Tuesday, 21 October 2003

Election tea-leaves

Patrick Carver has a set of predictions up for the upcoming Mississippi election. Below the lieutenant governor’s race, most of the down-ballot elections have gotten almost zero publicity, which will probably favor incumbents (Anderson, though, will probably be helped by black turnout, as Patrick notes).

One thing I will say is that if the election does go to the Mississippi House, I think the plurality winner will be chosen by them regardless. If Barbour wins a plurality, there are two many “yellow dog” Democrats who will be absolutely killed in 2007 if they don’t vote for Barbour. And if Musgrove wins the plurality, the 1999 precedent (where Musgrove was the slight plurality winner) suggests that black Democrats aren’t interested in making a deal with the Republicans to cut out the “yellow dogs” and elect a Republican governor. Obviously the Legislature needs to amend the system—frankly, I’m surprised it hasn’t been ruled unconstitutional already because of Baker v. Carr—but I’m not holding my breath on that happening.

While the federal Electoral College mechanism could be cited as a defense for Mississippi’s system, I doubt Baker would support that conclusion; after all, Baker explicitly rejected a defense of malapportioned state legislative bodies on the basis of the Senate “two seats per state” precedent. This Supreme Court might show the state system more deference on federalism grounds, but I honestly don’t see that happening—particularly if Barbour wins a plurality yet legislative shenanigans put Musgrove back in office.