Why the DSCC Can Still Endorse Candidates

DSCC-Backed MJ Hegar (D-TX)

In 2018, the DCCC has a pretty much unimpeachable record.  Despite the news' focus on the likes of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley, the reality is that the organization had an incredibly strong scorecard, wading into primary after primary with near universal success.  By my count they only lost two open primaries, neither of those candidates ultimately winning in the general election out of over thirty races launched.  All-in-all, this is an impressive track record for a powerful organization in DC.

And yet the DCCC just two years later has been almost silent on endorsing in competitive primaries. While DCCC Chair Cheri Bustos has been out speaking about candidates, there is so little consideration within the DCCC for endorsing candidates that they haven't even updated their website-it still lists the plethora of 2018 candidates they endorsed on their site instead.  Democrats have an enormous number of competitive primaries in states ranging from Montana to Georgia to Texas, but the DCCC is silent on anything other than incumbent protection.  While organizations like Emily's List are willing to go into competitive primaries, the House Democrats' campaign arm is withdrawn, only issuing the most calming of platitudes for candidates, not wanting to risk the ire of the party's most progressive wing.

It's understandable.  Right now, the DCCC is being mocked all over social media for backing Jeff van Drew just days after he walked over to the other side of the aisle.  Not wanting to look a fool in an era where AOC is literally so famous she's being parodied on Saturday Night Live, they have backed off, highlighting incumbents (again, to some chagrin in an era of AOC), but shying away from getting into myriad primaries.  This is obviously to avoid the perception that they are hampering the grassroots movement, but they do so with some risk.  For example, one could reasonably guess that had former Rep. Brad Ashford won the NE-2 primary rather than the more liberal Kara Eastman, he might have been able to close the 2-point gap that Eastman got to in the moderate Omaha district and win the seat.

The Republican campaigns have struggled with this as well, and for longer than the DCCC.  They've promoted candidates in the NRCC with the "Young Guns" program, but it's pretty much toothless in helping to influence primaries.  In the upcoming race for CA-25, because two candidates have already qualified for the fundraising/organization thresholds, they're endorsing both candidates, essentially making their backing meaningless.  The organizations still have a powerful function-they decide when it comes to the general elections which campaigns are worth airlifting 6 or 7-figure ad buys into, but in the past decade these campaign arms have essentially lost one of their most powerful attributes: significant endorsements in the primaries.

Theresa Greenfield (D-IA)

That is, except the DSCC, the Senate Democrats' campaign arm.  Run by Catherine Cortez Masto, but really run by former DSCC Chair Chuck Schumer, the DSCC has landed itself into pretty much every competitive Senate race in 2020.  In fact, one could argue that while the other three campaign arms have all but given up on getting into primaries, worried about upsetting the left, the DSCC has never been so fervent.  So far they have endorsed nine challengers to Republican seats: Mark Kelly (AZ), Al Gross (AK), John Hickenlooper (CO), Theresa Greenfield (IA), Barbara Bollier (KS), Sara Gideon (ME), Cal Cunningham (SC), Jaime Harrison (SC), and MJ Hegar (TX), as well as one challenger in an open seat, Ben Ray Lujan (NM).  This is despite the fact that many of these candidates have competitive challengers in their primaries, particularly Gideon, Hegar, and Cunningham.

The DSCC getting into these races comes at some risk, but not as much as you'd think so far.  The left has not really rallied in a major way around one of the people who would be to the left of one of these candidates and could be a viable general election contender (think someone like Betsy Sweet in Maine or Andrew Romanoff in Colorado), and it's possible they just skip it.  The Senate Democrats have picked the most well-known figure in each field, and has strategically skipped select races so far.  Georgia is hosting two competitive contests next year, but so far the Democrats have not weighed in on one of the most competitive races on the map, perhaps hoping that at least one of the higher-tier candidates jumps over to the special?  And while it's obvious she's their preferred candidate, Amy McGrath has not gotten an official endorsement from the DSCC in Kentucky though she was heavily recruited by Schumer (probably to help avoid Mitch McConnell using it as a talking point).

There's a lot of argument from a pragmatic standpoint that the DSCC should get out of these races.  At some point they're going to get egg on their face here-an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez-style candidate is going to break past a DSCC-appointed candidate and win the general, getting into the Senate with a grudge.  But for now I wonder if they're making the smarter decision here.  By getting their candidates through, and as many of them as possible, they guarantee that the "Brad Ashford"-style candidates can break through to the general.  That way they have the best-polling/fundraising candidate, and while that can be a problem (look at someone like Phil Bredesen or Ted Strickland, where arguably a younger, more unknown figure might have been a smarter investment), it also means that they don't leave any seat with an unelectable general election candidate; there's not always reward, but there's also never any risk.  Having this kind of control over their candidates certainly would have helped the Republicans hold Alabama in 2017, or wouldn't have left them with unelectable options against someone like Jeff van Drew last cycle (when the RNC basically pulled support for the then-Democratic van Drew's opponent).  2020 will be crucial for the DSCC-if these candidates fail to inspire, there will be added pressure to not pick so many candidates that fit a certain mold since their strategy failed.  But if Schumer is able to win back the majority with this slate of nominees, he'll have a team that's loyal to him and his process, ensuring that the DSCC can exert a control that the other three congressional arms find enviable but unattainable.