- Republican candidate Dan Bishop beat Democrat Dan McCready in a competitive special election race for North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District.
- The election comes after an election fraud scandal in the 2018 midterms, where a man hired by the Republican candidate was found to have illegally collected and in some cases filled out absentee ballots.
- The scandal prompted the state’s Board of Elections to throw out the results of the 2018 midterm election, which Harris had won by 905 votes.
North Carolina’s 9th District
Republican Dan Bishop narrowly won a special congressional election in North Carolina’s 9th District Tuesday, marking the end of a race marred by scandal.
With all precincts reporting, Bishop won 50.74% of the vote while his Democratic opponent Dan McCready won 48.66%, according to the official results from the state elections board. Bishop won by 3,937 votes out of 189,363 votes cast.
The election closes the book on a nearly 10-month long process to choose a representative for the district. This after the discovery of a massive election fraud scheme prompted the state’s Board of Elections to throw out the results of the 2018 midterm and call for a new election to be held.
During the first election in November, Republican Mark Harris appeared to beat Democrat Dan McCready by only 905 votes. Just 0.3% of the vote in a district where about 280,000 votes were cast.
However, the North Carolina State Board of Elections, which consisted of four Democrats, four Republicans, and one Independent, voted unanimously not to certify Harris as the winner and launched an investigation into the election.
Investigation & Hearing
At first, the public was not told the reason for the investigation.
Then, local media outlets discovered that Harris had hired a man for his campaign named McCrae Dowless.
Dowless had directed people to illegally collect absentee ballots, falsify absentee witness certifications, and even at times fill out absentee ballots for voters in rural Bladen County, parts of which are in the 9th District.
According to reports and interviews with people who worked for Dowless, he had basically set up a functional mill of people he directed to commit massive election fraud. Some of his employees were reportedly members of his own family, and some were high on opioids while they were at work.
Harris, for his part, later confirmed that he had hired Dowless to do what Dowless had told him was pretty standard voter outreach, but that he was not aware of the coordinated illegal scheme Dowless was running.
Fast forward to February when a new election board of three Democrats and two Republicans was convened and held a multi-day evidentiary hearing to decide whether to certify the election or call for new elections.
Notably, at that hearing, Harris’ son gave surprise testimony, and told the board that he had sent his dad emails warning him not to hire Dowless.
Harris’ son said he sent the emails after he found that Dowless had run the absentee campaign in a 2016 congressional race where there had been recorded absentee voting irregularities in Bladen County.
With the information that Harris had, in fact, been warned by his own son about Dowless’ questionable tactics, Harris told the board to call for a new election, and the board agreed, voting unanimously to do so.
Shortly after that decision was announced, Dowless was arrested and indicted on seven counts, and the FBI launched its own investigation into the election fraud.
McCready chose to stay in the race, but Harris decided to drop out. Republicans chose Bishop, a state senator who ran as a close ally of President Donald Trump. Trump himself held a rally for Bishop Monday, the day before the special election was set to take place.
In a victory speech last night, Bishop thanked Trump for supporting him and said his win was a “first step toward taking back the House of Representatives in 2020.”
“I hope the Democrats in Washington are watching this incredible victory and realize what they’re doing is not working,” Bishop continued. “Let’s hope they see this as an opportunity to stop playing presidential politics and come to the table to work with us and work with this president.”
McCready, who now has been campaigning for 27 months, conceded the election in a speech Tuesday night.
“The people of North Carolina stood up, and we faced down the full force of election fraud and voter suppression,” he said.
“When the people in power . . . perpetrated the largest case of election fraud in recent American history, we fought back, and we won. We were not successful tonight, but I want you to remember that victory postponed is not defeat.”
Trump also chimed in, celebrating the win on Twitter.
“Dan Bishop was down 17 points 3 weeks ago. He then asked me for help, we changed his strategy together, and he ran a great race. Big Rally last night. Now it looks like he is going to win,” he wrote, later referring to the victory as a “big night for the Republican Party.”
However, as NPR pointed out, there were no public or private polls that showed Bishop behind by 17 points, and both parties have said that the race was very close throughout the whole process.
Potential Implications for 2020
Many have noted that the closeness of the race is actually concerning for Republicans, who have held the congressional seat in District 9 for more than 50 years since 1962.
Some have also argued the 2% margin should be especially concerning for Trump, who won District 9 easily by 12% in 2016.
According to the election results, McCready performed better in the district’s suburbs than he did in the last race. A fact that numerous experts have argued shows the growing shift away from Trump and the GOP among suburban voters, who largely drove the Democratic victory in the 2018 midterms that lead the Democrats to flip the House.
Now, many Democratic leaders and pollsters say that is a good sign for Democrats, especially because District 9 is historically conservative.
As Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairwoman Cheri Bustos told NPR, District 9 is a far more conservative seat than most of the seats Democrats flipped in 2018.
“There are 34 Republican-held districts that are more favorable to Democrats than North Carolina’s Ninth,” she said.
“Tonight’s razor-thin result in this ruby-red district solidifies the fact that Democrats are pushing further into Republican strongholds and are in a commanding position to protect and expand our House Majority in 2020.”
On the other side, McCready actually lost ground in some rural areas compared to last race, which experts have said shows that Trump and Republicans have not lost their strongholds in rural areas.
National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Emmer said in a statement that Bishop’s victory shows that the GOP’s messaging in the 2020 cycle is working so far.
“North Carolinians rejected the Democrats’ socialist agenda and elected a representative who will defend North Carolina values, and will always fight for freedom and against socialism,” he said.
Regardless of the implications for 2020, the approximately 778,000 people of North Carolina’s 9th District now have a someone to represent them in Congress for the first time in almost a year.
See what others are saying: (NPR) (The Charlotte Observer) (The Washington Post)
Biden Calls on Congress To Extend Eviction Moratorium
The move comes just two days before the federal ban is set to expire.
Eviction Freeze Set To Expire
President Joe Biden asked Congress on Thursday to extend the federal eviction moratorium for another month just two days before the ban was set to expire.
The request follows a Supreme Court decision last month, where the justices ruled the evictions freeze could stay in place until it expired on July 31. That decision was made after a group of landlords sued, arguing that the moratorium was illegal under the public health law the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had relied on to implement it.
While the court did not provide reasons for its ruling, Justice Brett Kavanaugh issued a short concurring opinion explaining that although he thought the CDC “exceeded its existing statutory authority,” he voted not to end the program because it was already set to expire in a month.
In a statement Thursday, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki cited the Supreme Court decision, as well as the recent surge in COVID cases, as reasons for the decision to call on Congress.
“Given the recent spread of the delta variant, including among those Americans both most likely to face evictions and lacking vaccinations, President Biden would have strongly supported a decision by the CDC to further extend this eviction moratorium to protect renters at this moment of heightened vulnerability,” she said.
“Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has made clear that this option is no longer available.”
Delays in Relief Distribution
The move comes as the administration has struggled to distribute the nearly $47 billion in rental relief funds approved as part of two coronavirus relief packages passed in December and March, respectively.
Nearly seven months after the first round of funding was approved, the Treasury Department has only allocated $3 billion of the reserves, and just 600,000 tenants have been helped under the program.
A total of 7.4 million households are behind on rent according to the most recent data from the Census Bureau. An estimated 3.6 million of those households could face eviction in the next two months if the moratorium expires.
The distribution problems largely stem from the fact that many states and cities tasked with allocating the fund had no infrastructure to do so, causing the aid to be held up by delays, confusion, and red tape.
Some states opened portals that were immediately overwhelmed, prompting them to close off applications, while others have faced technical glitches.
According to The Washington Post, just 36 out of more than 400 states, counties, and cities that reported data to the Treasury Department were able to spend even half of the money allotted them by the end of June. Another 49 — including New York — had not spent any funds at all.
Slim Chances in Congress
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) urged her colleagues to approve an extension for the freeze Thursday night, calling it “a moral imperative” and arguing that “families must not pay the price” for the slow distribution of aid.
However, Biden’s last-minute call for Congress to act before members leave for their August recess is all but ensured to fail.
While the House Rules Committee took up a measure Thursday night that would extend the moratorium until the end of this year, the only way it could pass in the Senate would be through a procedure called unanimous consent, which can be blocked by a single dissenting vote.
Some Senate Republicans have already rejected the idea.
“There’s no way I’m going to support this. It was a bad idea in the first place,” Senator Patrick Toomey (R-Pa.) told reporters. “Owners have the right to action. They need to have recourse for the nonpayment of rent.”
With the hands of the CDC tied and Congressional action seemingly impossible, the U.S. could be facing an unprecedented evictions crisis Saturday, even though millions of Americans who will now risk losing their homes should have already received rental assistance to avert this exact situation.
See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (The Associated Press)
Mississippi Asks Supreme Court To Overturn Roe v. Wade
The Supreme Court’s decision to consider Mississippi’s restrictive abortion ban already has sweeping implications for the precedents set under the landmark reproductive rights ruling, but now the state is asking the high court to go even further.
Mississippi’s Abortion Case
Mississippi filed a brief Thursday asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade when it hears the state’s 15-week abortion ban this fall.
After months of deliberation, the high court agreed in May to hear what will be the first abortion case the 6-to-3 conservative majority will decide.
Both a district judge and a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit had ruled that Mississippi could not enforce the 2018 law that banned nearly all abortions at 15 weeks with exceptions for only “severe fetal abnormality,” but not rape and incest.
If the Supreme Court upholds the Mississippi law, it would undo decades of precedent set under Roe in 1973 and upheld under Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992, where the court respectively ruled and reaffirmed that states could not ban abortion before the fetus is “viable” and can live outside the womb, which is generally around 24 to 28 weeks.
When the justices decided to hear the case, they said they would specifically examine the question of whether “all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.”
Depending on the scope of their decision on the Mississippi law, the court’s ruling could allow other states to pass much more restrictive abortion bans without the risk of lower courts striking down those laws.
As a result, legal experts have said the case will represent the most significant ruling on reproductive rights since Casey nearly three decades ago, and the Thursday brief raises the stakes even more.
When Mississippi asked the justices to take up its case last June, the state’s attorney general, Lynn Fitch (R), explicitly stated that the petition’s questions “do not require the Court to overturn Roe or Casey.”
But that was before the court’s conservatives solidified their supermajority with the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett — who personally opposes abortion — following the death of liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
New Filing Takes Aim at Roe
With the new filing, it appears that Fitch views the high court’s altered makeup as an opportunity to undermine the constitutional framework that has been in place for the better part of the last century.
“The Constitution’s text says nothing about abortion,” Fitch wrote in the brief, arguing that American society has changed so much that the previous rulings need to be reheard.
“Today, adoption is accessible and on a wide scale women attain both professional success and a rich family life, contraceptives are more available and effective, and scientific advances show that an unborn child has taken on the human form and features months before viability,” she added, claiming the power should be left to state lawmakers.
“Roe and Casey shackle states to a view of the facts that is decades out of date,” she continued. “The national fever on abortion can break only when this Court returns abortion policy to the states.”
The Center for Reproductive Rights, which represents Mississippi’s sole abortion provider in the suit against the state’s law, painted Fitch’s effort as one that will have a chilling effect on abortion rights nationwide.
“Mississippi has stunningly asked the Supreme Court to overturn Roe and every other abortion rights decision in the last five decades,” Nancy Northup, the president and CEO of the group said in a statement Thursday. “Today’s brief reveals the extreme and regressive strategy, not just of this law, but of the avalanche of abortion bans and restrictions that are being passed across the country.”
The Supreme Court has not yet said exactly when during its fall term it will hear oral arguments on the Mississippi case, but a decision is expected to come down by next June or July, as is standard.
An anticipated ruling just months before the 2022 midterms will almost certainly position abortion as a top issue at the ballot box.
See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (The Washington Post) (Politico)
Republicans Boycott Jan. 6 Committee After Pelosi Rejects Two of McCarthy’s Picks
The House Minority Leader said that unless House Speaker Pelosi reinstated the two members, Republicans will launch their own investigation into the insurrection.
Pelosi Vetoes Republicans
Republicans are boycotting the select committee to investigate the insurrection after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) rejected two of the five GOP members Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Ca.) picked to serve on the panel Wednesday.
In a statement, Pelosi cited the “statements and actions” of Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Oh.) and Jim Banks (R-In.), whose nominations she said she was opposing “with respect for the integrity of the investigation.”
Jordan and Banks — both staunch allies of former President Donald Trump — have helped propagate the previous leader’s false election claims, opposed efforts to investigate the insurrection, and voted not to certify the election for President Joe Biden.
A senior Democratic aide also specifically told The Washington Post that Democrats did not want Jordan on the panel because he reportedly helped Trump strategized how to overturn the election and due to the fact he spoke to the then-president on Jan. 6, meaning there is a possibility he could be called to testify before the very same committee.
The aide also said that Democrats opposed Banks’ selection because of a statement he issued after McCarthy chose him.
In the statement, the representative compared the insurrection to the racial justice protests last summer, implied that the rioters were just normal American’s expressing their political views, and claimed the committee was a political ploy “to justify the Left’s authoritarian agenda.”
Notably, Pelosi did say she would accept McCarthy’s three other nominees — including Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Wi.), who also voted against certifying Biden’s win.
McCarthy Threatens Separate Investigation
McCarthy, however, refused to select new members, and instead opted to remove all his appointees from the would-be bipartisan committee.
In a statement condemning the move, the minority leader said that Pelosi’s action “represents an egregious abuse of power.”
“Denying the voices of members who have served in the military and law enforcement, as well as leaders of standing committees, has made it undeniable that this panel has lost all legitimacy and credibility and shows the Speaker is more interested in playing politics than seeking the truth,” he said.
“Unless Speaker Pelosi reverses course and seats all five Republican nominees, Republicans will not be party to their sham process and will instead pursue our own investigation of the facts.”
Pelosi defended her decision during a press conference Thursday, where she said that Banks and Jordan were “ridiculous” choices for the panel.
“When statements are ridiculous and fall into the realm of, ‘You must be kidding,’ there’s no way that they’re going to be on the committee,” she added.