By C. Nicole Mason

The mayoral race in New York City could have been a classic David and Goliath story: Billionaire incumbent spends 100 million only to be defeated by small time politico with few dollars and even fewer big city connections. This unlikely story might have been the case if blacks and Latinos had turned out in larger numbers on Election Day.

Given the dire social and economic condition of blacks in New York City, they did not flock to the polls in numbers that one would have expected. According to recent exit polls, only 23 percent of blacks voted in the Mayoral election. And among blacks who voted, 77 percent voted for Bill Thompson compared to just 22 percent for Michael Bloomberg.

If blacks and Latinos had turned out in larger numbers, it is possible that the results of the election would have turned out differently. For example, in black and Latino districts, Thompson won by a 3 to 1 margin.

In a city where blacks are four times more likely than whites to be out of work in and 25 percent more likely to be without health insurance compared to whites, 16 percent versus 11 percent, the question is why didn’t they turn out to the polls in larger numbers?

Disenfranchisement and the fight over term limits

Depending on whom you ask, the New York City Mayoral election was either a classic case of money and influence driving democracy or democracy at work. In 2008, the New York City Council, at the request of Mayor Bloomberg, voted to extend term limits. The highly controversial and contested decision to extend the limits so that Bloomberg could run for a third term left a sour taste in the mouths of many voters. Many viewed the move as show of disrespect of voters who voted in 1993 and again in 1996 to limit the time an individual could serve in office to two terms.

Leading up to the Council’s vote, polls showed that 89 percent of voters said that term limits should have been decided by referendum and 51 percent opposed extending term limits so that Bloomberg could run again.

Among those who voted for Thompson, most of whom were black or Latino, 76 percent said the decision to change the term limits made a difference and made it less likely that they would support Bloomberg. These are the people who felt most disenfranchised by the decision to extend the term limits or who believed that money and influence, not the will of the people, drove the decision by Council members to vote in favor of extending the limits.

Did he ever stand a chance?

While Thompson won a coveted endorsement by Barack Obama, New York City heavy hitters failed to endorse him, particularly black clergy such as Reverend Floyd Flake of Greater Allen A & E Church in Jamaica, Queens and Pastor Calvin Butts of Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem. As a black candidate, losing these endorsements deprived him of a key voting bloc that he would have needed to win the election–or at least compete.

Bloomberg also outspent Thompson by margins unheard of in a local election—he spent 50 million dollars in campaign ads alone and another 50 million dollars cultivating support from all sectors of the voting population, including the support of the black church. In sharp contrast, Thompson spent seven million dollars on his entire campaign. Just looking at the dollars poured into each campaign, Thompson never really stood a chance.

Did he deserve another four?

While crime has gone down and the education system has begun to improve, not much has changed about the social and economic conditions of blacks in New York City since Bloomberg was elected eight years ago. They are still facing many of the same issues as before he was elected to his first term.

Among voters, the economy and jobs were cited as top priorities. Sixty-seven percent of voters believed that the economy was not in good shape. Among those who voted for Bloomberg, 72 percent believed that the New York City economy was in good condition compared to just 55 percent of those who voted for Thompson. And 58 percent of those who voted for Thompson said that their financial situation had worsened over the last year, compared to just 39 percent of those who voted for Bloomberg. Sixty-four percent of Bloomberg voters said that their financial situation was better than a year ago.

During this economic recession, higher than the national average unemployment rates and rising housing costs, means that blacks need a mayor that not only understands these disparities and inequalities, but also would work with communities to overcome them.

Blacks had every reason to turn out for this election. In fact, their very survival and well-being may have depended on it. Among Thompson voters, 54 percent had an income of less than $50,000, compared to 61 percent of Bloomberg voters who had incomes of $100,000 or more.

Money and influence seemed to carry the day in the New York City Mayoral election. Blacks may have felt jilted by the extension of term limits without a direct say or believed their vote would not have made a difference in the outcome. No matter what the reason for low voter turnout, at the end of the day, it was politics as usual.

Dr. C. Nicole Mason is the Executive Director of the Women of Color Policy Network at the Wagner School of Public Service at New York University.