sign in sign up
<<
Home , Diana Harshbarger, Kelly Loeffler, Matt Rosendale, Rand Paul

Analysis of 2020 Elections

Summary As the sun rises on Wednesday morning, the saying “what is old is new again” comes to mind.

As in 2016, polling has missed the mark by margins outside the margin of error, both nationally and in key states. If this was “The Apprentice,” the pollsters would be in the board room getting fired. Forecasts of former Vice President Biden winning the national popular vote by 7 percent to 12 percent are almost certainly faulty.

However, what is old is new again. At this hour, with polls closed and initial tabulation process underway, both President Trump and former Vice President Biden have a path to an Electoral College win. Recounts and litigation around the presidential contest are likely, and the result may hang in the balance for several days. It is worth remembering that in 2000, results were not certain for 38 days.

As in 2016, Republican Senate candidates (incumbents and challengers) have outperformed relative to expectations and appear likely to retain control of the Senate. If that outcome holds, Senate Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) will be poised to continue oversight of the legislative agenda and the consideration of presidential nominations.

The expected Blue Wave has not yet materialized in the House of Representatives. While Democrats will continue to hold the majority, forecasts of Biden’s coattails growing the Democrats majority appear overstated as Republicans have gained a handful of seats in the chamber.

So, as votes are tabulated and litigation ensues, the most likely scenario appears to be divided control of the Congress, which moderates whoever wins the presidential contest. This will certainly diminish claims of a mandate for any sweeping policy agenda. Expectations that Senate Republicans would pay a price for their handling of both the Supreme Court nominee and pandemic stimulus negotiations appear overstated. Similarly, expected growth in progressive ranks in the House do not appear to have materialized.

Bottom line, results tabulated so far clearly reject the assumption that this election would decisively repudiate the ideology and/or demeanor of President Trump and the so-called brand of . Whether President Trump wins or loses, Republican strength in congressional returns (and possible Senate majority) suggests there are some voters continue to split their ballot between the parties.

Presidential As of Wednesday morning, there remains a narrow path to an Electoral College win for either President Trump or former Vice President Biden. The threshold in the Electoral College is 270 votes.

However, results will now trickle in for the next several days and, under various state laws, into next week. Both campaigns are prepared to initiate and/or respond to litigation.

As of this morning, results tabulated so far have Trump largely winning the same states he won in 2016. However, initial results have him losing Arizona (11 EC votes) and Wisconsin (10 EC votes) and trailing in Michigan (16 EC votes). He is leading in (20 EC votes), North Carolina (15 EC votes), and (16 EC votes). If he wins the states where the reports he is leading (216 EC votes) then he will have 267 EC votes, but not enough to win re-election. He still needs to win a state where Biden is leading.

Biden is not presently losing in any state that Secretary Clinton won in 2016. He is narrowly ahead in Nevada (6 EC votes), which Clinton won in 2016 and leading in Arizona, Michigan and Wisconsin, which Clinton lost. If he wins all three and holds onto Nevada, he will surpass the necessary 270 EC votes to win the presidency.

While both candidates have a path to a win in the Electoral College, it is unlikely that either candidate will meet or exceed President Trump’s 306 electoral votes in 2016. Furthermore, while President Trump has a path to victory in the Electoral College, he is presently trailing Vice President Biden by over 2.3 million popular votes and that gap is likely to widen. Both candidates, have each already exceeded Secretary Clinton’s 2016 popular vote total of 65,853,514.

With the presidential contest undetermined, it is premature to speculate on potential policy impact. That said, it is widely believed that in either a reelected or newly elected administration, there will be significant personnel changes at Health and Human Services. New leaders will need to be confirmed by the Senate and if it is closely divided, the likelihood of more centrist nominees and proposals rises.

Senate What is old is new in the Senate as well.

While final control is not yet certain, it is clear Republicans have exceeded forecasts (and polling) and now have the inside track to preserve their majority in the Senate. For Democrats to gain outright control, they needed to net four Senate seats (or three if Biden wins the presidency).

Pollsters predicted that three Republican Senators, McSally (Ariz.), Gardner (Colo.), and Collins (Maine) would lose and provide the foundation for a potential Senate majority. However, this morning it appears that while Gardner has in fact lost and the AP has McSally trailing, However, Sen. Collins was declared the winner in her race. Across the aisle, pollsters predicted Democrats would lose Sen. Jones’ race in Alabama, and it appears he has lost.

In the vulnerable lean category, pharmacy champions (R-Iowa), and (R-Mont.) were reelected while Rep. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) won an open Senate seat in Kansas. Additionally, Sens. (R-), (R-S.C.) and Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) won reelection which allowed Republicans to run the table with these “lean GOP” seats.

One lean GOP Senate seat remains uncalled. That is Sen. Tillis in North Carolina. He is leading there, but North Carolina law allows for votes to be counted as late as next week so results will not be final for some time and could shift.

Then, in a surprise, Republican candidate John James is leading in Michigan against Democrat incumbent Sen. . Final results there will likely be delayed due to anticipated litigation over the presidential results in Michigan. However, if Sen. Peters is defeated, then Democrats will have netted zero seats. However, if Sen. Peters wins, then the Senate will be 49-49 with two seats hanging in the balance to decide control.

Welcome to Georgia, where control of the Senate may be decided but not before Jan. 5.

Georgia state law requires that for a candidate to prevail in a non-presidential race, the candidate must receive an outright majority (not a plurality) of votes cast. If no candidate receives a majority then a special election will be held. In this cycle, that special election, if necessary, is scheduled for Jan. 5, 2021.

Two senate seats were on the ballot in Georgia due to the 2019 retirement of former Senator Isakson.

The first seat, occupied by Republican Sen. , was forecasted as slipping away from the GOP as pollsters speculated that Vice President Biden might win Georgia. Perdue is leading and, importantly, has just over 50 percent of the votes cast. If he maintains an outright majority, he will be declared the winner and will return for a six-year term in the Senate. If he falls below 50 percent, this race goes to that Jan. 6 run-off, and his opponent will be the Democratic nominee, .

As for the second seat, pharmacy champion Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) was running in a field of 19 candidates in the “jungle” primary, where the top two vote getters, regardless of party, advance to a Special Election. The AP has called that race and unfortunately, Collins will not advance. However, Democrat and incumbent Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler will advance to the election on Jan. 5.

With one or two Senate seats in Georgia not being decided until Jan. 5, it is possible that Senate control may be undecided until the results from the special election are tabulated and certified.

Given that control of the Senate is unknown, it is premature to forecast policy implications. Whichever party has control of the Senate, it is unlikely that the Senate will dramatically change its rules or culture. Therefore, the likely survives, and the Senate likely continues to be a moderating force on any sweeping policy proposals.

While the final makeup of the Senate is uncertain, there is certainty that there will be changes with key committees. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley is term-limited. If, as it currently appears, Republicans retain control, Sen. (R-Idaho) is the likely successor. If Democrats are able to regain the majority, Sen. (D-Ore.) would assume the chairmanship. Additionally, two members of the committee, Sens. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) and (R-Kan.) did not seek reelection.

On the HELP Committee, Sen. Lamar Alexander is retiring and is likely to be replaced by either (R-N.C.) or (R-Ky.) if Republicans are in the majority. If Democrats are in the majority, Sen. (D-Wash.) would chair the committee.

U.S. House of Representatives What is old is new again in the House as well.

Going into Election Day, Democrats had a 34-seat majority in the House, with five vacancies, and were expected to pick up 8-12 seats. It appears that those expectations were too high.

As of this morning, Democrats have won two GOP seats (NC-2 and NC-6) while losing six of their incumbents (FL-26, FL-27, MN-7, NM-2, OK-5, and SC-1) which reduces the Democrats majority by four seats. Notably former HHS Secretary Donna Shalala was unexpectedly swept out of her seat in FL-27 by Trump’s stronger-than-expected results in the Miami area.

If these initial results hold, then in the next Congress, Speaker Pelosi and her entire leadership are expected to seek reelection to their leadership positions. If Republicans grow their ranks in the House, Republican Leader McCarthy is likely reelected to his position as leader.

With Democrats retaining control of the House, Rep. (D-Mass.) will remain chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, while Rep. (R-Texas) remains the ranking Democrat. Rep. (D-Texas), who chairs the panel’s health subcommittee, will remain in that post while Rep. (R-Calif.) will continue as the ranking member.

On the Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. (D-N.J.) will continue to serve as committee chairman. On the Republican side, ranking member Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) did not seek reelection. Pharmacy champions Reps. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and Michael Burgess (R- Texas) are likely candidates to succeed Walden. Rep. (D-Calif.) is the chair of the panel’s health subcommittee, while Rep. Burgess serves as the ranking member.

Rep. (R-Ga.) won reelection, but he will no longer be the lone pharmacist in Congress as community pharmacist (R-Tenn.) won her race in ’s 1st Congressional District. They will also be joined in Congress by pharmacy owner (R-Ala.) and other pharmacy champions including: newly elected (R-Mont.), and Reps. (R-Va.), (R-Wash.), Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas), (D-Vt.), and Austin Scott (R-Ga.).

In the States

Governors Only 11 states had gubernatorial elections this cycle, and only and Utah were open races without an incumbent. Of those two, only Montana was considered a toss-up race.

All incumbent governors were re-elected and Republicans prevailed in both open seats.

State Legislatures There were over 5,700 regularly scheduled state legislative contests along with dozens of special legislative elections. In advance of the redistricting process, national Democrats made an enormous and concerted effort to generate a “Blue Wave” that would give them greater control in the redistricting process.

But, in what has become a theme for this election, Democrats underperformed relative expectations and partisan control at the state legislative level appears to have gone largely unaltered. While final results, and potential litigation, are pending in numerous states, Republicans majority appear to have prevailed in Texas, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Minnesota, Arizona, Alaska, Iowa, and Michigan. In , Republicans won control of both the Senate and the House.

Moving Forward NCPA will continue to monitor policy implications as the election returns continue to come in. As a clearer picture landscape develops, NCPA will report on any developments and opportunities that arise for community pharmacy.

While many uncertainties remain with the election results, NCPA will continue to work in a bipartisan matter. Community pharmacy issues are not partisan issues and are supported by policymakers with diverse political views. As we begin to work with many newly elected officials, we will continue in our efforts to address a number of challenging issues for independent community pharmacy.

Our job going forward is to ensure that NCPA is well-positioned to advocate on behalf of our membership and to continue to achieve results that matter.