In yet another twist to an extraordinary congressional race to replace outgoing Rep. Anna Eshoo, two people have asked for the votes in the March primary to be recounted, but questions remain as to whether either of them will pay Santa Clara and San Mateo counties a hefty sum to make it happen.
The Congressional District 16 race ended in a stunning fashion with Assemblymember Evan Low and Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian in a historic 30,249-to-30,249 tie for second place after a month of counting votes and frequent swings between the two. Former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo came in first with a healthy lead of more than 8,000 votes.
With no automatic recount provision for federal and state races in California, it appeared that all three would head to the general election in what would be a first for a congressional race since the state went to a top-two system in 2012. But now, it’s possible that the tie might not stick, as two voters have requested a recount: former San Mateo County Supervisors candidate Dan Stegink and 2020 Biden Delegate Jonathan Padilla.
The recount requests sparked backlash Tuesday night from one of the campaigns and a Silicon Valley congressmember.
Low’s campaign cried foul over Padilla’s connection to Liccardo. Padilla worked on Liccardo’s 2014 mayoral campaign as a finance and policy director, according to his LinkedIn page.
“This is a page right out of Trump’s political playbook using dirty tricks to attack democracy and subvert the will of the voters,” Whitney Larsen, a Low campaign spokesperson, said in a statement. “Sam Liccardo, who does not live in the district, did not file a recount himself. Instead, he had his former staffer do it for him. What’s he afraid of?”
U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, who has endorsed Low’s congressional bid, called in at “crass political ploy” in a social media post.
“A candidate wanting to overturn the will of the voters is undemocratic,” he said. “@samliccardo
supporters should not push for a recount asking to overturn election results in CD16 when all other candidates have accepted them.”
A candidate wanting to overturn the will of the voters is undemocratic. @samliccardo supporters should not push for a recount asking to overturn election results in CD16 when all other candidates have accepted them. It’s a crass political ploy and it’s why I’m with @Evan_Low
— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) April 10, 2024
Liccardo’s camp flatly denied asking Padilla to file the request on the former mayor’s behalf. However, Orrin Evans, a campaign consultant for Liccardo, said that “every vote should be counted, and that’s why recounts are part of the state’s electoral process to ensure accuracy.”
“We understand why, under these extraordinary circumstances, there would be an effort to make sure these votes are fully considered,” Evans added.
Simitian, for his part, said in a statement that “eventually, this process will work itself out. My job is to stay focused on how I can best represent the folks in our district. And that’s what I’m doing.”
The recount will only move forward if Stegink or Padilla is willing to pay for it.
Despite the backlash, Larry Gerston, a professor emeritus of political science at San Jose State University, said that trying to make the recount requests look “sinister or illegal or wrong” is an “undeserved reaction” since the recount process is outlined in California law.
“Not liking it and being Trumpian are two different things,” he said. “This is clearly within the boundaries of the law that has been on the books for some time. This is just one of those situations that’s uncomfortable for some people.”
The Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters said a manual recount will take about 10 days and cost $32,000 per day, for a grand total of $320,000. A machine recount, which would consist of re-scanning ballots that might be less likely to pick up an error, would take about five days at a cost of $16,840 per day, or $84,200. A cost estimate for San Mateo County was not readily available.
Stegink told The Mercury News that he is willing to shell out the money for the recount.
Padilla did not respond to several requests for comment about whether he would pay for it and instead posted a statement on social media about the recount on Wednesday morning.
“Donald Trump represents an existential threat to democracy and believes in not counting votes, as we saw on election night in 2020,” he said. “Why other Democrats don’t believe in counting votes and ensuring that the will of the people is transparently reflected confuses me. It’s especially baffling that many of the folks criticizing the recount I’m proposing have themselves advocated for automatic recounts in the past.”
This will be my only public comment on the CA Congressional District 16 Recount until all the votes are counted:
My name is Jonathan Padilla. I was a 2020 Biden Delegate to the Democratic National Convention. I’m a former Treasurer of the Young Democrats of America, former…
— Jonathan Padilla (@JPadillaCA) April 10, 2024
Steve Goltiao, a spokesperson with the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters, said details are still being worked out, and didn’t know whether it was possible for Stegink and Padilla to split the cost.
“This is a very unique situation,” he said. “Having a tie and then also on top of that having multiple recount requests, we’re continuing to sort that information out.”
Goltia said the recount would start on Monday with pulling out all the ballots in the congressional race as long as they’ve received a deposit by then. As of Wednesday morning, Santa Clara County had yet to receive any money from either individuals. The San Mateo County Registration and Elections Division could not be reached for comment.
While recounts can change the results of an election, the margin between the two candidates is typically small in those cases. FairVote, a nonpartisan election research organization, analyzed 6,929 statewide general elections between 2000 and 2023 and found that out of the 36 recounts, only three resulted in a reversal. The initial margin between the top-two candidates in those three cases was less than 0.06%.
While Liccardo led the trio in the primary in both votes and fundraising, local politicos in recent weeks have raised questions of how the former mayor might fare in a three person race compared to a one-on-one matchup.
A polling memo obtained by The Mercury News shows Liccardo remaining as the frontrunner in a three-way race. The poll was conducted by Lake Research Partners and surveyed 400 likely voters between April 5 and 8.
An initial question with no other information other than party registration and ballot designation showed Liccardo leading his opponents with 26% of the vote, followed by Low with 21% and Simitian with 20%. Another 24% were undecided. The poll’s margin of error was plus or minus 4.9%.
Evans confirmed the poll was paid for by Liccardo’s campaign.
“We are full steam ahead to the general election,” he said. “Sam is continuing to reach out and listen to voters concerns and talk about his recount.”
