Sifting Through the Ashes of the 2009 Houston General Election

The voters of Houston have spoken.  What did they tell us and what does it mean for the runoffs that will decide the races for mayor, controller, and five council seats?  Today, I’ll focus on the mayoral runoff and address other races next week.

First, the elimination round did not interest or engage the vast majority of Houstonians.  Turnout in the city precincts averaged about 20 percent, far below the norm for a contested, open-seat mayoral contest.  Voter apathy reflected the absence of a funded, credible, white, conservative Republican.  Roy Morales was two for five on that list – enough to garner 20% of the 175,000 votes cast for mayor, but a five-for-five candidate would have produced thousands of additional voters in a city where John McCain garnered over 220,000 votes last November.   Turnout was also not helped by a mostly low-key, positive campaign where the three funded candidates resolutely refused to draw out clear differences on issues that mattered to city voters.  Annise Parker and Gene Locke also had money problems, as did Peter Brown until his wife put personal funds into his campaign. 

Second, when turnout drops to really low levels, pre-election polls are often badly off the mark.  Peter Brown became the anointed frontrunner after a Houston Chronicle Zogby poll showed him with a significant lead over both Parker and Locke.  But among the few who showed up at the polls Tuesday, Brown ran fourth behind Roy Morales. 

Third, TV advertising ain’t what it used to be in terms of campaign effects.  Brown vastly outspent Parker and Locke in this media, and lost to both.  Other forms of interpersonal communication have become much more important as voters gather election information from diverse sources. 

Fourth, there is no clear front-runner going into the runoff.  Parker’s lead is small compared to previous frontrunners as she needs to pick up nearly 20 additional percentage points to win the runoff on December 12^th.  Locke will require an even higher percentage gain to win in the finals.  

Nearly half the General Election voters supported a losing candidate for mayor.  Where do they go?  I think African American supporters of Peter Brown will gravitate to Gene Locke, and Anglo Brown voters toward Annise Parker without regard to what Mr. Brown does personally.  Since there are twice as many white Brown voters compared African American supporters, that nets an advantage for the Controller.  But Roy Morales voters may well have a harder time supporting a lesbian contender than a black man backed by much of the business community.  Probably a net advantage here for Locke but there is more uncertainly here forecasting movement among Morales voters than is the case with Peter Brown voters.

Two other things make predictions about the runoff unreliable at this point.  First, does turnout increase so that the December electorate is larger than the November voter group?  I think that could well happen for the first time since 1971 when a runoff between Mayor Louie Welch and challenger Fred Hofheinz brought more voters to the polls than cast ballots in the November election.  And if the electorate expands, which campaign most benefits?  No one can say at this point.

Another confounding factor could be the intervention of third parties into the runoff contest.  I expect Ms. Parker and Mr. Locke will personally run campaigns that avoid personal attacks.  I am not at all sure other interested parties that wish to elect or defeat Parker or Locke will abide by this standard.  If the runoff turns mean, turnout will likely go up even more than anticipated.

The long first electoral round showed the survivors to be smart, tough competitors with extensive knowledge of the city and its governmental process.  Now Annise Parker and Gene Locke will be tested in a 38 day one-on-one competition quite unlike the multi-candidate scramble just concluded.  Let the games begin!

Dr. Richard Murray