Politics

The West: The New South

By Robert Saldin, Guest Writer, 8-13-08

	Electoral votes in the Rocky Mountains.

It’s no accident that Democrats are holding their convention in Denver later this month. Rather, it’s indicative of a new reality in presidential politics: the Mountain West has emerged as the critical swing region. For decades, the South held the key to the White House. But having lost their once solid grip on Dixie, the Democratic party has set its sights on the same romantic frontier that has traditionally offered hope to those seeking a second chance and new opportunities.

The eight Mountain West states offer a combined total of 44 electoral votes. That’s not much compared to the Pacific Coast’s 80 or the South’s 153; however, given the razor thin margins of the last two elections and what appears to be another close contest this year, every electoral vote is critical. In 2000, George W. Bush won every Mountain state except New Mexico and four years later he swept the region. This fall, though, Obama has a legitimate chance to take an even split of the region’s electoral votes by winning Colorado (9 electoral votes), Montana (3), Nevada (5) and New Mexico (5). (He’d have a good chance in increasingly purple Arizona too if it wasn’t John McCain’s home turf.) If Obama can pull off the split, he’ll become the 44th president, even if the rest of Bush’s 2004 wins-including oft-mentioned swing states Ohio, Virginia, and Florida-stay in the GOP column.

This new electoral calculus has as much to do with internal party politics as with the West’s reputed independent spirit. Democrats have lost the South—the foundation of their New Deal coalition—and have been forced to look elsewhere to make up the difference; that in turn has led the party to embrace candidates who appeal to the region even if they don’t adhere to coastal liberal orthodoxy.  The Republican party, meanwhile, has weakened its brand in the Rockies by emphasizing social conservatism at the expense of libertarian ideals rooted in individual freedom. These new dynamics have already resulted in numerous impressive victories and boosted Democrats’ credibility in the region. They also offer a roadmap for Obama.

Democrat’s Southern Freefall

Amongst regions, the South—comprised of the 11 former Confederate states—has traditionally played the most important role in presidential elections. In the 18 contests between the end of Reconstruction and 1952, the Republican presidential nominee went 0-11 in the South states with only two exceptions. Through the 1960s, Democrats relied on a coalition of largely conservative Southerners and a bloc of increasingly liberal Northerners.

Beginning in the 1950s, though, this uneasy coalition showed signs of strain and the South entered a new phase as the critical swing region in presidential elections. Since 1956, every president but one has had to win the bulk of Southern electoral votes to reach the White House. The only exception—Democrat Bill Clinton—was a native son who kept it close in the tally of Southern electoral votes. During this stretch, the South also slowly shifted from a reliably Democratic bastion into a Republican stronghold and the once flourishing bulwark of conservative Southern Democrats has now become nearly extinct.

Despite the centrist and Clinton-affiliated Democratic Leadership Council’s best efforts in the 1990s to stop the party’s hemorrhaging in Dixie, the last two presidential elections have witnessed the dawning of a new era. Al Gore failed to carry his home state of Tennessee in his 0-11 showing in the South and four years later John Kerry’s organization didn’t even contest the region, pulling out of all the former Confederate states months before the election to focus on states he actually had a chance of winning.

Republican Ideology

Democrats didn’t lose Dixie all by themselves. Over the past several decades, the GOP has not only become competitive in the region; it’s come to be defined by its Southern base. The region’s shift to the Republican party has frequently been attributed to white racism. Recent scholarship, however, makes the convincing case that the South’s Republican realignment had more to do with post-World War II economic development and a conservative regional ethos that over time simply came to mesh more naturally with the Republican party. In any event, just as the Democrats’ embrace of liberalism had ramifications, the GOP’s increasing identification as a Southern-based party has brought unintended consequences in the Mountain West.

It’s true that both regions are frequently called conservative, but crudely branding the South and the Rockies in this manner does a disservice to the two regions’ distinct and often opposing political cultures—and it has a lot to do with Democrats’ heightened prospects in the Mountain states. As the story goes, the scrappy individualists who left the Atlantic coast to seek their fortunes out West left a legacy of individualism that still permeates the region. Indeed, the libertarian spirit is still most vibrant in the Rocky Mountain states. The South’s social conservatism, on the other hand, has a more moralistic and religious tone. And frequently these two strands of conservative thought are in direct conflict, with libertarians prizing nearly unlimited individual freedom while social conservatives seek certain restrictions. Ironically for the Republican party, its conquest of the socially conservative South may have had a teeter totter effect and forced the GOP back down to Earth in the Mountain states. President Bush’s religious rhetoric and faith-based initiatives don’t resonate out West like they do down South. And Western libertarians aren’t impressed with Bush-backed programs that have vastly increased the federal government’s role in, say, education or the new prescription drug program. Furthermore, from the libertarian’s perspective, after nearly eight years in power, the Republican party has abdicated one of its trump cards and can now reasonably be seen as the less responsible party when it comes to government spending.

The New and Improved Western Democrat

These two changes—the fall of Southern Democrats and the rise of a Southern-based GOP—spurred the revival of the moderate Western Democrat. Democrats pragmatically started nominating candidates who fit, rather than clashed, with the districts and states they hoped to represent.

Surprisingly, this new breed of Western Democrat has arisen at the same time—and often with the assistance of fiercely liberal “netroots” bloggers and party activists. Though this cohort frequently extols the virtues of ideological orthodoxy (see Joe Lieberman), at times they also seem to recognize that shrewdly compromising on certain issues, like guns, can yield more elected Democrats in statehouses and Washington. Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean—who in his 2004 presidential bid provocatively dismissed some of his intra-party opponents as representatives of “the Republican wing of the Democratic party”—has been remarkably pragmatic as a party leader. His “50 state strategy” has taken a page from the old Ronald Reagan playbook, recognizing that “the person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally-not a 20 percent traitor.” Nancy Pelosi or Barney Frank clones aren’t going to win many elections in the Mountain West. But a populist gun-toting rancher can.

Outside of liberal enclaves like Boulder, most Democratic hopefuls need to be able to fill some of the pragmatic libertarian ground vacated by the national Republican party while remaining true to core Democratic principles. This can, and increasingly is, being accomplished by Democrats who emphasize economic competence and support for the Western lifestyle, including gun rights and access to hunting and fishing grounds. Democrats haven’t always done this. As Democratic Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper has argued: “I’m not sure that the politics and the people [in the Mountain West] have changed as much as the politicians have changed, right? Look at the crop of Democrats running now. They’re pretty different from what you saw 10 or 15 years ago, right? Look at [Montana Governor] Brian Schweitzer or [Arizona Governor] Jan Napolitano or me or [Colorado Governor] Bill Ritter. We are much more pro-business. We don’t have problems with guns.”

The new strategy has produced an impressive string of victories and demonstrated that the right kind of Democrat can be successful in the Rockies. In the last four years, for instance, Democrats have replaced Republican governors in Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico and Wyoming and won Republican-held Senate seats in Colorado and Montana. Each of these successful Democrats has embraced a distinctly Western brand of independence and a moderate approach.

Western Democrats have been helped by Republican infighting between “big tent” moderates and ideologically rigid conservatives. When the conservatives have gained the higher ground, it hasn’t worked too well. In Colorado, for example, a moderate-conservative split has plagued the party and led to bitter nominating contests that have severely weakened the GOP’s standard bearers in recent general elections. And this summer Idaho Republicans are showing signs of similar intra-party discord. Conservatives gained the upper hand two years ago when now-Rep. Bill Sali was nominated over several moderate Republicans for Idaho’s 1st Congressional District, which he went on to claim in a surprisingly narrow general election victory. The state’s conservative bloc won another victory this summer when they installed one of their own as state party chair, dispatching a key architect of the Republicans’ monopoly in Idaho because he was allegedly too much of a watered down Republican. The feud is evident throughout the Idaho Republican hierarchy and Governor Butch Otter has withheld his support from Sali. The national Democratic party now eagerly sees a realistic possibility of picking up a congressional seat in Idaho, the reddest of Mountain West states, and has uncharacteristically committed several hundred thousand dollars to their candidate in the 1st District, Walt Minnick.

The Mountain West and the 2008 Election

Minnick is perhaps the best example in this election cycle of the kind of Democrat that can be successful in the Mountain West. A businessman, hunter, and self-proclaimed “conservative Democrat,” Minnick is certainly no more out of step with his district than Sali, who has more in common with his fellow partisans in the South than with the traditional libertarian-oriented Western Republican. If Minnick can pull out a victory in Idaho, it would be the strongest indication yet that Democrats are a force to be reckoned with in the West and that the Republican party’s shift to the right has hurt their standing in the Rockies. In addition to Minnick, Western Democrats could pick up as many as seven other currently GOP-held House seats in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico. They also appear likely to pick up Republican controlled Senate seats in Colorado and New Mexico.

Of course, the presidency is the biggest prize and Obama clearly has a chance to win several Mountain states this November. If he’s to do so, emphasizing sound economic policies is key.  This means looking to the business community as a collaborative partner in creating healthy communities, rather than as an inherently suspicious adversary. Obama could also make headway in the Rockies by emphasizing a tax plan geared toward encouraging entrepreneurial activity while still allowing the federal government to balance its budget.
Equally important for Obama’s fate in the Rockies is to avoid issues that have proved to be a death knell for many Democrats in the region, such as championing gun control and vocally opposing the death penalty.

Finally, Obama should continue his highly visible trips to the region. Unlike many other parts of the country, a presidential candidate’s visit is rare and, as such, a very big deal. He’s already been to Montana several times and even spent the 4th of July in Butte. It’s a safe bet that passing this prime patriotic and photogenic holiday in such an idiosyncratic locale never occurred to Kerry’s campaign. While in the Rockies he should continue to emulate Schweitzer and others by pledging to maintain or expand access to hunting and fishing grounds. In addition to winning favor with sportsmen, this pledge offers a two-fer because, in preserving access to public lands, it’s also attractive to most environmentalists. In this way, Obama can appeal to the gun crowd while simultaneously bringing cheers from his liberal base.

The Mountain West could be a prime battle ground for years to come. Demographic trends show that the Mountain West will pack a bigger punch after the 2010 census and the updated apportionment of electoral votes. With Democrats on the rise and more electoral clout headed West, we may be seeing the dawn of a new era of presidential elections. As the South did for much of the Twentieth Century, the Mountain West may well control the nation’s electoral destiny for the Twenty-first.

Robert Saldin is an assistant professor of Political Science at the University of Montana.

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.