THE PRAIRIE EDITOR: The Temptation of Pelosi

Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi ended the
2020 election with a 222-213 majority (currently 219-211 with
recent vacancies), and her slim 5-vote margin has tempted
her to consider the legal but very dangerous act of removing
an (certified) elected and provisionally-seated Republican
congresswoman from Iowa who had won her seat in 2020 by
less than 10 votes.

It was the closest congressional contest in last year’s cycle,
and the losing candidate, Democrat Rita Hart, quickly
challenged the result, contending some ballots for her had
been excluded from the count. However, instead of following
the proscribed challenge process in Iowa, Ms. Hart ended
the process prematurely, saying she would take her case to
the U.S.. house where her party held  the majority. As a result,
the Iowa secretary of state duly certified her Republican
opponent, Marianette Miller-Meeks, as the winner, and she
then was sworn in.

The U.S. constitution says that the U.S. house  has the right
to determine who will be its members, but this right to
override a state district election (presumably with cause)
was rarely used initially until the mid-19th century when
house majorities of both parties routinely ignored the
results of many close elections, denying the winner of the
opposition and seating their own candidate. By the early
20th century this obvious political abuse of the framers of
the constitution intention became rare. It was last used in
1984 when the Democrats held a large house majority.

Indeed, if Speaker Pelosi had a comfortable majority, she
almost certainly would not even consider overturning
this election, and giving Republicans so much political
ammunition for 2022. Furthermore, her effort would
would probably be short-lived because the Democrat would
likely lose the next election. Longer-term she would also be
giving future Republican house majorities justification to
refuse to seat Democrats who won close elections, and even
restart the unfortunate mid-19th century practice.

It doesn’t seem to make much political sense. At least four
house Democrats are on record saying they oppose the
move (it would make a powerful opposition ad anywhere in
the nation). But Mrs, Pelosi is very skillful with her caucus,
albeit one that is often divided.

If she does it, it would be what William Safire calls a
“power grab” in his famed Political Dictionary (2006 edition).
[I can’t help but note Safire's own definitions are always
accompanied by someone else’s usage of the term, In the
case of “power grab,” it is the title of a 2006 op ed in
The Washington Times. That title was “Nancy Pelosi’s
Power Grab” --- it was a column about an action she took
when she first became speaker fifteen years ago. The
author of that op ed? Yours truly!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (c) 2021 by  Barry Casselman. All rights reserved.