TOPEKA — Kansas congressional candidate Don Coover expressed frustration with U.S. Rep. Derek Schmidt’s refusal to help trigger a House vote on a bill pressuring the administration of President Donald Trump to release more documents in the Jeffrey Epstein case.
Coover, a Democrat seeking to oust Schmidt in the 2nd District of eastern Kansas, urged the Republican congressman to join more than 200 Democrats and a handful of Republicans working on the Epstein Files Transparency Act II. The bill was a response to the U.S. Department of Justice’s failure to fully comply with a 2025 law mandating disclosure of Epstein documents. Critics also accused the DOJ of heavily redacting documents to hide names of alleged Epstein associates.
Schmidt, a former Kansas attorney general, told constituents during a recent town hall that he wouldn’t sign the bipartisan “discharge petition” directing GOP House leadership to bypass normal committee procedure and bring the new Epstein bill to a vote of the House.
“Once again, Derek Schmidt decided to stand behind D.C. insiders covering up the Epstein files instead of standing with survivors of sexual abuse,” said Coover campaign spokesperson Lily Johnson. “Like many Kansans, Don Coover is disgusted with what is happening in Washington. He will be a strong voice for Epstein survivors.”
Epstein was awaiting trial on federal charges of sex trafficking of minors when he died in his jail cell in 2019. During the 2024 presidential election, Trump vowed to voluntarily comply with public demand for release of government documents linked to the case. Trump later broke his campaign promise to make Epstein files public, calling the inquiry a hoax perpetrated by Democrats.
U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids, D-Kansas, signed the 2025 discharge petition related to the initial Epstein transparency bill. No Republican member of the state’s congressional delegation joined her. Under political pressure, Trump reversed course to endorse that bill. In the House, the measure passed 427-1. It received unanimous backing from the Senate. Trump signed the legislation in November 2025.
The New York Times reported the president’s name appeared in the government’s Epstein files at least 38,000 times.
On Thursday, House sponsors of a discharge petition attached to the second piece of Epstein disclosure legislation said they secured the minimum 218 signatures to bring about a vote. The follow-up Epstein legislation likely wouldn’t reach the House floor until after the Nov. 3 election.
Schmidt’s congressional office didn’t respond to telephone and email requests for comment about the Epstein files, but he said during the town hall that he objected to the petition process because it was often driven by lawmakers intent on making Congress appear dysfunctional.
“I have not yet signed a discharge petition on any subject since I’ve been in Congress,” said Schmidt, who was elected in 2024. “I prefer to work with the leadership to get items scheduled on the floor. This has the potential to sound glib and I don’t mean it to, but there’s a lot of politics around this place.”
“On lots of issues,” he added, “what happens is folks join up and try to run over the leadership. Not only because they care about an issue, but because they want to render the place nonfunctional. They want to basically hijack the ability of the (House) speaker and the leadership to control the floor schedule and to do that, usually, for political reasons.”
Schmidt committed to voting on merits of legislation regardless of how it got to the House floor.
In terms of the latest Epstein disclosure bill, Schmidt said during the town hall that “I’d probably vote for it.”
Schmidt said his preference would be for the Justice Department and Attorney General Todd Blanche to meet obligations under the 2025 Epstein law. So far, the DOJ says about half of 6 million pages of documents have been released.
Blanche has been accused by Epstein victims of undermining DOJ transparency. U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan threatened Blanche with civil contempt if DOJ failed to meet court deadlines. While Blanche defended the DOJ, the state of New Mexico sued after the agency refused to release information relevant to a probe of alleged sex crimes at Epstein’s ranch.
“I’m not sure we have to have another law,” Schmidt said. “What we have to have is DOJ follow the one we’ve got. Don’t make us pass another law. Just release what you’ve got. I think it would be potentially quicker and maybe fruitful. I’m happy to be part of those efforts.”
Kansas Reflector is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Kansas Reflector maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sherman Smith for questions: info@kansasreflector.com.