By Lenore Chester
Although winner takes all in the primary races for borough
president and City Council, that has not been true of
citywide races since 1972. It was then that the New York
State legislature enacted a runoff primary law for primaries
in which nobody wins at least 40 percent. The law is applicable
only to the City of New York and there, only to the three
city-wide offices - mayor, comptroller and public advocate.
In every other city and jurisdiction in the state whoever
wins the most votes becomes the party nominee.
Since Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans in the
City, the winner of the Democratic Party primary usually
goes on to win in the general election. That makes the
runoff particularly important in Democratic Party politics.
This year the runoff, if necessary, will occur on September
25, just 14 days after the primary.
There is already a kind of official acknowledgement that
a runoff is likely among the four Democratic candidates
for mayor. The Campaign Finance Board last week approved
the mayoral candidates' request to solicit contributions
for a primary runoff. The law requires that such a nomination
be "reasonably anticipated" before allowing candidates
to raise funds for it. (The contribution limit is $2250
- half the limit of $4500 applicable for the primary and
general election combined.)
WHY A RUNOFF
The runoff provision was meant to assure that the results
of the primary, and also of the general election, reflect
the choice of a reasonably broad segment of the electorate.
Supporters, including Citizens Union, worried that in
a multi-candidate contest without a runoff provision,
a vote of 20 percent or even less could determine the
outcome of an election. They insisted the runoff is necessary
to assure the political legitimacy and effectiveness of
the winning candidate.
Not everyone agreed. Many in the minority community believed
that the real intent of the runoff law was to make it
more difficult for a black or Hispanic candidate to emerge
as the party nominee. In past primaries, race has often
been an underlying issue.
Indeed, the runoff law was legally challenged on the
grounds that it violated the United States Constitution,
the Voting Rights Act, and the Civil Rights Act. Herman
Badillo, a mayoral candidate in 1969, 1973 and 1977, and
a candidate for comptroller in 1993, was a major witness
in that court case. He described a pattern of misinformation
designed to incite racial voting in the short period between
the 1973 primary and the runoff. He testified that as
a minority candidate with little access to large sums
of money needed to run an effective media campaign in
a three week time frame, he was unable to counteract the
false charges laid against him. In 1985, Federal Judge
Charles L. Brieant sided with the plaintiffs, Reverend
Calvin Butts III and Diana Sanchez, but was later overruled.
THE 1969 RACE FOR MAYOR
Although race has always been a factor in New York City
politics, a more immediate reason for the adoption of
the runoff law may have had more to do with assuring a
Democratic victory at the polls than the stated and somewhat
more noble goal of effective governance. The seeds of
the 1972 law rest in the 1969 race for Mayor.
That year, the Democratic primary for mayor included
five candidates. The candidates and the results of the
primary were as follows:
- Mario Procaccino 33%
- Robert Wagner 29%
- Herman Badillo 28%
- James Scheur 5%
- Norman Mailer 5%
In the general election, the Democratic nominee, Mario
Procaccino, was defeated. John Lindsay ran that year as
an Independent and Liberal Party candidate and won in
a three-way race, receiving about 42 percent of the total
vote. Democrats were not happy and that is why runoff
elections were born.
HISTORY OF RUNOFFS
A history of runoffs since their inception is interesting
if only to remind ourselves that New York City elections
have rarely been ho-hum. In a city with many ambitious
politicians, vacancies for elected office have always
brought out more than a few candidates. Racial, ethnic
and religious tensions were reflected in many of the contests.
1973
There were four candidates in the initial primary for
mayor in 1973 - Herman Badillo, Abraham Beame, Mario Biaggi
and Albert Blumenthal. The percentages of total votes
obtained by each of the candidates were:
- Abraham Beame 34.5%
- Herman Badillo 29.0%
- Mario Biaggi 20.5%
- Albert Blumenthal 16.0%
In the run-off election, Beame defeated Badillo by 61
percent of the total votes cast. It was this lopsided
victory that Badillo blamed on the misinformation of his
positions that was disseminated in Jewish and Italian
neighborhoods throughout the city.
1977
There were seven candidates seeking the Democratic
Party nomination for Mayor in 1977. The results of the
initial primary election were as follows:
- Edward Koch 20.0%
- Mario Cuomo 19.0%
- Abraham Beame 18.0%
- Bella Abzug 16.5%
- Percy Sutton 14.0%
- Herman Badillo 11.0%
- Joel Harnett 1.5%
Koch won the 1977 runoff primary, receiving 55 percent
of the total votes cast.
There was yet another runoff in 1977. There were five
candidates for the office of City Council President (now
the Public Advocate). The candidates and the percentages
of total votes cast were:
- Paul O'Dwyer 31%
- Carol Bellamy 25%
- Carter Burden 20%
- Abraham Hirschfield 17%
- Leonard Stavisky 7%
Bellamy won the runoff election with 59 percent of the
vote, defeating incumbent Paul O'Dwyer.
THREE ELECTIONS, NO RUNOFFS
In 1985 and 1989 there were multiple candidates for several
citywide races. There were, however, no runoff elections
since all the winning candidates captured more than 40
percent of the votes. In the three-way 1989 primary race
for comptroller, for example, Elizabeth Holtzman had more
than twice the number of votes than Alan Hevesi, the second
place challenger.
1993
Holtzman was not as lucky in 1993. In 1993, Comptroller
Holtzman came in second in a tight three person primary
contest with 33.4 percent of the vote. Alan Hevesi received
35.3 percent and Herman Badillo, 31.4 percent. She was
forced into a runoff and lost the Democratic Party nomination
to Hevesi. Herman Badillo went on to oppose him in the
general election running on the Republican/Liberal line
but lost in the general election.
There were initially seven candidates for City Council
President in 1993. The incumbent, Andrew Stein, withdrew
leaving a field of six: Mark Green (the winner with 45
percent of the vote); David Paterson (second with 19 percent);
Susan Alter; Donald Halperin; Robert Ramirez; and Ronald
Reale. A runoff was not required.
1997
In the tumultuous election year of 1997, Manhattan Borough
President Ruth Messinger resigned to run for mayor, and
six candidates rushed to fill her seat. Messinger herself
faced two candidates in her primary: Al Sharpton and Sal
Albanese. Initial voting results gave Ms. Messinger just
39 percent of the vote. Sharpton won 32 percent and Albanese
21 percent of the vote. A recount lifted Messinger's vote
to 39.93 percent; she finally managed to avoid a runoff
with Sharpton by a mere 658 votes thanks to absentee ballots.
The appearance of weak support had done its damage. Mayor
Giuliani easily defeated her in the general election.
2001
While race and ethnicity are still factors in any New
York City election, fewer people argue about the legitimacy
of runoffs these days. If anything, they may work to the
advantage of minority candidates. New York's first black
mayor, David Dinkins, won election with both white and
black support; and by mobilizing the black vote, the Reverend
Al Sharpton almost succeeded in forcing a long time white
elected official into a runoff in 1997. In 2001, New York's
minority population is almost a majority; blacks make
up 1/3 of voters in the Democratic primary; and public
campaign financing for run-off elections is now available.
Running an effective campaign in the few weeks between
primaries will at least take place on a financially level
playing field.
In 2001, the large number of candidates vying for the
Democratic Party nomination for mayor and public advocate
makes runoffs a decided possibility. But until petitions
are filed in mid-July, the number and identity of declared
candidates is subject to change as they jockey for advantage.
A "declared" candidate is not the same as a candidate
certified by the Board of Elections.
None of the four declared candidates for mayor (Fernando
Ferrer; Mark Green; Alan Hevesi; and Peter Vallone) is
likely to drop out before primary day. They have been
planning and plotting to be mayor for years. They may
yet be joined by the Reverend Al Sharpton, which could
be the worst kind of news for Ferrer. There are currently
five declared candidates for public advocate: Stephen
DiBrienza; Kathryn Freed; Betsy Gotbaum; Norman Siegel;
and Scott Stringer. While the public advocate lacks real
power, it is a bully pulpit and widely seen as a step
up to the mayoralty. As of March 1, there are only two
candidates for the Democratic Party's nomination for comptroller:
Herbert Berman and William Thompson. No runoff in that
scenario!