Congress

The left seethes at the ‘Schumer surrender’

Published

2 years ago

March 14, 2025

The Democratic base wants a fight. Chuck Schumer won’t give it to them.

The Senate minority leader on Thursday backed away from the shutdown confrontation that many liberal voters and activist leaders had been pushing for — arguing that closing the government would only empower President Donald Trump and billionaire ally Elon Musk in their bureaucracy-slashing campaign.

That decision sent shockwaves through the left and had many in their ranks seething at a top party leader who had sought to win them over in recent years.

Ezra Levin, the co-executive director of the liberal grassroots organization Indivisible, quickly dubbed it the “Schumer surrender.”

“I guess we’ll find out to what extent Schumer is leading the party into irrelevance,” he said in an interview, adding that his decision “tells me maybe he’s lost a step.”

The news that the top Senate Democrat would be backing down dejected scores of House members who were gathered at a resort about 25 miles outside of Washington for the Democratic Caucus’ annual policy retreat.

They had stuck together behind House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who had wrangled all but one of his members to oppose Republicans’ seven-month funding patch earlier in the week.

“Extremely disappointed,” Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said after he heard the news. “It gives them the ability, Elon Musk the ability, to go through and continue to do the shit he’s doing.”

And further outside Washington, longtime party activists and high-dollar donors fumed about Schumer: “He sucks,” one state party chair who was granted anonymity to respond candidly, adding that the cave constituted “political malpractice.”

In anticipation of the criticism he was certain to receive, Schumer delivered a 10-minute speech on the Senate floor defending his decision, later holding a question-and-answer session with Capitol Hill reporters and publishing a New York Times op-ed.

His points were two-fold: First, a shutdown would play into Trump and Musk’s hands, he argued, allowing them to continue with their slash-and-burn campaign overdrive. His second argument was more political — and in keeping with his long history as a leading strategist counseling his party to pay heed to the concerns of America’s middle class above all else.

“For Donald Trump, a shutdown would be a gift,” Schumer said. “It would be the best distraction he could ask for from his awful agenda.

“Right now, Donald Trump owns the chaos in the government. He owns the chaos in the stock market,” he added. “In a shutdown, we would be busy fighting with Republicans over which agencies to reopen, which to keep closed, instead of debating the damage Donald Trump’s agenda is causing the American people.”

Some Democrats offered some sympathy, given the dilemma he and other senators faced. The GOP-written stopgap cuts some $12 billion in domestic funding while adding money for migrant deportations and some other programs Democrats oppose. It also contains no language that would stop the Trump administration from continuing to hold back congressionally approved spending.

But Schumer argued there was no telling what Trump and Musk would do in a shutdown, where the White House would “have full authority to deem whole agencies, programs and personnel non-essential, furloughing staff with no promise they would ever be rehired,” he said.

“I don’t think he had a choice,” Democratic National Committee member Joseph Paulino Jr. said, adding that Democrats “don’t have any cohesive plan. They don’t have a strategy. They don’t have any clear direction where they want their … opposition to go.”

Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, called it a “challenging” choice for Schumer even as she called a temporary shutdown “a better option than passing a bad bill.” She predicted blowback from grassroots activists but demurred on how lasting it might be.

“There will be strong reactions,” she said. “But the exact consequences, I think it’s too soon to know.”

Prior to Schumer’s remarks, progressive groups were encouraged by the succession of Senate Democrats who had publicly announced opposition to the GOP funding measure. More than a dozen did so Thursday, many of them echoing the language used by activists.

“I don’t want a shutdown but I can’t vote for this overreach of power, giving Trump and Musk unchecked power to line their pockets,” said Sen. Andy Kim of New Jersey in an online post.

Joel Payne, the chief communications director at MoveOn, called the moment “pretty disappointing,” adding that it crystallized for many in Democratic activists that Schumer and other Democratic leaders may not be equipped for fighting a more brazen, second-term Trump.

“I think it does say a little something about whether or not these folks truly understand the fight that we’re in right now,” Payne said. “And I think that’s a question that a lot of folks are asking.”

The irony is that Schumer had spent much of the past five years patching up his relationship with the Democratic Party’s left flank. Once known as a friend of Wall Street interests and an ally of moderates, he faced similar criticism as minority leader during the first Trump term, then retooled his reputation after becoming Senate majority leader in 2021 — embracing the expansive pandemic-era spending plans of President Joe Biden and winning converts among liberals.

Now Schumer is facing sharp backlash from some of Biden’s top advisers. His former top domestic policy adviser, Susan Rice, told Schumer to “please grow a spine. And quickly.” Neera Tanden, who held the same top policy job, expressed exasperation after Schumer told reporters Trump would be more unpopular — and Democrats would be better positioned to fight — in the fall.

“HE’S UNPOPULAR NOW,” she responded on X. “LORD!”

Schumer did not take any incoming fire from his fellow Democratic leader and Brooklyn native, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. Speaking to his members at the retreat, Jeffries told them that their votes were “something they can be proud of now and tomorrow and years from now” but did not criticize Schumer directly, according to three people granted anonymity to describe the private remarks.

“We stood up against Donald Trump. We stood up against Elon Musk. We stood up against the extreme MAGA Republicans,” Jeffries said in a statement. “We can defend that vote because we stood on the side of the American people.”

A leader of the Democratic left in the House was not as oblique. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York — often mentioned as a potential primary rival for Schumer — said on BLN Thursday that Schumer had made a “tremendous mistake.”

“To me, it is almost unthinkable why Senate Democrats would vote to hand [one of] the few pieces of leverage that we have away for free,” she said.

Asked Thursday to respond in advance to possible calls for new Democratic leadership in the Senate, Schumer said he made a “tough choice … based on what I thought were the merits.” (None of his Senate colleagues, notably, joined in the firestorm of criticism.)

“You have to make these decisions based on what is best for not only your party but your country, and I firmly believe and always have that I’ve made the right decision,” he continued. “I believe that my members understand that … conclusion and respect it.”

Mia McCarthy and Nicholas Wu contributed to this report.

Congress

Capitol agenda: How Warren could link arms with Trump’s GOP

Published

4 hours ago

October 9, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Sen. Elizabeth Warren may get her clearest shot yet to take on corporate America next year — thanks to the once unthinkable help of Republicans.

The Massachusetts Democrat is poised to chair Senate Banking if the party takes back the chamber. And while the progressive has long been a boogeyman to corporate America, lobbyists worry she’ll have powerful backup thanks to the surge of populist Republicans eager to take big swings at Wall Street and Big Tech.

One longtime financial industry lobbyist, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said Warren “has a streak that is not just wanting to be a progressive gadfly, but to actually reach across the aisle to push for policy ideas.” There is “absolutely” reason for concern, the person said.

Atop the panel, Warren would also have a strong position to shape the 2028 presidential debates on both sides.

“There’s very little doubt that the agenda of the Senate Banking Committee is going to overlap substantially with the core issues that the candidates in the 2028 election cycle are going to be grappling with,” said Dennis Kelleher, the outgoing leader of the progressive group Better Markets.

As Banking chair, Warren is expected to try to recruit Republicans in a crackdown on artificial intelligence — specifically restrictions on chip giant Nvidia’s exports to China, which already has some GOP support — and a follow-up of this year’s bipartisan housing law that sought to rein in private equity’s role in the market, according to people close to the senator.

Some of President Donald Trump’s own populist ideas, like credit card interest rate caps and limits on stock buybacks for defense contractors, would provide fertile ground for Warren.

But Trump would also likely be Warren’s biggest obstacle, as he’s been resistant to embrace policy overlaps with her. He’s also been resistant to any AI restrictions.

Warren’s approach also threatens to expose rifts between GOP populists who have been ascendent under Trump and more mainstream conservatives.

Asked about the possibility of a Chair Warren, Sen. Mike Rounds, a more moderate South Dakota Republican, said he doesn’t “think anything would get done except lots of investigations and lots of accusations.”

What else we’re watching:

— LAWMAKERS CLAMOR FOR GAO v. TRUMP — Lawmakers are desperate for a government watchdog to step up and help them in their fight against the Trump administration over control of federal cash. The independent Government Accountability Office concluded earlier this week that the White House illegally withheld more than $1 billion for education and health care research programs — the latest in more than a half-dozen such findings GAO has published since the start of Trump’s second term. But the agency has yet to use its unique power to take the president to court to challenge those “impoundments,” and lawmakers who are tired of the administration running roughshod over their funding prerogatives want GAO to act.

— MURPHY’S DEFENSE FUNDING ULTIMATUM — Democrats should not approve Pentagon funding or the annual defense policy bill if they control Congress next year unless those bills would hasten the end of the Iran war, Sen. Chris Murphy told reporters Thursday. “We should make the end of the war a priority,” said the Foreign Relations Democrat who was returning from a trip to Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Murphy also accused Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and officials of attempting a “cover-up” of the war’s damage and obscuring its true cost after he was denied entry on a base in Qatar. Given the damage to bases in the region, Murphy also told reporters that the U.S. should “reconsider its footprint” in the Middle East.

Jasper Goodman, Jennifer Scholtes and Connor O’Brien contributed to this report.

Congress

Even some Republicans want this watchdog agency to sue Trump

Published

5 hours ago

October 9, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Members of Congress are desperate for backup in their battle with the Trump administration over control of federal cash. The oversight agency that would lean into that fight is sitting on its hands.

The independent Government Accountability Office concluded earlier this week that the White House illegally withheld more than $1 billion for education and health care research programs — the latest in more than a half-dozen such findings GAO has published since the start of President Donald Trump’s second term.

But the agency has yet to use its unique power to take the president to court to challenge those “impoundments,” and lawmakers who are tired of the administration running roughshod over their funding prerogatives want GAO to act.

There’s one problem: GAO is currently run by an interim director, acting Comptroller General Orice Williams Brown, because the Senate has yet to confirm a long-term replacement following her predecessor’s retirement last year. And lawmakers fear she’s reluctant to exercise her temporary authority to take such dramatic legal action.

“They are empowered to sue,” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, told reporters last week. “I think the biggest problem is that we have an acting director of the GAO, who understandably is wary of suing the administration without direct congressional approval.”

The recent rulings came on the heels of Trump’s unilateral cancellation of $810 million in other congressionally approved spending the previous week — which GAO quickly deemed illegal — as well as his decision to allow hundreds of millions more to expire as the fiscal year ended Sept. 30.

The search for a permanent GAO leader, meanwhile, appears to be at a standstill. A designated group of 10 senior lawmakers is supposed to be searching for replacement candidates to recommend for Trump’s nomination, but the members have yet to meet — nine months since former Comptroller General Gene Dodaro departed at the end of his 15-year term.

“We would like a GAO director who’s a man or a woman of integrity and going to do the job that needs to be done. That’s our focus,” said Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, who is part of the selection group as the top Democrat on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

He said it was accurate that the group has made no progress toward recommending nominees.

The Washington Sun reported Thursday that the administration has floated the idea of Trump nominating Eric Ueland, a top official at the White House budget office and former longtime Senate aide, to head GAO. Blue Light News has not independently confirmed the potential nomination.

If Ueland is nominated, however, there is no guarantee he would have the votes for confirmation in a narrowly divided Senate, given the perception of his loyalty to the president and doubt he would challenge Trump’s funding moves.

In the meantime, lawmakers in both parties are urging the acting director to sue, while a GAO spokesperson maintains that the agency “has not made a decision to file any lawsuits at this time” and that the acting comptroller general “legally exercises all the functions and duties” of the role.

The fact that GAO is operating without a Senate-confirmed leader “is definitely stifling their ability to hold the administration accountable,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said in an interview, adding that he believed Dodaro was “clearly building toward making a case” prior to his retirement.

Dodaro said in an interview during his final days at GAO that he considered a lawsuit against the Trump administration “a last resort.” He explained that “in every case we’ve identified so far, people were already suing” and that “Congress has the ability to correct these things and to deal with the distribution of funds.”

What the former inspector general did not expect, however, is the Supreme Court’s suggestion last fall that GAO is the only entity with standing to sue the Trump administration for violating the decades-old Impoundment Control Act, which was designed to ensure presidents spend all the money Congress approves.

Dodaro said he was “surprised” by that suggestion, given his belief that “the law is very clear that GAO’s ability to sue doesn’t preclude anybody else from suing.”

A year later, the president has continued to flout Congress’ authority to dictate how federal dollars get spent. Top administration officials and some Republicans in Congress have publicly belittled GAO as a partisan and noncredible oversight agency since Trump’s return to office.

And after the federal watchdog concluded last week that Trump’s recent funding cancellation is unconstitutional, White House budget director Russ Vought claimed on social media that GAO makes its “legal assessments based on whether Democrats are in the White House.”

Potentially bolstering GAO’s arguments in a lawsuit, lawmakers added provisions to the government funding bills Trump signed into law this year designed to protect their own power of the purse, though Republicans bucked Democratic demands to enact the most aggressive constraints — including to block Trump’s ability to cancel federal dollars at the end of the fiscal year.

Some Republicans are now embracing more stringent methods to stifle Trump’s funding moves, however, after he slashed hundreds of millions dollars through the “pocket rescissions” tactic last month.

“I’m very disappointed in their action here, and it will have to be rectified,” Sen. Mike Rounds, a South Dakota Republican, said about Trump’s latest funding cancellation in an interview.

But he also said he doesn’t know if GAO or another entity should sue: “I’m not sure who should do it. All I know is I want a different result than what we have right now.”

Congress

This watchdog can bark. Congress wants it to bite.

Published

7 hours ago

October 9, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Members of Congress are desperate for backup in their battle with the Trump administration over control of federal cash. The oversight agency that would lean into that fight is sitting on its hands.

He said it was accurate that the group has made no progress toward recommending nominees.

Dodaro said he was “surprised” by that suggestion, given his belief that “the law is very clear that GAO’s ability to sue doesn’t preclude anybody else from suing.”

“I’m very disappointed in their action here, and it will have to be rectified,” Sen. Mike Rounds, a South Dakota Republican, said about Trump’s latest funding cancellation in an interview.

But he also said he doesn’t know if GAO or another entity should sue: “I’m not sure who should do it. All I know is I want a different result than what we have right now.”