DNC to open vote that could oust vice chairs David Hogg and Malcolm Kenyatta

The DNC may hold a new vice chair election after invalidating February’s results, citing a procedural error. — Image credit: Graeme Sloan/Sipa USA via Reuters

This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

DNC considers new vice chairs

The DNC is considering a new election for vice chairs David Hogg and Malcolm Kenyatta after its Credentials Committee invalidated the February results due to a procedural error.

Hogg criticizes Democratic Party

The decision follows Hogg’s public criticism of the Democratic Party and his group's $20 million campaign targeting incumbents.

Vice chairs staying in roles for now

Both Hogg and Kenyatta criticized the move but will remain in their roles until a full DNC vote is held.

Full story

The Democratic National Committee is considering holding a new election for two of its vice chairs, David Hogg and Pennsylvania state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta. On Monday, the DNC’s Credentials Committee voted to invalidate the results of the February election in which Hogg and Kenyatta were elected to two of the three DNC vice chair positions.

Statements by Hogg cause stir

The move comes after Hogg called for more competition within the party by challenging established Democratic politicians.

Hogg’s organization, Leaders We Deserve, started a $20 million campaign to unseat current Democratic lawmakers and promote a new generation of candidates to serve.

Hogg also appeared on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” show Friday, days before Monday’s Credentials Committee vote, in which Hogg criticized his own party.

“Ultimately, what we have to do here is figure out how to bring people back in and work towards the bigger goal of advancing the future of this country,” Hogg said.

Procedural error cited by DNC

According to DNC Chair Ken Martin, Monday’s Credentials Committee vote had nothing to do with Hogg. Instead, he insisted there was a procedural error in February’s vice chair elections.

“The Credentials Committee has issued their recommendation, and I trust that the DNC members will carefully review the committee’s resolution and resolve this matter fairly,” Martin said in a statement after Monday’s vote, as reported by Fox News.

Responses from Hogg and Kenyatta

Semafor reporter David Weigel posted Hogg’s full statement to his X account after the DNC Credentials Committee vote Monday. In it, Hogg said the “country is in crisis” and “Democratic leaders are asleep at the wheel.”

“I ran to be DNC vice chair to help make the Democratic Party better, not to defend an indefensible status quo that has caused voters in almost every demographic group to move away from us. The DNC has pledged to remove me, and this vote has provided an avenue to fast-track that effort,” Hogg said.

Kenyatta also responded to Monday’s vote, writing in a post on X, “The Credentials Committee believed, as they stated, that they are remedying a procedural flaw. But doing so the way they did, is a slap in my face. I’m frustrated, but I’ll be ok.”

Next steps for the DNC

The entire DNC will now have to decide whether to proceed with a new election for the vice chair positions. Until that vote, Hogg and Kenyatta will continue serving in their vice chair positions.

Tags: Democratic National Committee, Democratic Party, Democrats

Why this story matters

The Democratic National Committee's decision to void the vice chair elections for David Hogg and Malcolm Kenyatta highlights ongoing tensions over internal party procedures, leadership accountability, and the influence of reformist activism within major political organizations.

Procedural disputes

Disagreement over the fairness and process of the vice chair election underscores the importance of transparent and equitable rules in party governance, as cited by DNC Chair Ken Martin and several committee members.

Intraparty reform efforts

David Hogg's campaign to challenge incumbent Democrats and promote new leadership, as well as his founding of the organization Leaders We Deserve, illustrates the push for generational and ideological change within the Democratic Party.

Leadership accountability and neutrality

The debate over whether party officers should remain neutral in primary contests spotlights the ongoing struggle within political parties to balance internal activism with institutional roles and responsibilities, emphasized by statements from Hogg, DNC Chairman Ken Martin, and committee members.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 53 media outlets

Debunking

There is no evidence from the sources that the procedural challenge was explicitly orchestrated as retaliation for Hogg’s advocacy of primary challenges. The challenge, according to multiple statements from DNC officials, originated from concerns raised before Hogg publicly announced his campaign plans, although several articles note the overlapping tensions created by his activism.

History lesson

Internal challenges over party leadership and election procedure are not new to American political parties. The Democratic Party, in particular, has a precedent for disputes over process, as seen in previous controversies over primary fairness and leadership elections, notably including the 2016 presidential primary’s handling by the DNC.

Oppo research

Opponents within the Democratic Party, especially those favoring institutional continuity, have criticized Hogg's approach as disruptive, with prominent figures like strategist James Carville initially deriding his primary challenge proposals. The opposition frames these efforts as destabilizing and counter to party neutrality, while eventually some critics expressed reluctant respect for engagement.