Number of runoffs across the state may be unprecedented
One of the most remarkable periods in Oklahoma’s political history has entered another phase, one that is largely inconsequential in most election years, but that this time is almost certain to have long-lasting effects.
From governor to county assessor, the number of runoffs statewide is easily the most in at least a generation and may be unprecedented. The House of Representatives alone has 29 runoffs, of which 10 involve incumbents, all Republicans.
Many of these runoffs are genuine ideological showdowns, especially on the GOP side.
Until 2012, runoff elections in Oklahoma were held within a few weeks of the primary, making interest and momentum easier to sustain. Concerns about getting absentee ballots to and from military service members stationed abroad caused primary elections to be moved to June, creating the current two-month gap.
At the time, there was some discussion of eliminating the runoffs. Only 10 states have them, and one of those — Vermont — only uses runoffs to break ties. Others limit their use in other ways.
In Oklahoma, they weren’t coming into play that often — one or twice a year for statewide offices, two or three times in congressional races and maybe 10 legislative seats. In most cases, the candidate finishing first won the runoff.
But that didn’t always happen, and when it didn’t the results were often memorable — and momentous. The 1974 (David Boren over Clem McSpadden) and 2002 (Brad Henry over Vince Orza) Democratic gubernatorial runoffs come immediately to mind.
So Oklahoma kept its runoffs, and on Aug. 28 will have more of them for state and federal office than in any year since at least 1994.
And that doesn’t include county and district attorney races.
The biggest of runoffs, obviously, is the contest between Republican gubernatorial candidates Kevin Stitt and Mick Cornett, but stakes are high all the way down the ballot and for both major parties and even, on a smaller scale, a Libertarian Party fighting for credibility with voters.
Many candidates, especially those in races demanding television ad time, are spending several weeks replenishing their campaign funds. Another recent change makes this both possible and necessary.
Previously, donors could contribute a maximum $5,000 per candidate per election cycle. Now the limit is $2,700 per candidate per election.
So, candidates can’t raise as much per donor up front, but they can raise more if they progress — $2,700 per donor for each primary, runoff and general. Candidates with deep-pocket donors have a distinct advantage, and the extra time between primaries gives them more of an opportunity to use it.
When the campaigning begins in earnest again, it may well turn more negative, observers say. Conventional wisdom is that aggressive attacks are more effective in oneon-one contests.
And there could be more independent dark money involvement, such as that seen in the Republican 1st Congressional District primary. This can range from fairly straightforward funders such as chambers of commerce to dropbox nonprofits whose true funding sources are never revealed.
A particularly common use of independent money in Oklahoma is late mass mailings in legislative races, usually in opposition to someone and often of questionable veracity, to which the targeted candidate hasn’t time to respond. Such mailings are relatively inexpensive and can be very effective in close races with low turnout.
And low turnout is the norm for runoffs.
Certainly no one expects the 890,000 who voted in the June 26 primary. There appears to be no single galvanizing ballot item like State Question 788. But in a year that has already tested Oklahoma’s political norms and set records for civic participation, Aug. 28 may be another exception to the rule.