The matter came up in a call on Monday between Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee officials and the most vulnerable members of the party – a discussion that at times became tense as lawmakers expressed concerns about the decision of the committee.
“As I said before in relation to the 2020 presidential election, lawmakers should be on the lookout for state certifications for their elections,” said Rep. Susan Wild (D-Pa.), An unstable district democrat who spoke out in calling for the DCCC. “Unless there is a rampant error and substantial evidence of that, I do not believe that it is the role of members of the Chamber to dictate the outcome of the elections.”
Representative Josh Gottheimer (DN.J.), co-chairman of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, added in a statement to POLITICO: “I have deep reservations.”
Senior Democrats say these concerns are exaggerated, arguing that Hart is undergoing a constitutional process, unlike Trump and his allies. They say the House Management Committee will carefully look at Hart’s challenge – which revolves around 22 ballots that she said were wrongly rejected and if counted would make her victorious – and that she bears the burden of proof.
Still, about half a dozen Democrats have privately expressed reservations about the House accepting Hart’s challenge – enough to override any vote in the plenary, according to several sources familiar with the talks. Some vulnerable Democrats plan to conduct an informal whip count among their own members this week to probe exactly how many colleagues can oppose the removal of Miller-Meeks if the issue goes public.
“Losing an election in the House by six votes is painful for Democrats. But taking him down in the House would be even more painful for America, ”said Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.), Who on Monday became the first undecided district Democrat to speak out against any attempt to overthrow the results on twitter.
This Iowa dispute is now under review by the House’s Management Committee, an unusual – but not unprecedented – process that could result in on-the-spot investigations and a potential recount. Hart, who is being represented by the leading Democratic electoral lawyer, Marc Elias, opened a new petition in the case on Monday. But there is no set timetable or process for this, and the committee has ample freedom to move forward.
Some Democrats hope that if enough of them are reluctant to remove another member, the committee – chaired by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), A Pelosi ally – will let the investigation go. In previous contested election cases, the Management Committee called a small task force that can seize ballots, conduct a recount and then make a recommendation on who is the legitimate winner of the dispute.
The House could then vote for whomever it chooses – a result that Democrats with a mixed seat hope to avoid.
“This is an issue for which states should have primary responsibility in determining the outcome of the election. The state of Iowa has certified it, and that is what must remain, ”said Rep. Lou Correa (D-Calif.) In an interview.
All of this is happening in the most divided Congress in decades. Democrats are clinging to a five-seat majority after losing more than a dozen seats in 2020.
Meanwhile, the Republican Party’s campaign arm in the House is pinching its heels and trying to make Hart’s situation as politically painful as possible for Democrats. The National Republican Congressional Committee has mounted a public pressure campaign – complete with bursts of email almost daily – to define its position on the subject in 15 of the most vulnerable Democrats.
Republican Party leaders in the House accused Pelosi of trying to “steal” a seat in the House to increase his small majority. In the past few weeks, they have also tried to elevate Miller-Meeks, a doctor and veteran, within the Republican conference: she joined minority leader in the House, Kevin McCarthy, for a trip to the U.S. border with Mexico last week and ended up to be appointed to a select coronavirus subcommittee.
And hoping to bring some additional credibility to the discussion, nine of the 10 Republicans who voted for Trump’s impeachment wrote a letter to Pelosi on Monday warning that throwing out a state-certified victory would undermine voters’ faith in democracy.
“You cannot complain about someone questioning electoral certificates again if you are willing to do the same with a duly elected member,” said Rep. Rodney Davis of Illinois, the main Republican on the House Management Committee. “Especially since Rita Hart did not complete the court case in Iowa. She went straight to politics. “
But after more than 120 House Republicans contested Biden’s victory on the day of the deadly January 6 riots, Democrats say Republicans have no room to complain about contesting the elections. McCarthy, however, defended his decision to challenge the results of the presidential election in two states, arguing in an angry exchange with a CNN reporter last week that it would not have been enough to really change the outcome.
The Miller-Meeks campaign took advantage of comments from House Democrats, skeptical of Hart’s challenge. In a call to reporters on Monday, lawyer Alan Ostergren cited the enormous cost of a taxpayer-funded investigation into the race.
“I question whether it makes sense for someone to spend millions of dollars litigating an electoral dispute,” he said, “when it is clear that there are some members of the Democratic Party in the House who think that all of this is wrong from the start and should be stopped. “
In particular, some Democrats were shocked by Hart’s decision to contest his defeat in a way that could force members in distress to vote hard.
In contrast, former deputy Anthony Brindisi (DN.Y.) chose to end a protracted battle over who would be the legitimate winner of his seat in upstate New York in February. When a state court ordered Republican Representative Claudia Tenney to be certified as a winner by 109 votes, he admitted, although he said the process was “riddled with errors, inconsistencies and systematic violations of state and federal electoral laws.”
It is not uncommon for candidates to appeal to the House panel, although such revisions rarely result in the annulment of the election result. Perhaps the best-known example was after the 1984 election, when Democrats refused to elect the winner of the Republican Party of the 8th District of Indiana, did a recount and then voted to elect their own candidate. House Republicans, led by then backbencher Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), Accused us of trying to steal an election and staged a strike in protest against the so-called “Bloody Eighth”.
Republicans are now warning of a similar setback – both at the ballot box and inside the corridors of Congress – if Democrats go ahead with the removal of Miller-Meeks.
“It would be the most unifying event that we would have as Republicans in my entire career here,” said Davis.
Democrats argue that they are not looking to prove a foregone conclusion – that Hart actually won the seat – but are trying to follow the facts without partisanship. And some are particularly skeptical that the panel would eventually endorse the election.
“They will have to be able to present a really compelling case,” said Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Mich.). “It won’t just be, you know, a conclusion. convincing case that includes the arguments of both sides in the most complete way possible. ”
It is also unclear how much the dynamics would change if the committee found new evidence in favor of Hart. Some skeptical Democrats say they are open to changing their minds.
“At the moment, it is a matter of state. Do we have any facts that tell me otherwise? We’ll see that too, ”said Correa.