Tuesday 2 November 2010

Backdated - US GUBERNATORIAL ELECTIONS 2010

I said I wouldn't analyse the Gubernatorial Elections, but here I am. There are several reasons:

  1. The Gubernatorial Elections will determine the bias of the next ten years of United States Politics,
  2. There is a little more to this than just whoever wins the most Governorships, and
  3. I REALLY like the word Gubernatorial.

So, there are 39 Governors to be elected today (plus several Lieutenant Governors), including Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 38 of these elections are traditionally scheduled for the midterms, the exception being Utah, which constitutionally requires a special election due to unusual circumstances. This leaves 13 states and four territories with carry-over Governors.

In addition to the 36 states and two territories that hold their Gubernatorial elections at the midterm, there are 11 states and two territories that hold Gubernatorial Elections in conjunction with the US Presidential Elections. Utah is normally one of these, as are New Hampshire and Vermont, but with two-year terms these latter occur at every Presidential and Midterm election. The remaining 9 Governors elected in 2008 to remain in power until 2012 are:
Delaware - Democrat
Indiana - Republican
Missouri - Democrat
Montana - Democrat
North Carolina - Democrat
North Dakota - Republican
Washington - Democrat
West Virginia - Democrat
American Samoa - Democrat
Puerto Rico - Republican

The remaining fives states and The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands are therefore elected in the other two years, the “off-years”. In 2007, these were:
Kentucky - Democrat
Louisiana - Republican
Mississippi - Republican

And in 2009,
New Jersey - Republican
Virginia - Republican
Northern Mariana Islands – Covenant Party

This gives the Republicans 7 Governors, and the Democrats 8 but – as we shall see – there is more to the nation-wide view of Gubernatorial Elections than the number of seats won.

The 37 states and two territories up for election currently are:

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Iowa
Kansas
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Mexico
New York
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Guam
The U.S. Virgin Islands

Providing predictions for all of these would require a lot of research, and by the time I had formulated them, the elections would probably be over. However, history has traditionally resulted in more Republicans in the South, and more Democrats in the North. However, we are only interested in their impact of future elections through Gerrymandering, so lets first consider the nature of this process.

Gerrymandering is the act of realigning the boundaries of electoral districts to skew or manipulate the voting outcome. Because the United States Constitution demands that Congressional Districts be based on the latest population figures, the government conducts a census every ten years – including this year, 2010. After the 2010 census, Congressional districts may need to be re-sized, added or removed, and the State Governors will play some role in this.

To give an example of Gerrymandering, consider a small state (in terms of population, at least), like Idaho. Idaho has two congressional districts at present. Now imagine 60% of the population are traditionally voters for party A, with party B gathering the remaining 40%. But, imagine that most of Party B's supporters are city dwellers, while Party A does best among the country folk. Now finally imagine, as in Idaho, the majority of the big cities – Boise, Meridian, Pocatello, Nampa, Idaho Falls, Caldwell, Twin Falls etc. lie in the southern, industrial half of the state, while the north is largely rural.

If party A is in power, then the ideal boundary line would run more or less vertically through the state, making each half more or less representational of the whole state. Party A is likely to win both seats, with about 60% support in the North of each versus roughly 40% opposition in the south.

If, however, Party B was in power at the time of drawing the borders, they might opt for a horizontal divide. This places the rural, northern seat firmly in the hands of Party A, perhaps receiving 90% of the vote, but all of this avid support is wasted in the safe seat. In the southern seat, however, the city-dwellers dominate and Party B is likely to win. In short, a vertical divide will give A two seats, while a Horizontal divide will give one seat to each party. This, effectively, is Gerrymandering, except rarely are the borders as clear a straight lines. In some cases, the Gerrymandering can occur to such an extent that seats curl up around eachother in strange contorted positions to maximise the dominant party's wins whilst segregating powerful areas of opposition or diluting minority groups.

However, this is where the Gubernatorial Elections come down to more than the number of seat won. Whoever wins the most populous states will have far better Gerrymandering opportunities than anyone else, and winners of marginal states will find the process far more effective than solid Republican or Democrat states where most of the votes will go one way, regardless of borders, and Gerrymandering will scrape together or dissolve only a couple of districts that vote otherwise.

Based on population and this years marginal seat distribution, the top states to watch are:
California (53 Congressional Districts at present, with one currently “Likely” for each party, which could be realigned to become a tossup or even go the other way)
Texas (32 Congressional Districts)
New York (29 Congressional Districts including three “Likely” Republican, one “likely” Democrat and one Tossup which could be strengthened or weakened as desired)
Florida (25 Congressional Districts )
Pennsylvania (19 Congressional Districts with four Republican and one Democrat “Likely”s )
Illinois (19 Congressional Districts with two Republican and one Democrat “Likely”)
Ohio (18 Congressional Districts with two Republican “Likely”s and a Tossup)
Michigan (15 Congressional Districts )
Virginia (11 Congressional Districts, two “Likely”s for either Party)

In addition to this, the Parties will want to dominate the most marginal states. A map of how marginal a state is can be found at: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ac/PurpleNation.PNG
This places a high premium on the states of Nevada, Missouri, Ohio, Florida and New Hampshire, Arizona, Colorado, Louisiana, Arkansas, Virginia and West Virginia. Factoring in the previous list of desirable seats, it is apparent that Florida, Ohio and Virginia are highly desirable for both parties, along with the ridiculously populous California, Texas and New York. The following offers a brief analysis of each state:

Florida (Likely Republican)
Partisan Rating: 0-5 Democrat
Recent Voting History: (last 4 Presidential Elections) Even – 2 x Democrat support, 2 x Republican
Predicted House of Representatives result: 18 Republican seats, 6 Democrat, 1 Tossup
Number of Congressional Districts at present: 25
Number of marginal seats: 4 (1 Tossup, 3 Change hands to Safe Republican)

Ohio (Likely Republican)
Partisan Rating: 0-5 Democrat
Recent Voting History: Even
Predicted House of Representatives result: 12 Rep, 5 Dem, 1 Tossup
Number of Congressional Districts at present: 18
Number of marginal seats: 5 (1 Tossup, 2 Change hands to Safe Republican, 2 Change hands to Likely Republican)

Virginia (Likely Republican)
Partisan Rating: 0-5 Republican
Recent Voting History: 3 x Republican
Predicted House of Representatives result: 7 Rep, 4 Dem
Number of Congressional Districts at present: 11
Number of marginal seats: 4 (2 Change hands to Likely Republican, 2 Remain Likely Democrat)

California (Likely Democrat)
Partisan Rating: 10-15 Democrat
Recent Voting History: 4 x Democrat
Predicted House of Representatives result: 20 Rep, 33 Dem
Number of Congressional Districts at present: 53
Number of marginal seats: 2 (1 Change hands to Likely Republican, 1 Remain Likely Democrat)

Texas (Safe Republican)
Partisan Rating: 10-15 Republican
Recent Voting History: 4 x Republican
Predicted House of Representatives result: 22 Rep, 10 Dem
Number of Congressional Districts at present: 32
Number of marginal seats: 2 (1 Change hands to Safe Republican, 1 Change hands to Likely Republican)

New York (Safe Democrat)
Partisan Rating: 20+ Democrat
Recent Voting History: 4 x Democrat
Predicted House of Representatives result: 6 Rep, 22 Dem, 1 Tossup
Number of Congressional Districts at present: 29
Number of marginal seats: 6 (1 Tossup, 1 Change hands to Safe Republican, 3 Change hands to Likely Republican, 1 Remain Likely Democrat)

Naturally, with the pro-Republican swing across America, we would expect the Republicans to gain many states. They also look set to gain many of the key states, and those the Democrats do win (New York and California in particular) are only held because they are so solidly pro-Democrat that the maximum possible Gerrymandering advantage has already been achieved.

It is difficult to say what impact this will have on Obama's attempt at a Second term, but I would predict the next decade to bode well for Republican Presidential Nominees. If Obama gets a second term and Palin is not the best candidate for the Republican party, I would expect a strong, two-term Republican President to dominated from 2016 to 2024.

If Obama does not get a second term and Palin is still not the best candidate for the Republican party, I would expect a strong, two-term Republican President to dominated from 2012 to 2020 and another Republican for the 2020-2024 term before the next census is completed.

If in either case Palin is the best candidate the Republicans can muster, then they just aren't trying, and it is impossible to call.

No comments:

Post a Comment