as regional elites with personal stakes in their regional economies and vested interests in democratic institutions confront an encroaching federal government.