Copyright Salon
For the past 40 days, congressional Democrats mustered a remarkable display of unity and perseverance. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer had finally decided to follow Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi’s dictum to know and use their power. They settled on a message: No Democratic votes for a stopgap funding measure to keep the government open without Affordable Care Act subsidies. In the tradition of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, health care would be the hill they were willing to die on. Members of Congress — seemingly of all philosophies, persuasions and wings of the party — delivered that message in town halls, interviews, op-eds and on social media. The party’s base, which had been demoralized for over a year after former Vice President Kamala Harris’ narrow loss to Trump, was energized by the show of force and confident about their shutdown strategy. Polls showed the message was gaining traction; more American voters blamed the shutdown on President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans than on Democrats. More importantly, there were signs the administration was beginning to feel the heat. And then all the momentum, all the messaging work over the past six weeks, came to a crashing halt on Sunday evening when eight Senate Democrats broke ranks to agree to a deal with Republican negotiators that would lead to the reopening of the federal government. In exchange for their votes, Democrats got literally none of what they had demanded, only an unenforceable promise from Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., to hold a vote on Obamacare subsidies in December. After passing the Senate on Monday night with all Democrats — except for the eight negotiators — and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., opposed, the agreement is expected to reach the House on Wednesday. The outcry from the party’s base was immediate. “[Sunday] morning, I was feeling great about my party,” said Julie Roginsky, a longtime Democratic strategist, television commentator and author of the Salty Politics online newsletter. “I felt like we’d finally gotten our footing after [going through] hell.” Roginsky described the success of the “No Kings” protests, last week’s election results and Trump’s realization that the GOP was being held responsible for the shutdown as empowering. “And most importantly, I heard a Democratic leadership that convinced their own voters that Democrats felt it imperative to provide people with affordable and accessible health care, and that that was non-negotiable for them.” Now, Roginsky is “thoroughly disgusted,” she said. “I don’t understand why they would subject people to hunger and to layoffs and to flight delays and to missed paychecks for the past 40 days, if only to get nothing out of it now.” Among the eight Democrats, Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine pointed to the pain the shutdown was causing his constituents, a large number of whom are federal workers in northern Virginia. Neither Kaine nor any of the other senators involved in the deal are up for reelection in 2026; some, including Minority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois, are retiring. Schumer, who was the target of near-universal vitriol among Democrats in March when he backed down in a budget battle that threatened to evolve into a shutdown, was quick to announce his opposition to the deal and he voted against it Monday night. But in fact, his fingerprints are all over it. Either Schumer no longer has effective control over own his caucus, or he has permitted the deal to progress with a wink and a nod behind the scenes — and with a strident disavowal for the bank of cameras he famously loves — while taking Democratic voters for fools. The agreement reveals two things about the New York Democrat’s leadership in the Senate, both of which are devastating. Either Schumer no longer has effective control over own his caucus, or he has permitted the deal to progress with a wink and a nod behind the scenes — and with a strident disavowal for the bank of cameras he famously loves — while taking Democratic voters for fools. The drumbeat within Democratic ranks — and even beyond them — is already beginning: Schumer must step down. Time and again, since Trump’s return to the White House, the minority leader has demonstrated a tin ear for what the Democratic Party needs and is demanding at this moment: An all-out slugger, someone who will step up to the plate and swing at the fastballs rather than bunt — or simply fail to bat altogether. The leader should function as a player-manager who can be trusted to deliver on the Senate floor and in the cloakroom. To all appearances, Schumer appears to be practicing the politics of the Before era — before Trump and Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., began shredding bipartisanship and institutional norms like a block of cheddar. In decades past, an agreement such as the one forged yesterday might have worked. But not now. Not when the word of Senate Republicans has been proven worthless time and again. Not when even the likes of former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, politically and temperamentally a moderate known for calling on the better angels of our nature, has blasted the agreement as “a bad deal” that will adversely affect the millions of Obamacare recipients who are seeing their premiums skyrocket. Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. Schumer and Senate Democratic leadership “have let those people down,” Roginsky said. “They have let down all the rest of us who supported those people. They have let down the voters who voted in droves this past Tuesday because they supported a Democratic Party that fought… All of those people just got punched in the face.” In a blistering essay, Rick Wilson, the ex-GOP strategist and co-founder of the Lincoln Project, thrashed Democrats as “the all-time champions of snatching defeat out of the slavering jaws of victory at the last possible second.” He reserved special ire for Schumer: “It was a colossal leadership failure, and Chuck Schumer should resign as Minority Leader immediately if he had a shred of honor or shame.” Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton, a moderate who is running against incumbent Sen. Ed Markey in the Democratic primary, wasted no time in calling for new leadership in the Senate. “If [Chuck Schumer] were an effective leader, he would have united his caucus to vote ‘No’ tonight and hold the line on healthcare,” he said on X, challenging Markey to withdraw his support for the minority leader. (While other House members have joined Moulton in calling for Schumer’s resignation, as of Wednesday morning, no senator has yet to do so.) For Roginsky, a self-described establishment Democrat who supported Hillary Clinton against Barack Obama in 2008, Clinton against Bernie Sanders in 2016 and Joe Biden over Sanders (and others) in 2020, the agreement is tantamount to betrayal. “They’ve lost people like me,” she said. “It turns out Sen. Sanders, who’s been saying the same thing over and over again, has been right, and we need fighters. We need people who understand what is at stake.” People who are not Chuck Schumer. Roginsky, who served as communications director for former Sen. Jon Corzine, D-N.J., named Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut as a potential minority leader. She was quick to note that there are others who could lead, unify and corral the Democratic caucus in the vein of McConnell or Pelosi, who each ruled their respective chambers “with an iron fist.” On the other side of the Capitol, Jeffries notably backed Schumer on Monday, saying he had “waged a valiant fight” against Trump and Senate Republicans. But in a statement issued Sunday evening, Jeffries denounced the agreement. “America is far too expensive,” he said. “We will not support spending legislation advanced by Senate Republicans that fails to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits.” We need your help to stay independent Despite his nominal opposition, the deal also calls Jeffries’ leadership into question. Until Monday, when centrist Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, characterized the agreement in positive terms on X, the minority leader had maintained apparent unity in his own caucus. Strong party leaders in the House — whether as speaker or minority leader — have historically held some measure of influence in the Senate. This was especially true with Pelosi, who was highly adept at sniffing the political winds. Her instincts were respected and trusted, and if she signaled her immovable opposition, Democratic senators tended to pay attention. Jeffries’ leadership, though, remains largely untested, and appears confined to his own chamber. Ahead of a likely Wednesday vote, the mood among House Democrats is grim. They are staring down a harsh reality: Without any Republican defectors, passage of the agreement is all but assured. Some of the Senate negotiators, though, predicted success. “The American people will see who stands with them on health care and who does not, and that will be the platform of the next stage in the fight,” Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire said following a procedural vote on Monday. “I hope we can find bipartisan agreement on an extension of those premium tax cuts.” But very few Democrats closer to the ground seem to be buying her sunny optimism. “Did they really think that Donald Trump was not cruel enough to just continue the pain for everybody?” Roginsky said. “He understood that Democrats always cave. And for once — for once — I think enough Democrats believed that this time — this time — our leadership would learn the lesson. And we were wrong.”
