Back in January, when Donald Trump and congressional Republicans were declining to accept the results of the 2020 election, G.K. Butterfield was among the many who lined up to wag a finger.
“It is shameful that many Republicans in Congress and President Trump have refused to respect the will of the people and recognize the election results,” said Butterfield, the U.S. House representative from North Carolina’s first district. “Instead, President Trump and his allies have pushed wild conspiracy theories and unfounded claims of election fraud, which undermine faith in our representative democracy.”
Butterfield was right. Trump’s refusal to concede was dangerous, as evidenced in polls that continue to show Republicans not accepting what is plainly true — that the presidential election was fairly won and rightfully certified. “The American people deserve better,” Butterfield said then.
Now, he’s the one failing them.
The congressman is among a panel of House Democrats that is moving a step closer toward overturning a Republican congressional victory in Iowa, CNN reports. In November, Mariannette Miller-Meeks defeated Democrat Rita Hart by just six votes, 196,964 to 196,958, in Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District. Miller-Meeks initially won by 47 votes, but the lead was sliced to a half-dozen after a recount. It was the closest federal race in 2020, and importantly, it was certified by bipartisan state election officials.
Hart, however, says that 22 additional ballots should be counted, and in December, she filed a challenge in the House under the Federal Contested Elections Act. Lawyers for the two sides have until Monday to send their initial briefs to a House Administration Committee, which already has voted on party lines last week to consider the case. The committee can investigate the election and issue a report that recommends who should hold the House seat. The House, which has a 219-211 Democratic majority, would then vote on who is seated.
That has Republicans unhappy and Democrats defensive.
Republicans say that Hart could have made her case in court, and they rightfully (if hypocritically) noted that Democrats like Butterfield were being inconsistent about certified elections. “You cannot complain about anyone questioning election certificates again if you’re willing to do the same with a duly elected member, especially since Rita Hart did not finish the court process in Iowa,” Illinois Rep. Rodney Davis, the top Republican on the House Administration Committee, told reporters.
Democrats say this is a valid, albeit rare, path for Hart. While the Constitution authorizes states to administer elections, each chamber of Congress gets the final say on the election and qualifications of its members. The House has considered 107 contested election cases from 1933-2009, according to the Congressional Research Service. In only four cases was the election result changed.
Said Butterfield to CNN: “We can’t be concerned about optics.”
But he should be, especially now. At a time when Americans’ trust in elections is tenuous, overturning a certified result would further feed the perception that either party will do whatever it can to maintain its grip on power. It also could encourage future majorities to look for reasons to reconsider election results they don’t like. We already know what that looks like from Republicans, and we already know the damage it’s done to the integrity of the election process.
Hart’s campaign got a recount and had an opportunity to have its arguments heard by state courts, but it didn’t make a December deadline required by law. Now it wants a friendlier audience. The House may be constitutionally empowered to question state certified results, but the threshold for doing so should be exceedingly high. This case, in this moment, doesn’t meet it.
House Democrats, including those from North Carolina, should signal that they won’t support such an effort. They should tell Butterfield and Democrats on the committee to take the L, for the good of everyone.