It Can Be Better to Lose Than to Linger

It hurts to lose by a lot. It is gut-wrenching to lose by a little.

Just ask Republican Susan Brooks, who has lost twice in her bid for the House of Representatives--in 1994 by fewer than a thousand votes, and this year by a lot more.

On the morning after election day last week, she awoke to the news that she had failed in her second bid to unseat South Bay Rep. Jane Harman (D-Rolling Hills), this time by a margin of nine big points--18,829 votes. “I was absolutely pleased that I am not going to be in a down-to-the-wire race,” Brooks said, breathing a huge sigh of relief.

And perhaps, she added, Rep. Robert K. Dornan (R-Garden Grove), who seems on the verge of losing his reelection bid, can learn something from her experience.

(Dornan’s is one of two California congressional elections that turned into nail-biters. Republican Linda Wilde is still considering whether to contest San Bernardino County Democratic Rep. George Brown’s 865-vote victory.)

Two years ago, in Brooks’ first congressional race, she--like Dornan--looked like the winner the morning after the election, by 93 votes, only to find herself 812 votes behind three weeks later, after the absentee ballots were counted.

Suspecting widespread voter fraud, the former Rancho Palos Verdes city councilwoman asked the House of Representatives to overturn the election results and declare her the winner. By doing so, she said she only prolonged the agony of defeat.

“I’m so relieved it’s over,” Brooks said, eager to stress just how relieved she really is.

Of course, she wanted to win, she added, but at least this time, it wasn’t the squeaker that Orange County voters are witnessing in the race between Dornan and Democrat Loretta Sanchez.

Dornan, who led Sanchez by 233 votes on the morning after the election, now trails Sanchez by at least 700 votes. He may ask the House to overturn the results, claiming noncitizens voted.

“I wouldn’t want to be in his situation right now,” said Brooks. The reason: The burden of proof before the House was so great that it was almost impossible, even for Brooks, to prove her case in the Republican-friendly House.

Pity the poor candidates whose psyches, finances and ethics have been scrutinized throughout the grueling campaign season, only to be at the mercy of California’s unwieldy voting system that can take weeks to determine a winner.

With ego fully exposed, it’s hard for any candidate to simply walk away from a tough contest, especially if the results are close enough to be questioned.

The House Oversight Committee hears appeals after all local and state legal remedies are exhausted. And truth be told, Capitol Hill insiders say, members cringe at the thought of having to settle these disputes.

Still on the minds of election experts is the “Bloody 8th,” the 1984 election in Indiana’s 8th Congressional District, in which Republican Richard D. McIntyre appeared to have a narrow victory, only to have the House step in and order a recount of its own. In the end, the Democrat-controlled House voted to turn the seat over to their own party member, Frank McCloskey, and Republican House members walked out in protest.

Consequently, losers are warned to have an armload of proof, said Herb Stone, a lawyer for the Democratic side of the House panel that hears such matters under the 1969 Federal Contested Election Act.

“The basic premise of the House is that you should not overrule the will of the people,” Stone said.

“It doesn’t do much good if you are the loser, to come whining and complaining to say all sorts of strange people voted. You better be able to say, ‘I have proof there [were] illegal votes cast, and they voted for my opponent, and it changed the outcome of the election,’ ” Stone added. “Since we cast a secret ballot, it’s kind of difficult.”

Oversight Committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Bakersfield), who was the only Republican on the 1984 task force, agreed. “We do not want to be the court of first resort because it puts it in the political arena far more than if we are the court of last resort,” Thomas said.

As Brooks learned for herself.

The Republican candidate claimed that there were 2,035 irregular votes cast in the election and offered examples of “phantom” votes from vacant and commercial buildings, bed-and-breakfasts, mailbox houses, and at least one restaurant.

In response, Harman argued technicalities, including the fact that Brooks had failed to ask for a recount, and that the “weak” case should have been thrown out under guidelines established by law.

The election appeal dragged into the summer of of 1995, and Brooks sensed that the committee was stalling. (Three other election contests that year, from Connecticut, New Hampshire and North Carolina, were dropped early on). She said she got “no help” from the GOP, and relied on volunteers and a lawyer willing to work for free.

She decided to drop her crusade and go back to the voters in the 1996 March primary.

Brooks warns that Dornan is treading on politically sensitive territory by charging that he may have lost at the hands of noncitizen voters.

“I could not advise that he not pursue” the election contest, Brooks said. “His may be a more colorful demonstration of what’s right or wrong with the system, but it could also go the other way.”