Congress

Capitol agenda: Platner’s Hill support crumbles

Published

2 hours ago

July 7, 2026

Graham Platner’s congressional fan club is ready to move on.

The Maine oysterman’s already scandal-ridden campaign was hit Monday by new allegations reported by POLITICO that he forced a woman he dated, Jenny Racicot, to have sex with him in 2021 — a claim Platner denies.

Now a wave of Democrats across the ideological spectrum is calling on the progressive to step aside while already circulating names to replace him. Those bailing include his — now former — staunchest defenders on Capitol Hill, along with party leaders who had warily gotten behind him after their preferred candidate, Gov. Janet Mills, suspended her campaign.

The cascade of opposition spotlights a party deeply anxious about their path ahead in Maine, where unseating GOP Sen. Susan Collins is critical to Democrats’ effort to win control of the chamber.

Democrats can still replace Platner on the ballot, but only if he chooses to drop out before the July 13 deadline outlined in Maine law. If he were to exit the race, the state Democratic Party would have to pick his replacement by July 27.

That tight timeline would set up a scramble potentially pitting factions of the party against each other.

Rep. Ro Khanna, who joined Platner on the campaign trail several times, Monday night endorsed a former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Troy Jackson, who had previously won the backing of Sen. Bernie Sanders. Khanna said Jackson was “someone who has spent his life standing up for these progressive values.”

Sanders himself, who had backed Platner, has yet to comment publicly on the allegations.

A progressive-aligned PAC also weighed in, calling for Maine’s Democratic Party to honor primary voters’ wishes and “not allow crusty insiders like Chuck Schumer an establishment do-over.”

“A small caucus of party insiders cannot be trusted to nominate the shake-up-the-system outsider this moment calls for,” Progressive Change Campaign Committee co-founder Adam Green said in a statement.

Meanwhile, Schumer and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Kirsten Gillibrand called for Platner’s immediate withdrawal, saying the DSCC “will not invest in the Maine Senate race” if he remains on the ballot. Schumer had previously backed Mills.

Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Martin Heinrich, previously two of Platner’s biggest supporters, also joined in calling for him to step down, while Sen. Ruben Gallego, another former Platner fan, rescinded his endorsement.

Apart from Jackson, Secretary of State Shenna Bellows and former public health official Nirav Shah are taking calls about replacing Platner, according to three people familiar with those conversations, granted anonymity to discuss sensitive discussions.

A spokesperson for Platner did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the candidate’s loss of lawmakers’ support.

Platner has not said that he would suspend his campaign. In a video statement posted minutes after Blue Light News’s report, Platner said he is “taking the time to reflect on the best path forward” for his candidacy.

What else we’re watching:

— MEET THE NEXT LIKELY CBC CHAIR: Rep. Troy Carter has a front row seat to Republican redistricting in Louisiana, is a self-proclaimed “close ally” of potential speaker Hakeem Jeffries and is currently the Congressional Black Caucus’ vice chair. CBC members say that makes him their ideal next leader. Several members, including Chair Yvette Clarke and No. 3 Lucy McBath, said in interviews they view Carter as a strong — if not singular — contender to chair the caucus next term.

— HILL STAFFER GROUP DEMANDS MISCONDUCT ACCOUNTABILITY: A 1,500-strong group of Capitol Hill staff members is calling on congressional panels to take steps to better hold accountable denizens of the campus accused of misconduct. The Congressional Progressive Staff Association is asking House Administration and Senate Rules and Administration to enact a series of recommendations after two House members — Eric Swalwell and Tony Gonzales — became the latest lawmakers to resign over sexual misconduct accusations against them.

Riley Rogerson and Hailey Fuchs contributed to this report.

Congress

The likely next Congressional Black Caucus chair has big plans for the shrinking powerhouse

Published

5 hours ago

July 7, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The Congressional Black Caucus is, for now, at the pinnacle of its power, with record-high membership, deep influence on the House Democratic agenda and one of its own members in line to claim the speaker’s gavel.

But major threats have shaken the nearly 60-year-old group in recent months. A recent Supreme Court decision threatens to decimate its membership and an influx of hard-left Democrats could undermine its brand of pragmatic, civil-rights-focused liberalism.

It will likely be Rep. Troy Carter’s job to plot a path forward. The three-term Louisiana Democrat is positioned to take over as chair from Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) next year, and in an extensive interview said he was determined to defend the CBC’s privileged place in House Democratic politics.

“If those who are out there banking on us being quieted, going away, not fighting for the rights of individuals, and providing resources to those that have been historically left behind, they are sadly mistaken,” he said.

Carter, 62, is now serving as caucus vice chair and a self-proclaimed “close ally” of Hakeem Jeffries, the minority leader and likely speaker if Democrats can win a majority in November. He would not commit to seeking the chair but spoke about his “passion for the caucus,” and five other CBC members, including Clarke, said in recent interviews that he is a strong — and perhaps the only — contender.

“I don’t know if there’s anyone who would even think about running against him,” Rep. Cleo Fields (D-La.) said. “He’s set in a perfect position to be the chairman of our caucus, and he has my unyielding support.”

Fields, however, probably won’t be eligible to vote for Carter — underscoring the larger challenges the caucus faces.

The Supreme Court’s April ruling in Louisiana v. Callais allowed the Republican-controlled state legislature to redraw congressional lines — effectively drawing out Fields and leaving Carter as the delegation’s sole Democrat. The ruling’s effects went far beyond the Louisiana state lines, however, allowing GOP-dominated states to eliminate majority-minority districts and threaten the reelections of as many as 19 CBC members.

Carter cast the moment as an opportunity for evolution rather than reinvention for the CBC as he fielded questions about how aggressively Democrats should respond to Republican gerrymandering, the caucus’s longstanding commitment to preserving seniority rights and how it will respond to a new crop of ultraprogressives intent on tugging the party leftward.

“It’s always been revered as the conscience of the Congress, and we will still be the conscience of the Congress if we lose one, two, three or 10 members,” he said.

But some CBC consensus positions that have served to amplify its influence inside the larger Democratic Caucus are already coming into conflict with some members’ demands that their party get more serious about fighting President Donald Trump and Republicans.

For instance, some Democrats believe the most effective way to combat the GOP redistricting spree is to carve up majority-minority districts in blue states as well as red ones. That could create more Democratic seats at the price of diluting Black power in Congress.

Though some prominent CBC members, such as New York Rep. Greg Meeks, are open to the idea, Carter said he was not inclined to join them.

“We want a party that is reflective of all the voices of all the people,” he said. “And if we just start painting a picture, all we want is Democrats, then we lose the value and the flavor and the diversity of what our party represents, and that is a seat at the table for everyone.”

Carter struck a softer note on seniority rights, which has long been seen as the foundation of minority power in the House and a red-line issue for the CBC. The system, he acknowledged, helps minority members “ascend to roles of leadership in a system that even within the party hasn’t always been fair.”

But, he added, “I have never believed that a person that comes in with superior expertise in a subject matter, should be told to wait.”

That attitude has served Carter himself well, putting him in position to assume the CBC chair in only his fourth congressional term after a long career in New Orleans politics. His words, however, are a far cry from suggesting that longtime committee leaders such as Meeks on Foreign Relations, Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson on Homeland Security or California Rep. Maxine Waters on Financial Services ought to step aside.

The real threat could come from a slew of young progressives who have signaled they aren’t interested in waiting their turn next term or otherwise playing nice with the traditional Democratic powers-that-be. Some of those future lawmakers, such as Darializa Avila Chevalier of New York and Chris Rabb of Philadelphia, could be joining the CBC.

Carter brushed off the potential for conflict. He said that while the CBC “still plays a role” in moderating House Democrats, he would not endorse the suggestion from centrist lawmakers such as Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J) and Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) that self-avowed democratic socialists like Avila Chevalier and Rabb don’t belong in the Democratic Party.

“We’re not going to let people pit us against each other,” Carter said. “A Democrat’s a Democrat’s a Democrat. We have different ideas, we have different philosophies, we have different views, different approaches on how to get there, but our missions aren’t different.”

But members of the caucus have shown a taste for intraparty warfare recently, and several of the new progressive members have so far refused to commit to backing as speaker should Democrats prevail in November.

Just weeks ago, Clarke and two former CBC chairs, Reps. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio) and Steven Horsford (D-Nev.), publicly lambasted Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) for merely suggesting there should be “new leadership” in the Democratic Party, without naming Jeffries directly.

Carter said he was not involved in drafting the statement but did not distance himself from its sentiment — especially as a friend and fraternity brother of Jeffries.

“For Senator Slotkin to suggest there needs to be new leadership, I’m not sure what barometer she’s using to measure that,” he said. “If anyone cared to be honest and fair, and they evaluated the task at hand and the ultimate challenges … Hakeem Jeffries has demonstrated exquisite leadership.”

Carter and Jeffries aren’t out of step on much, but the likely new chair said he had a different view on what the signature bill of a new Democratic majority ought to be. Jeffries has said he wants a focus on “affordability.” Carter is instead advocating for a voting rights bill that could help restore Black political power.

But the two have been in lockstep on using the bully pulpit to pressure corporate America and other institutions outside government to preserve American democracy from the threats they see.

When the caucus announced unanimous opposition in May to a bipartisan college athletics reform bill, Jeffries spoke at a news conference announcing a boycott of the Southeastern Conference over its limp opposition to Republican redistricting in the South.

Expect more of that, Carter said.

“If you call yourselves our friends, if you recognize and appreciate our economy, our entertainment, our sports, then you have to also recognize and stand with us at this great time of peril, when our rights are being taken away,” Carter said. “Stand with us if you want us to stand with you.”

Congress

Capitol agenda: Jeffries takes hands-off approach to Israel

Published

1 day ago

July 6, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Hakeem Jeffries is signaling how he’ll handle the issue most deeply dividing his party.

In short: very carefully.

U.S. support for Israel has emerged as a major internal Democratic fault line and portends to be a stinging headache for Jeffries next year as Israel skeptic after skeptic wins the party’s primaries.

Jeffries’ unenviable position came into starker contrast last week. The minority leader barely dodged a Democratic reckoning as his party debated whether to support a Republican-led measure to cut off aid to Israel.

As Democrats wrestled with how to approach that politically thorny vote, Jeffries offered little guidance, preferring to let his members hash out their differences in a pair of hour-plus caucus meetings that several House Democrats repeatedly described as “intense.”

Last week’s meetings, four of those present said, were not intended to galvanize the caucus behind a leadership-driven position, but rather present an opportunity for members to air their perspectives. Lawmakers across the ideological spectrum said they appreciated having forums to deliberate, and many suggested it could offer a model for how the potential speaker could manage his caucus in a majority.

But some Democrats warned an agree-to-disagree posture might not always fly on sensitive issues, especially if the party takes back the House next year. If elected speaker, Jeffries could stave off some of the most politically divisive votes, but a Republican minority could still force Democrats to confront their own internal disagreements.

One progressive House Democrat who has been critical of party leaders, Rep. Delia Ramirez, said the meetings were the first caucus-wide opportunity to discuss Israel during her two terms in Congress.

“I don’t think it’s been an easy process for him as a leader,” Ramirez said about Jeffries. “But I do appreciate that he’s open for us to have a real dialogue, and that he hasn’t in any way suppressed the voices of the people there. He’s been really intentional about listening.”

Jeffries told members he plans to give more specific guidance once the House returns and a vote on the appropriations amendment is confirmed, but that might not be for a while. The measure, from Rep. Thomas Massie, was poised for a vote last week until unrelated Republican dysfunction delayed consideration indefinitely.

In the meantime, Jeffries declined to state his position on the measure, which is unlikely to garner enough Republican support to be adopted.

“There’s a lot that needs to happen differently to get to a place where there’s a just and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, and we all need to focus on actually achieving a two-state solution once and for all,” Jeffries said in response to a question from Blue Light News last week.

But Jeffries has hinted a bit more to his caucus where he would ultimately land on the amendment. In one of the meetings, Jeffries read a statement opposing the amendment from the left-leaning pro-Israel group J Street, according to a person in the room granted anonymity to discuss the private remarks.

What else we’re watching:

— JOHNSON WANTS TO MAKE SAVE AMERICA ‘IRRESISTABLE’ TO GOP: Speaker Mike Johnson is trying to reset his strategy to enact the SAVE America Act after an intraparty feud over the bill shut down his chamber last week. In a “Fox News Sunday” interview, Johnson pushed back on hard-liners’ protest of his proposal to meet their demands on the measure. He reiterated his desire to include the legislation in a party-line reconciliation bill. And he stated President Donald Trump will accept a version of the election security bill that doesn’t crack down on mail-in voting — an issue that threatens to cost the measure Republican support.

— WHO WANTS TO BE A TOP HILL TAX WRITER? — Lawmakers are jockeying for open seats on Congress’ powerful tax writing committees, as exits by several members in both parties next year deplete ranks. At least three Democrats and four Republicans on House Ways and Means are leaving at the end of the year. Across the Capitol, five Republicans and one Democrat plan to depart Senate Finance. Members on both panels hold sway over major party priorities, like last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Emilio Perez Ibarguen and Kelsey Brugger contributed to this report.

Congress

How Hakeem Jeffries is handling the most divisive issue in Democratic politics

Published

1 day ago

July 6, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

House Democrats are fiercely divided over a proposed cut to Israel aid. Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries hasn’t so far tried to unite them.

Lawmakers were set to weigh in on the matter last week before an unrelated Republican meltdown sent them home early for the Independence Day recess — but not before it forced a reckoning inside the Democratic ranks on an issue that has dominated party primaries this year.

Hard-left candidates Darializa Avila Chevalier and Brad Lander in New York as well as Melat Kiros in Colorado ousted incumbents after hitting them — and leaders — for taking money from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Now, thanks to an appropriations amendment proposed by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) that would cut off aid to Israel, the internal fight among Democrats is live on Capitol Hill — and Jeffries is in the middle of it.

As Democrats wrestled with how to approach the politically thorny vote, Jeffries offered little guidance, preferring to let his members hash out their differences in two lengthy private caucus meetings.

“Politics, at least in the Democratic primary, has evolved to the point where folks who don’t know this issue very well are looking for guidance,” Rep. Greg Landsman of Ohio, a pro-Israel Democrat, said in an interview last week.

Jeffries, who represents a significant orthodox Jewish community in his Brooklyn congressional district, historically has been a strong supporter of Israel. When he first ran for the House in 2012, Sen. Chuck Schumer called him a “true blue friend of Israel” in the course of endorsing him in an open-seat primary.

But the politics surrounding Israel have been transformed in the decade-and-a-half since — and especially since Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched his invasion of Gaza in the wake of the October 2023 Hamas terror attacks.

Now U.S. support for Israel has emerged as a major internal Democratic fault line and portends to be a massive headache for Jeffries next year as Israel skeptic after Israel skeptic wins the party’s primaries.

He has given some signals in recent months about how he plans to handle the shift in sentiment — in short, very carefully.

Jeffries declined to state his position on the Massie amendment last week, saying in response to a question from Blue Light News, “There’s a lot that needs to happen differently to get to a place where there’s a just and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, and we all need to focus on actually achieving a two-state solution once and for all.”

He has told members he plans to give more specific guidance once a vote is confirmed. In one of the caucus meetings, Jeffries read a statement opposing the amendment from the left-leaning pro-Israel group J Street, according to a person in the room granted anonymity to discuss the private remarks.

Members across the ideological spectrum said last week they appreciated having forums to deliberate, and many suggested it could offer a model for how the potential speaker could manage his caucus in a majority. But some Democrats warned an agree-to-disagree posture might not always fly on sensitive issues.

Massie’s Israel amendment is unlikely to be adopted — very few of his fellow Republicans are expected to support it — but it has fractured House Democrats along loosely ideological lines all the same.

Progressives generally support the amendment, which would also cut $3.3 billion in foreign military aid in addition to blocking funding for Israel. Meanwhile, many leadership-aligned members and moderates have said the amendment is poorly written and believe it could also restrict humanitarian support for Palestinians.

The friction led leaders to convene a pair of hour-plus caucus meetings that several House Democrats repeatedly described as “intense.” The meetings, four of those present said, were not intended to galvanize the caucus behind a leadership-driven position, but rather present an opportunity for members to air their perspectives.

The meetings were scheduled after concerns emerged about Massie’s amendment during a weekly leadership meeting last month. Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.), who was present, said members demanded time to openly discuss the issue, and Jeffries complied.

Balint said the message sent to leaders was, “We need to talk about it sooner rather than later.”

“This is really a very robust conversation that we need to have, whether it comes up this week or in the future,” she said. “How do we continue to address this issue when we know it’s going to be the issue that the Republicans are going to use to try to drive a wedge between us?”

One progressive House Democrat who has been critical of party leaders, Rep. Delia Ramirez of Illinois, said the meetings were the first caucuswide opportunity to discuss Israel during her two terms in Congress.

As minority leader, Jeffries has rallied his caucus around several discharge petitions — including one to extend expiring Affordable Care Act tax credits — and a war powers resolution to restrain the Trump administration on Iran. Those efforts have tended to divide Republicans and force uncomfortable conversations within the GOP conference.

If elected speaker, Jeffries would control the floor agenda and could stave off some of the most politically divisive votes. But even in the minority, Republicans would have the same tools at their disposal as Jeffries, which they could use to force Democrats to confront their own internal disagreements — including on Israel.

Jeffries has kept his powder dry on other contentious topics this term. As the House considered extending key surveillance powers in April, he stayed in the background, instead leaving it to Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Intelligence Committee Democrat, and Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Judiciary Committee Democrat, to make their respective cases for and against.

When a 45-day extension of the spy power came to the floor, Democrats split 94-85.

But Jeffries later showed on that issue that he can galvanize his caucus when consensus emerges. After Trump appointed MAGA ally Bill Pulte to serve as acting director of national intelligence, Jeffries rallied nearly all of his caucus to oppose an extension until Pulte is no longer serving.

“There are issues where he knows that we’ve got to stick together,” said a House Democrat who was granted anonymity to discuss internal caucus dynamics. “There are issues that he knows that people have different ways of thinking, like on [Israel]. And I think that’s good that he allows us to do that, because if he would whip one way or the other, there’s some people that feel very strongly.”

Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) said Jeffries’ predecessor as top Democrat, Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, also had to pick her political battles — despite her reputation as a hard-nosed leader who made firm decisions and brooked little dissent afterward. But he said he was not surprised to see a softer touch in Jeffries.

“I don’t think Hakeem is the kind of guy to bash heads,” Beyer said in an interview. “He will try to do it by persuasion, by showing the common good, by saying, ‘This is good for America.’”