The Only Black Republican Woman Ever Elected to Congress Is at Risk of Losing in a Deep-Red District

The latest polls suggest Mia Love, a former Republican rising star, could be on her way out in Utah.

Rep. Mia Love, R-Utah, participates in a news conference on immigration reform at the Capitol on Wednesday, May 9, 2018. Bill Clark/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Mia Love used to be a Republican rock star. She was young, Haitian American, Mormon, and very conservative. In 2012, when she was running for the first time for her current congressional seat in Utah, party leaders made her a prime-time speaker at the Republican National Convention. She lost that race to Democrat Jim Matheson. But when he retired in 2014, she won his seat, becoming the first black Republican woman ever elected to the House. After two terms, however, sheā€™s in serious danger of losing a seat she won by 13 points in 2016.

By a small but consistent margin, Love has been running ahead of her Democratic challenger, Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams, for most of the year. But this month, Love has been trending downward in the polls, which have shown a dead heat, and a poll released Tuesday shows her trailing by more than the margin of error for the first time. The pollā€”conducted by KUTV, a Salt Lake TV station owned by the conservative Sinclair Broadcasting, and Dixie Strategies, a polling firm that leans Republicanā€”found that among likely voters, McAdams now holds a 6-point lead over Love.

In her four years in office, the onetime tea party darling has primarily made news in Utah because of ethics problems, starting in her first term, when she and her husband took a weekend trip to Washington to attend the 2015 White House Correspondentsā€™ Dinner. House rules bar members of Congress from using their congressional funds to pay for travel to social events, but Love’s congressional office reimbursed her for more than $1,000 for the plane tickets. Love claimed she had flown to DC for official business, though she never produced any evidence and she ultimately repaid her office for the travel after an outcry in Utah. In 2017, her campaign spent nearly $10,000 on food and lodging at Disney World in Florida. Love claimed the money was spent on fundraising events.

More recently, Love has run into trouble with the Federal Election Commission, which in August sent her campaign a letter questioning whether Love had illegally raised more than $1 million for her primary campaignā€”a race that never happened. Utah is one of a few states where the GOP holds a nominating convention first, rather than a traditional primary. If a candidate wins 60 percent of the convention delegate votes, he or she can proceed to the general election without a primary. Love knew in March that she would not have a Republican challenger at the convention. Yet she continued to raise more than $1 million for a primary race, including more than $370,000 after she had already been nominated at the GOP convention in April.

In its letter to her campaign, the FEC said that because Love didnā€™t participate in a primary, any campaign contributions received for the primary ā€œmust be returned to the donors or redesignated to another electionā€ with written permission of donors. Love has insisted her fundraising was legal, but her campaign refunded more than $10,000 in illegal donations and redesignated the primary funds she received after the convention. But good-government advocates in the state filed a complaint against her with the FEC, alleging that she should return the entire $1.1 million raised for the primary she knew sheā€™d never have. That complaint is still under review.

McAdams seized on the FEC finding and launched TV ads stating, ā€œWhat do Washington politicians do when caught with $1 million in illegal contributions? Mia Love kept the money and is using it to make false attacks against Ben McAdams.ā€

The election of President Donald Trump has also complicated Loveā€™s reelection campaign. In 2016, Trump was highly unpopular in Utah, one of the most reliably Republican states in the country. He won only 45 percent of the vote there in 2016, compared with the 72 percent Mitt Romney received in 2012. (Hillary Clinton received just 27 percent, with independent candidate Evan McMullin winning 21 percent.) Trumpā€™s performance was even worse in Loveā€™s 4th Congressional District, where he won just 39 percent of the vote and beat Clinton by only 7 points. Since the election, his approval ratings have plunged further in Utah than in any other state, from 58 percent at his inauguration to 45 percent today. Trump may be dragging Love down with him.

Thatā€™s somewhat remarkable, given that her district was gerrymandered to make sure a Democrat could never prevail there. Virtually all of the stateā€™s Democratic minority is clustered around Salt Lake City and the resort towns of Park City and Moab. For much of Utahā€™s history, Salt Lake City and the surrounding county were essentially their own congressional district and reliably sent a Democrat to Congress. But starting in 1999, Republicans in the Utah Legislature have twice redistricted Salt Lake City to split it into four different congressional districts, none of which has a majority of Democrats. Since Mathesonā€™s retirement in 2014, there hasnā€™t been a single Democrat in the stateā€™s congressional delegation.

But Salt Lake County, which Clinton won decisively in 2016, still makes up the bulk of Loveā€™s district. In 2016, Love won the part of the county in her district by about 35,000 votes, but if Democrats succeed in driving independent and Democratic turnout in the county this year, McAdams has a real shot at winning.

A former actress and flight attendant who moved to Utah from Connecticut after converting to Mormonism, Love had limited political experience before running for Congress, having served as part-time mayor of Saratoga Springs, a suburb of Salt Lake City. (When she wasnā€™t running the city, she was a part-time fitness instructor.)

In her first race against Matheson in 2012, Love was a fire-breathing tea partier. She campaigned on ending the school lunch program and eliminating the federal student loan program, even as she was still paying off loads of her own school debt. She echoed tea party demands to ā€œaudit the fed,ā€ repeal Obamacare, and eliminate the Common Core school curriculum. (Matheson, one of the last conservative Blue Dog Democrats, had actually voted against Obamacare.) Her campaign was so disorganized that she once failed to show up for an event with Romney in Houston. She lost narrowly to Matheson.

But once Matheson retired, Love toned down the rhetoric and beat Democrat Doug Owens in 2014 and 2016. The 2016 presidential election, however, energized Utah Democrats and progressives. A group of them launched the CD4 Coalition, which has raised money to buy Facebook ads and put up billboards in the district bashing Love for receiving more than 80 percent of her campaign funds from out of state this year and failing to hold town hall meetings with her constituents, among other issues.

CD4 Coalition

Love has voted with Trump 96 percent of the time in Congress, but she’s disagreed with the president on immigration. Loveā€™s parents came from Haiti and worked illegally in the United States before gaining legal status in the 1970s. Trump said last year that Haitians who were coming to the United States ā€œall have AIDS,ā€ and he ended Temporary Protected Status for Haitians who came to the US after the 2010 earthquake, putting nearly 50,000 at risk of deportation. In January, after the Washington Post reported that Trump had said Haitians and other immigrants come from ā€œshithole countries,ā€ Love responded by saying his comments were “unkind, divisive, elitist, and fly in the face of our nation’s values.” She called on him to apologize. (He didn’t.)

Not surprisingly, Trump wonā€™t be coming to Utah to campaign for her before the election next week, leaving Love to defend her seat on her own.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate