Democrats Work to Defy History in Georgia Runoffs That Have Favored GOP

Carl Hulse
·8 min read
A voter enters a polling place at CT Martin Natatorium and Recreation Center in Atlanta, on Friday, Oct. 30, 2020. (Lynsey Weatherspoon/The New York Times)
A voter enters a polling place at CT Martin Natatorium and Recreation Center in Atlanta, on Friday, Oct. 30, 2020. (Lynsey Weatherspoon/The New York Times)

WASHINGTON — A first-term senator in Georgia narrowly bested his opponent, outrunning his party’s standard-bearer only to face voters again a few weeks later under a quirky system that briefly made the state the center of the political universe after a hard-fought presidential election.

The year was 1992, and Sen. Wyche Fowler Jr., a Democrat, had amassed more votes than his Republican opponent on Election Day. But he lost his seat three weeks later.

“Yes, I was disappointed, running 6 points ahead of the president and being the only state in the country that had this kind of crazy system,” said Fowler, now 80, looking back on a storied runoff election 28 years ago after Bill Clinton won the presidency.

Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times

Now that same “crazy system” that overturned Fowler’s lead, defeating a popular member of Congress known for his folksy stories, has once again seized the attention of both parties. This time, the scenario is playing out in double: Not one but two incumbents, Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, both Republicans, are facing runoffs to keep their seats. This time, the ramifications are even more consequential.

Georgia’s runoffs, the vestige of segregationist efforts to dilute Black voting power, will determine control of the Senate in races to be decided on Jan. 5. In the past, such contests have heavily favored Republicans because of a drop-off among Democratic voters, particularly African Americans, after the general election.

But those intimately involved in the two previous Senate showdowns say what happened before is not necessarily predictive of the future. Demographic and cultural change has led to rapid shifts in the state, and Democrats have made concerted efforts to energize and turn out their voters, work that paved the way for President-elect Joe Biden’s strong showing in the state.

“Both times before, Republicans really turned out and the Democrats didn’t,” said Saxby Chambliss, a former Republican senator of Georgia who won a second term in a 2008 runoff weeks after Barack Obama won the presidency. “This time around, I’m not so sure that is going to be the case. I have told my Republican colleagues that Democrats are fired up going into the race, and with Biden winning Georgia, I assume that gives them momentum.”

Both parties and their allied outside groups are already making huge investments in advertising and grassroots efforts and a panoply of voter-stirring surrogates — perhaps including Biden and President Donald Trump — will visit the state over the next two months in an intense effort to win. Vice President Mike Pence is making the trip in the upcoming week.

If Republicans can hold only one of the two seats, they will retain the Senate majority and control much of Biden’s agenda. If Democrats win both, they will gain a working majority in a 50-50 Senate, with Vice President-elect Kamala Harris empowered to break ties. The difference between a Republican-controlled Senate or a Democratic-run chamber is immense when it comes to what legislation would be considered and how nominations would be handled.

“I can’t ever recall a time when the difference between a 50-50 Senate and a 51-49 Senate was so stark,” said Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat.

Perdue, like Fowler, finished first in his reelection bid, with a narrow lead over his Democratic challenger, Jon Ossoff. Loeffler, appointed last year to fill a vacancy, trailed her Democratic opponent, the Rev. Raphael G. Warnock, a Black minister.

The twin runoffs amount to an extraordinary accident of timing that came about because Perdue’s regularly scheduled reelection race coincided with a special election to finish the term of former Sen. Johnny Isakson, who retired in 2019 for health reasons, creating the opening Loeffler was tapped to temporarily fill.

But the unusual runoff rules in Georgia — which require a candidate to gain a majority of the vote to win, and automatically prompt a second contest between the top two vote-getters if no one does — are very much by design. They grew out of efforts by some white Georgians in the 1960s to keep control of the state’s political apparatus after the Supreme Court struck down a system that gave sparsely populated, heavily white rural counties more voting weight than dense urban areas that had large numbers of Black voters.

A federal study published in 2007 on the fight for voting rights described how segregationist state legislators then turned to runoffs, which many believed would reduce the likelihood that Black voters would unite behind one candidate to deliver a plurality victory while other candidates split the white vote. By requiring the winner to square off in a head-to-head race, backers of the plan were confident they could better control the outcomes.

“It was just another form of gerrymandering,” Fowler said.

The special election offers a textbook example of why Republicans have wanted to retain the system. Warnock drew just under 33% of the vote, while Loeffler received just under 26%, and another Republican, Rep. Doug Collins, captured just under 20%. With Collins now out of the picture, Loeffler has the potential to consolidate the Republican vote in a one-on-one contest.

The racist origins of the runoff have faded into the background over the years, and defenders argue that it is only fair to require a candidate to win at least half the state’s voters to be elected.

In 1992, Fowler, a former city councilman for Atlanta and congressman considered an up-and-coming force in the Senate, was seeking his second term. He had won in 1986 by surprising a Republican, Mack Mattingly, who had been swept in on Ronald Reagan’s coattails in 1980. Fowler’s opponent this time was Paul Coverdell, a Republican and a low-key Atlanta businessman, state legislator and ally of the elder George Bush, who had named him head of the Peace Corps.

Clinton’s Southern roots helped him carry Georgia with 43% of the vote — the last Democrat to win Georgia before this year — while Fowler surpassed Coverdell with 49.2%, besting him by 35,000 votes. But under Georgia’s unique law, it was not enough.

The runoff rapidly escalated into a bitter clash. As Clinton prepared to move into the White House, Republicans saw an opportunity to deliver him a quick blow by defeating Fowler. They pulled out the stops, pouring in money and sending Republican luminaries into Georgia by the planeload, including Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas, who promised to turn over his Agriculture Committee seat to Coverdell if he won.

Fowler drew his own big-name visitor when the president-elect popped over from Little Rock, Arkansas, for joint appearances in Albany and Macon, where he played the saxophone with a high school band. He and Fowler raised clasped hands to celebrate what they anticipated as a coming victory.

But Fowler had problems. It was going to be hard to re-create the enthusiasm of the presidential election with the voting finished and Clinton victorious. Fowler was also facing backlash for his vote the year before to place Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court. Fowler remembered Thomas, a Georgia native, had strong support from the state’s Black community, but was opposed by leading women’s groups because of his anti-abortion stance and accusations of sexual harassment. He said he believed that opposition cost him.

In the runoff, held two days before Thanksgiving, almost 1 million fewer votes were cast than three weeks earlier and Fowler saw his initial lead vanish, losing to Coverdell by 16,000 votes — 50.6% to 49.4%. It was a stinging defeat for Fowler but a welcome consolation prize for Republicans.

“We were more successful in getting our people back than the other side was in getting their people back without a presidential race at the top of the ticket,” said Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster who was a consultant to Coverdell. But he cautioned that the dynamic could be vastly different this time around, given that Warnock, an African American, is on the ballot.

“Democrats have never had an African American candidate to vote for at a time when control of the Senate is hanging in the balance,” he said. “The circumstances are clearly different. I don’t know if the outcome will be different.”

Fowler agreed, noting that Black voters now make up a significantly larger share of Georgia’s electorate than they did when he ran.

“Whether or not the Democrats can win this thing in the runoff, the demographics are much, much better now they were in 1992,” he said. “The numbers make it more likely than it would have been even six years ago. Either way, it is going to be whisper close.”

Fowler said he shook off the loss fairly quickly, and in 1996, he became ambassador to Saudi Arabia, serving for five years until the election of George W. Bush.

“I’ve had a good, adventurous life,” he said.

He said he had steered clear of politics over the years but was changing course in this election, relaying knowledge and ideas to Warnock and his campaign.

“I have dusted off my campaign shoes,” Fowler said. “I think it is that important.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

© 2020 The New York Times Company