Congress

‘Point of pride’: Dems revel in California House wins despite nationwide losses

Published

2 years ago

December 5, 2024

LOS ANGELES — Leave it to the Golden State to provide a rare ray of sunshine for national Democrats this election cycle.

Nearly a month after Election Day, Democrats clinched their final House win of the cycle this week, a capstone to winning four of the six most competitive California congressional races. Their strong showing, despite a statewide rightward shift that echoed national trends, led to the party ousting three incumbent Republicans and bringing them tantalizingly close to capturing the chamber.

In a cycle where very little went right for Democrats, their successes in California — and New York, another blue state bastion that delivered multiple red-to-blue flips — showed that the party’s relentless coastal focus paid some dividends. Democrats lavished far more attention, and crucially, money, on key races in those states compared to two years ago, enabling them to prevail against stiff political headwinds, sometimes by the barest of margins.

That consolation prize was enough for Californian and third-ranking House Democrat Rep. Pete Aguilar to take a victory lap Wednesday after a caucus meeting, which featured newly-minted winner Adam Gray — who took his Central Valley race by just 187 votes — beaming in via FaceTime.

“Ultimately, these candidates and their stories is what broke through,” Aguilar told reporters at his weekly news conference. “Netting three seats was a very big deal for California, a point of pride.”

While precinct-level deep dives are still to come, Aguilar sketched out in broad strokes what he saw as the Democrats’ successful formula in his home state: better candidates, more resources and driving a message on “quality of life issues.”

That combination helped reverse two consecutive cycles of setbacks for California Democrats, who swelled their ranks in the 2018 blue wave, only to lose four seats two years later and fail to reclaim them in 2022.

“Clearly, 2018 was the high water mark, and since then, all they’ve been able to do is claw back some of the territory that they lost,” said Jacob Rubashkin, deputy editor of Inside Elections, a nonpartisan campaign almanac.

In California, winning back that ground was an expensive proposition. In 2022, Democratic challengers were perpetually outgunned by cash-flush GOP incumbents. The party’s House campaign arm and the affiliated outside group House Majority PAC abandoned the expensive Los Angeles media market entirely, which touches four hotly-contested districts.

This time, Democratic candidates routinely posted seven-figure fundraising hauls, putting them in a position to more efficiently buy TV airtime. And they were boosted by substantial investments by the party and major super PACs, which early on oriented their funding goals in anticipation of the high cost of playing in those races.

“We knew from the onset how important these seats would be, and so did Republicans,” said Dan Gottlieb, spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Ultimately, we had a better formula to win these races and defy the political headwinds blowing the GOP’s way, and now these dysfunctional Republicans will have to manage through the smallest House majority in nearly a century.”

House Majority PAC also identified the California races early on as top priorities and set an initial spending target of $35 million. It ended up spending $50 million — almost five times more than it did two years prior.

Labor unions, another essential part of the Democrats’ arsenal, zeroed in on the state’s congressional races in a way they hadn’t since before the pandemic, said Lorena Gonzalez, who leads the California Labor Federation.

“When we are focused and we don’t end up in 10 different places, we do much better,” Gonzalez said, noting the labor movement sidestepped two major ballot initiative clashes with business groups, clearing the way for a single-minded focus on the House.

Republicans on the ground felt the disparity — particularly after former Rep. Kevin McCarthy was ousted from the speakership, denying vulnerable incumbents a powerful home state patron.

“We got outspent by $6 million,” said GOP Rep. John Duarte, who lost by a dental-floss thin margin to Gray. He acknowledged getting support from the national party and Congressional Leadership Fund, the super PAC directed by Speaker Mike Johnson.

“But if you look at the McCarthy money and some of the other independent expenditures, it never came in,” he said.

New York Democrats similarly swelled their efforts after being stunned by the loss of four House races in 2022. House Majority PAC plowed $50 million into the state, nearly quadrupling its previous investment, and two separate efforts founded in the wake of the midterm drubbing beefed up the Dems’ ground game.

The New York Democratic Party launched a “coordinated campaign” — led by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and Gov. Kathy Hochul, who was blamed for some of the 2022 losses — that knocked three times more doors in battleground districts than in 2022. A coalition of labor unions and left-leaning groups called Battleground New York raised $11 million and focused on turning out three groups: “drop-off voters,” voters of color and newer voters.

As a result, Democrats flipped four seats between a February special election and last month’s contests, reversing their midterm losses.

Two of the newly elected New York House Democrats — Laura Gillen and Josh Riley — won after losing by mere points in 2022, both appealing to independent and Republican voters and voicing their willingness to stand up to their fellow Democrats on border security.

“Frankly, I think in 2022, we, the Democrats, were surprised by some of those races, and certainly had not put a lot of money or organization or attention into those,” Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) said in an interview. “This time around, there was no surprise. … the state party was far more involved. Certainly, we in the delegation in Congress were very actively campaigning in those districts, and you just had high-quality candidates.”

California Democrats also credited their candidates with being able to defy their party’s gloomy national prospects, often running ahead of Kamala Harris at the top of the ticket.

“Each one was able to establish a brand, a narrative that did not fit neatly into what Republicans were trying to label all Democrats as nationally,” said Orrin Evans, a Democratic strategist who worked on two winning toss-up Orange County races.

One client, Dave Min, is a Korean American former state lawmaker who embodied the demographic changes that had transformed ruby-red Orange County to a purple battleground. He was able to hold the seat left vacant by outgoing Rep. Katie Porter, despite lacking her commanding spending advantage or national profile. He did it by running offense on public safety, overcoming his party’s soft-on-crime stereotype and his own drunken driving arrest.

“Dave Min was endorsed by every law enforcement organization in the state,” Evans said. A messaging war on crime “was a debate we were eager to have,” particularly given Baugh’s own past scrapes with campaign finance violations.

In a neighboring Orange County district, Derek Tran, a Vietnamese American first-time candidate, was well-positioned to peel away support from Little Saigon and defeat incumbent GOP Rep. Michelle Steel by roughly 650 votes.

Democrats had failed in two consecutive cycles to dislodge Los Angeles-area GOP Rep. Mike Garcia, despite their party’s double-digit registration advantage. This time, the party backed George Whitesides, the former CEO of Virgin Galactic. Whitesides’ profile — his ability to self-fund, plus his business background that resonated in a district with a heavy aerospace presence — earned grudging respect, even from Republicans.

“George Whitesides was probably the Democrats’ most impressive new recruit that they got throughout the entire country,” said one national GOP strategist who was granted anonymity to speak frankly. “I don’t think there was a better first-time candidate for them this cycle than in that seat.”

A sterling candidate profile can only go so far. Will Rollins, a former prosecutor who ran for a second time against Rep. Ken Calvert, the dean of the state’s GOP delegation, was a top-notch fundraiser and had a telegenic television presence, but it was not enough to overcome the red tilt of the Inland Empire district — though fellow Democrats don’t fault him for it.

“I only wish Will Rollins would run again,” said California Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell. “He was the perfect candidate for that race. It’s just that that was a really tough seat.”

Rollins was the only California Democrat to seriously challenge a GOP incumbent in a district that Donald Trump won in 2020. In the other five seats, Democrats were playing on blue-tinted territory. But even a 13-point party registration advantage was not enough to unseat Republican Rep. David Valadao, who easily beat his Democratic challenger Rudy Salas.

There are some ominous trends for the party even in its victories, such as Gray’s whisper-thin win in a majority-Latino district where Democrats have a nearly 11-point registration edge. Early in the cycle, Gray cited those figures in arguing that, in a presidential year turnout, the math favored the Democrats. That ended up being just barely true.

“It’s a warning sign that Democrats are getting from all corners of the country, which is that lower-propensity voters are no longer their friends,” said Rubashkin of Inside Elections.

Republicans point out that Democratic football spiking makes their wins look more impressive than they actually are.

“How insane is it that the Democrats are having to spend $40 or $50 million in traditionally blue states and blue districts, which is supposed to be their territory, because they were so lackadaisical the last couple of cycles that they kind of screwed up, let those seats go and then they almost lost these seats [this time],” said the national GOP strategist. “I mean, 650 votes is nothing to be that proud of after you’ve spent however much money that they did.”

For now, though, Democrats are accentuating the positive, choosing to bask in their net gain of one House seat, giving Republicans just a 220-215 margin and success of ousting California Republican incumbents who have bedeviled them for years.

“Mike Garcia and Michelle Steel have been survivors since 2020 and that’s impressive,” said CJ Warnke, spokesperson for House Majority PAC. “To beat people who are able to hold on in a district like that, you need to recruit the highest quality of candidate.”

Dustin Gardiner contributed to this report.

Congress

Trump tells Thune to keep Senate in session to pass SAVE America Act

Published

1 hour ago

July 27, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

President Donald Trump ramped up pressure Monday on Majority Leader John Thune, telling him to keep the Senate in session until a GOP election bill passes.

“John Thune should not allow the United States Senate to ‘leave town’ until it passes The Save America Act or, far better still, TERMINATES THE FILIBUSTER, where Republicans can then quickly pass everything they ever dreamed of,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Monday.

Democrats, he added, will nix the filibuster themselves when they regain power “and can’t believe how lucky they got with this Senate leadership. Remember, stupidity always brings LOSING & DEATH!”

Trump’s Truth Social post comes after he urged supporters last week to call Thune about the SAVE America Act, then said Friday that he wanted Senate Republicans to adopt a blueprint for a $95 billion party-line spending bill, which would include some election-related funding, before they leave town for the August recess as planned on Aug. 6.

Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said over the weekend that they believed the Senate should stay in town until the election bill is passed. Lee has previously called for the Senate to stay in session through prior recesses to pass the SAVE America Act but has not forced the issue on the floor.

Despite Trump’s pressure campaign, the elections bill doesn’t have the votes to pass the Senate and there isn’t enough support within the Senate Republican conference for nixing the filibuster, which requires 60 votes for most legislation to advance.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Thune tries to focus as Trump fumes

Published

3 hours ago

July 27, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

John Thune has a long to-do list, a shrinking runway for getting it done and a president in the peanut gallery.

The Senate is back Monday with only two more weeks — more realistically, eight legislative days — in town until the chamber leaves Washington through mid-September.

The majority leader wants to clear a government funding stopgap, a long-stalled Russia sanctions bill and dozens of nominees, but he’s also facing pressure from President Donald Trump and some of his right flank to make progress on the SAVE America Act, a GOP election bill that doesn’t have the votes to pass.

It’s the latter that will be the biggest headache for Thune after Trump told Senate Republicans to adopt the blueprint for a $95 billion spending bill, which would include election-related funding, before leaving for August break.

Most GOP senators, however, don’t expect that to happen — and the budget blueprint doesn’t have the 50 votes it needs right now among Senate Republicans to be adopted despite Trump’s public overture.

Then, over the weekend, Sen. Mike Lee signaled he opposed the Senate leaving for the recess without passing the election bill. Lee could force a vote if he wants to on whether or not to adjourn — though he’s previously tweeted about how the Senate shouldn’t leave and then done nothing about it. Sen. Rick Scott also posted Sunday that he stands with Lee in opposing a recess until SAVE America is passed.

Lee also fired off a warning for Thune, saying the fate of the election bill “could impact” the November Senate GOP leadership elections. Thune is running again for leader and most GOP senators believe he’s secure in his job. But a few, granted anonymity to speak candidly, have questioned if Trump, who is fuming behind the scenes, would target him after the midterms, especially if Republicans lose the majority.

Thune will have to balance those questions this week, while trying to move the agenda he views as actually accomplishable.

On that front, senators will take a vote Monday night on Jay Clayton’s director of national intelligence nomination (more on that below) and they could pass the Russia sanctions bill as soon as this week, if they can get a time agreement. This week is also key for Judiciary senators to decide whether to advance Trump’s attorney general pick Todd Blanche. And senators are working around funeral arrangements for the late Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Likely waiting until next week: A vote on a bill to fund the government into December as bipartisan talks proceed positively, according to two people granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. An initial vote on cryptocurrency legislation, known as the Clarity Act, is also likely to be punted to next week, but Democrats, so far, aren’t on board.

What else we’re watching:

— JEFFRIES MAKES HIS CLOSING MIDTERMS PITCH: Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spoke at an event in Pennsylvania’s swingy Lehigh Valley with Gov. Josh Shapiro and House candidate Bob Brooks to make his closing argument for why voters should hand his party the gavels 100 days from the midterms. His message? Affordability. Affordability. Affordability. The minority leader’s latest commitment to lowered costs gives a clearer preview of how Democrats would govern in the majority.

— FLOOD SEES FRAUD-BUSTING IN RECON 4.0: The head of a GOP group representing some of the House’s most vulnerable members this fall seems confident the party will tackle a fourth reconciliation bill with fraud-busting provisions. Republican’s Recon 3.0 budget framework is still facing an uncertain future in the Senate after being adopted by House lawmakers last week. But House Main Street Caucus Chair Mike Flood said in an interview he believes House Republicans do another party-line bill after the midterm elections. Read the full Q&A with Flood on PoliticoPro.

Riley Rogerson and Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.

Congress

A bipartisan House duo’s final pitch for pre-midterm AI action

Published

7 hours ago

July 27, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A bipartisan House duo is racing against the clock to build consensus around a framework for regulating artificial intelligence — and prove Congress is up to the task of setting guardrails around the rapidly-evolving technology.

Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) and Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) formally introduced legislation last Thursday with four cosponsors — two from each party — that would give the government more oversight over cutting-edge AI models as new and potentially dangerous technological advances continue to go largely unchecked.

It’s a considerably reworked version of a discussion draft the two lawmakers unveiled weeks earlier. It was highly anticipated as the most serious cross-party attempt at comprehensive AI regulatory legislation to date — and almost immediately panned by Republicans and Democrats alike.

But Trahan and Obernolte both think they’ve now found the sweet spot and are hopeful the Energy and Commerce Committee schedules a hearing or markup on the measure when the House reconvenes in September after the summer recess.

“That is the goal,” Trahan said in an interview Friday. “I think that there is real urgency. There’s earth-shattering news practically every week, and that’s only going to get more frequent and more serious as these models get more powerful.”

Obernolte said in an interview earlier in the week he “absolutely” thought the bill could move out of committee in the fall. “We’re certainly going to try and get it done this year.”

Yet when asked last week about whether he would bring up that bill — or any comprehensive AI legislation — before the midterms, Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie was noncommittal: “I’m not sure if we’ll get there before the election,” the Kentucky Republican said.

Congress has ultimately done little to legislate on AI under the Republican governing trifecta, as members remain divided on how to tackle the thorny policy area — particularly the question of how involved the federal government should be in regulating private sector innovation. The Obernolte-Trahan bill is the latest test for whether lawmakers can reach consensus on the issue before the November elections.

In the 119th Congress so far, lawmakers have managed to send to the president’s desk one bill that criminalizes the sharing of AI-generated deepfakes and “revenge porn.” The Energy and Commerce Committee has passed bipartisan bills on data centers and kids online safety but none have advanced onto in the Senate.

Across the Capitol, the Senate Commerce Committee was just forced to delay a highly-anticipated markup of AI legislation at least a week as Chair Ted Cruz (R-Texas) struggles to put together an agenda of bills that stand a chance of passing on the chamber floor.

In the House, Obernolte and Trahan are trying to set their proposal up for success despite the odds. In interviews, they both described how they worked hard to respond to the initially negative feedback they received from colleagues on their discussion draft.

They have seriously scaled down provisions in their latest version relating to preemption of state AI laws, seeking to strike a balance for lawmakers who are split between those who want the ability to replace local regulations with a federal framework governing AI, and those who want to leave regulatory action to the states.

“We all heard the criticism … and we narrowed the preemption [provisions] substantially,” Trahan said. “It now only touches three areas the federal bill actually covers: catastrophic risk transparency, independent verification and incident reporting. That’s it.”

“So, child safety laws are explicitly protected,” she continued. “So is the consumer protection, privacy and state procurement. All of that stays with the states.”

Obernolte acknowledged the topic of preemption makes people “emotional” but the new legislative language more precisely describes exactly “what we meant on what we were preempting … and I think that that’s giving everyone more comfort.”

Their bill would propose robust emergency shutdown authorities for AI models determined to be major national security risks, replacing the more haphazard nature of the Trump administration’s response in recent months to concerning technological developments.

It also would require large developers to publish safety reports, report safety incidents and participate in independent safety audits. Those auditors would have to then report any models to the government that pose “imminent catastrophic risk” and the Secretary of Commerce could choose to restrict their deployment.

Last week’s first documented case of an autonomous AI breach helped bolster their case that this kind of legislation is necessary, both lawmakers said, with Trahan pointing out, “we only know about these incidents because OpenAI chose to tell us — there’s no law that requires it.”

Trahan, a member of House Democratic leadership, has been working outside the structure of the three-member AI commission overseen by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries but was optimistic when asked if the proposal might eventually get their backing.

“The feedback has been overwhelmingly positive,” she said, adding she plans to spend recess talking with party leaders and the top Democrats on key committees “whether there’s a path to make this bill even better and to move it before we break for the midterms.”

Obernolte said he’s talking to GOP leaders “constantly” to “make sure that everyone knew what was going on and what we were doing.”

But he also added that he hasn’t yet asked Republican leaders for their endorsement, arguing it would be “inappropriate” for them to give the bill their blessing “at this point.”

In the hours before Obernolte and Trahan released their formal bill text, Majority Leader Steve Scalise said in an interview that while he had not spoken to Obernolte about what the two lawmakers intended to introduce, Republican leaders were interested in advancing a regulatory framework that they deemed not overly burdensome.

“We’re trying to get AI preemption … but we also want to make sure that we don’t impede innovation with heavy regulation from the government,” said Scalise.

A Scalise spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment about what the Louisiana Republican thought of the latest proposal.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has also not taken a position on the bill. His last comments about the Obernolte-Trahan effort were in June, when he said he was planning to discuss the then-forthcoming regulatory framework with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman during the tech giant’s visit to Blue Light News.

Obernolte is confident his bill with Trahan represents the emerging consensus view about where lawmakers need to go next on AI policy, even within the Republican Party that has long championed limited government regulation.

“I think that everyone would agree we need food safety inspectors, right? So sometimes the two parties disagree on just how onerous to make those regulations. … I don’t think anyone’s saying that we shouldn’t have any regulation of AI,” he said.

He also suggested perspectives may be shifting.

“I think everyone’s thoughts on this topic have evolved as the technology itself has evolved, and because AI is such a fast-moving technology, I think that Congress is going to have to stay very engaged on this,” Obernolte said. “So, even if we succeed in passing [the bill] this year and getting it signed into law, immediately in the next Congress, we’re going to have to dive into the things that have changed.”

In a sign Obernolte may still have people to convince inside his party, though, Scalise last week rejected the idea that Republican views on the subject have evolved.

“No,” Scalise said. “I mean — our Republicans, by and large, are against heavy regulation that impedes innovation in any industry.”