Sam Liccardo, a former San Jose mayor and former Stanford Law School lecturer, and Evan Low, a California assemblymember, will go head-to-head on Tuesday to represent California’s 16th congressional district.

The race is hotly contested and follows Representative Anna Eshoo’s retirement announcement late last year. Eshoo had represented the district — which encompasses parts of San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, including Stanford — since 1993.

In the March 5 open primary for the seat, where 11 candidates ran on a single ballot irrespective of political party, Low and Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian M.A. ‘00 both received exactly 30,249 votes. By California law, both Low and Simitian were slated to advance to the general election. However, a former Liccardo staffer, Jonathan Padilla, requested a recount that saw Low gain five more votes than Simitian. The recount was funded by the pro-Liccardo super PAC Neighbors for Results.

Ultimately, after the recount, Low moved forward to run against Liccardo in the general election, which has been a fierce point of contention for both campaigns. 

In separate interviews with The Daily on Monday — just over a week before the election — both candidates addressed the recount effort. Low criticized the process through which the recount was conducted, claiming that “Michael Bloomberg [who funds Neighbors for Results], a former Republican, out-of-state, anti-union billionaire, is trying to buy this election.” The Super PAC that funded the recall efforts has received $2 million from Bloomberg LP, according to the nonprofit OpenSecrets.

Liccardo said his position has always been clear, which is to “support a recount [and] count every vote.” 

Both Low and Liccardo have attempted to distance themselves from the recount controversy, focusing instead on highlighting their records of service in public office.

Liccardo, who served as mayor of San Jose from 2015 to 2023, has drawn on his extensive experience to make his case to voters. Despite serving an executive role as mayor, Liccardo said working within the city council guided his legislative process. As leader of the council, he said, he focused on getting a majority of the 11 council members on board.

“My job was to get six votes,” Liccardo said.

He hopes to continue serving as a pragmatist in Congress, pledging to join the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus if elected, Liccardo said.

Low is also touting his experience in reaching across the aisle. His effort to meet with every Republican in the California legislature despite opposition from the statewide Republican Party contributed to the unanimous Republican support of Proposition 3, a bill he co-sponsored to enshrine same-sex marriage in the state constitution. Nine Republicans voted yes and nine abstained. The proposition will be on the Tuesday ballot.

“The Republican Party recommendation was to vote no,” Low said. “Not a single Republican voted no.” Low said that he hopes to continue to “build bridges” if elected to Congress. 

Both candidates said they recognize the limitations of their potential influence in Congress as freshman representatives but are committed to delivering results for their constituents. While earmarks — a type of federal spending where members of Congress claim funds for their particular district — are a key point of contention among California Democrats, both Low and Liccardo support the practice with reservations. 

“If I had an opportunity to vote against all earmarks, I would vote to have no earmarks,” Liccardo said. “That being said, in a world in which 435 members are going to be vying for that money, of course I’m going to do what I can to advocate for those dollars, for critical priorities.”

Low points to the state funds he secured for his district as an assemblymember to “advance public infrastructure” and “help address the issues of climate change.” Praising Eshoo’s work, Low said District 16 has “been able to be beneficiaries of the electrification of the Peninsula Corridor” and hopes to continue the practice of earmarks, which he refers to as a “legacy of service and delivering resources” to the district.

Much like the open primary, the general election seems to be headed for a close finish. In an interview with The Daily prior to Gov. Newsom’s Monday endorsement of Low, California Democratic political consultant Vance Ulrich called Liccardo a “narrow favorite” given his experience representing more than 40 percent of the district and his 10-point lead in public polling at the time.

Lakshya Jain, a District 16 resident and CEO of Split Ticket, a data-driven election analysis site, agreed, noting that while Low has a “better field and ground game,” due to his canvassing and mailer efforts, Liccardo has more money and has “flooded the airwaves with attack ads against Low and positives for himself.”

Both candidates are optimistic about their prospects in the race.

Low, who has also nabbed the California Democratic Party’s endorsement, said internal polling shows him in a “dead heat, given turnout.” He is confident Newsom’s endorsement will help him in the final week leading up to the election.

“People trust Governor Gavin Newsom. People trust the California Democratic Party,” Low said.

Liccardo’s campaign is likewise confident that a September poll showing him leading Low 44 to 27 percent will hold through Election Day despite Low’s endorsements.

“I’ve had five contested elections in my career. I don’t think I’ve ever been endorsed by my party,” Liccardo said. “I’ve never lost an election, and I think that’s because we’re blessed to live in a community where we don’t want to be told how to vote by a party.”

Regardless of who ultimately wins the election, District 16 constituents are unlikely to know their representative by the end of election night. With the pace that California counts mail and absentee ballots, just like in the primary, it may take months to find out who will represent Stanford in the 119th Congress.