Category Archives: Reapportionment

Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison to Retire

Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) made official yesterday what has been expected now for years, that she won’t seek re-election in 2012. She twice promised to resign her seat mid-term, only to change her mind as political circumstances became altered.

Prior to running for Governor in 2010, the senator said she would resign in order to challenge fellow Republican Rick Perry. Gov. Perry came to office at the end of 2000, succeeding then-Gov. George W. Bush upon his election as President. Subsequently deciding to serve through the primary, Sen. Hutchison then said she would resign once the nomination was decided. The result: Perry out-polled Hutchison by 20 points, securing re-nomination against his two opponents by winning an outright majority, thereby even avoiding a run-off election. The defeat was a crushing one for Hutchison, who began the race as the most popular elected official in the Lone Star State. After the primary, and adhering to the request of Republican Party leaders who wanted to avoid a costly special Senate election, Hutchison again changed her mind about leaving Washington and decided to serve the remaining portion of her third, and now final, full term in office.

Since Republicans took total control of the state in the 1990s and early 2000s, Democrats have continued to maintain that they can again be competitive in statewide elections. They site the huge Hispanic population (maybe as high as 37% in the new census) and polling data that, as it turns out, has regularly under-estimated Republican strength. This was definitely the story for the closest statewide R vs. D contests during the latter part of the decade: Sen. John Cornyn’s 2008 and Gov. Perry’s 2010 re-election campaigns. Cornyn won a 55-43% victory and Perry’s result was a similar 55-42%, hardly campaigns that can be considered hotly contested.

It is important to remember that Texas has 29 statewide offices, including administrative and judicial positions. All 29 are in Republican hands. The congressional delegation is 23R-9D, and will grow to a total of 36 seats in the next election because of reapportionment; the state Senate Republican margin is 19-12; and, after two Democrats switched parties in the past couple of weeks, the state House is now an overwhelming 101 Republicans to 49 Democrats.

Under this backdrop, an open Texas Senate seat will come to the forefront of the ensuing election cycle. Since Hutchison has been planning to vacate her seat for some time, candidates in both parties have been making moves to position themselves.

When Hutchison said her resignation was imminent, most of the appointment speculation centered around Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst. The Texas Lt. Governor, who actively presides over the state Senate, is the nation’s most powerful Lt. Governor. Dewhurst has held the position since 2002, after being elected Land Commissioner in 1998. He was re-elected in 2010 with 62% of the vote. He has yet to indicate whether he will run for the Senate in 2012. Other Republicans who are already in the race are former Secretary of State Roger Williams and Railroad Commissioner (another Texas statewide office) Elizabeth Ames Jones. Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams is also viewed as a sure candidate.

The Democrats are looking to former state Comptroller John Sharp, even though he has lost his past two elections, both for Lt. Governor, against Rick Perry (1998) and versus Dewhurst (2002).

The eventual Republican nominee will be a heavy favorite in the general election against presumably Sharp.
__________________________________________________
For further detailed insights, to sign up for my daily email updates, or to sign up to track specific issues or industries, please contact me at PRIsm@performanceandresults.com.

Looking Ahead Towards the 2012 Presidential Map

Even though the 2010 election results aren’t yet finalized, speculation among political pundits about President Obama’s re-election chances already is running rampant.

Whether or not certain Republican candidates can win their party’s nomination and defeat Obama are topics for another day. The main purpose of this report is to simply analyze the mathematics that govern each side’s ability to win the next national election.

Photo: The White House

In 2008, President Obama secured his victory by winning 365 electoral votes (EVs); 270 are required. With reapportionment becoming official before December 31st, the 2012 map will begin to take shape. Right now, though, we know that Obama’s winning coalition of states will yield fewer electoral votes than it did in 2008.

Assuming that Texas gains four congressional seats from reapportionment, and Arizona, Georgia, South Carolina, and Utah all add one, a grand total of eight more electoral votes would be assigned to the group of states that supported ’08 Republican nominee John McCain. Obama states like Ohio (down two), New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois, and Iowa look to lose districts, thus meaning another 10 votes would be deducted from the President’s previous total. The only McCain state poised to lose a district is Louisiana. Florida, Nevada, and Washington are Obama states that look to gain representation, so add three EVs back to his total. Therefore, the new Obama state configuration would fall to an apparent total of 358 EVs.

The McCain coalition, on the other hand, would see a net gain of seven votes, giving this group of states a future total of 180 electoral votes. Assuming that pre-apportionment estimates are completely correct, which is unlikely (Oregon is in good position to gain and Missouri might lose, for example), the total swing away from the President when merely considering population shifts will be approximately 14 votes, or the size of a state like Michigan or Georgia.

If this analysis is correct, then the Republicans, in order to unseat Mr. Obama, would have to convert states with an electoral vote value of 90 votes, in addition to winning every previous state they claimed in 2008.

How can this be done? From a Republican perspective, they first must regain the states Obama won that traditionally vote for the GOP nominee. Indiana is priority #1, North Carolina is priority #2. Switching Indiana from blue to red would give the Republicans 11 more votes and take away the same number from the Obama total. An N.C. win is a swing of 30 EVs, thus bringing the EV count down to 332 to 206 and putting the GOP within 64 votes of denying the President a second term.

Next come Florida and Ohio. With Texas (38 electoral votes in the next presidential campaign) being the only large state that the Republicans traditionally carry, Florida and Ohio become central to a GOP win. A Democratic candidate can lose both of these states and still win the election, but it is virtually impossible for a Republican to do so. With Florida and Ohio added to the hypothetical Republican total, the adjusted electoral vote count moves to 286 to 252, still in favor of the Obama coalition. This leaves the generic Republican candidate 18 EVs away from winning.

While that can be done by taking Pennsylvania or the president’s home state of Illinois, neither seems likely today, especially the latter. Therefore, the Republicans must add multiple states. Two small swing states that could return to the GOP fold are New Hampshire (4 EVs) and Nevada (6 EVs).

If all the above happens, then the Republican nominee would go over the top by winning just one of the following states: Michigan, Virginia, Wisconsin, or Colorado. Another option, if this latest group of states all remain loyal to Obama, is to carry Iowa and New Mexico (11 total EV’s). These two places are the only ones that have consistently flipped between the two presidential party nominees in the 21st century and must be considered competitive for both the eventual 2012 Democratic and Republican presidential nominees.

Though much will happen to define campaign 2012, the mathematical formula leading to victory will remain as described above.