The House passed a bill on Thursday strengthening protections for whistleblowers in the federal government.
The legislation, titled the Whistleblower Protection Improvement Act, passed in a 221-203 vote. Two Republicans — Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.) and Nancy Mace (S.C.) — joined all voting Democrats in supporting the measure.
The bill seeks to prevent retaliation against federal employees who expose wrongdoings, including retaliatory investigations. Such wrongdoings can include breaches of the law, mismanagement, abuse of authority or actions that pose a danger to public health.
If the Office of Special Counsel determines that an inspector general referral was retaliatory, however, the measure would require that the special counsel make note of the discovery to the inspector general, who would use that information when deciding whether or not to open or continue an investigation.
Additionally, the bill calls for limiting the disclosure of the identity of whistleblowers, and clarifies that federal government employees — including the president, vice president and congressional lawmakers — are not allowed to hinder or strike back against a whistleblower who provides information to Congress.
“Today’s bipartisan passage of the Whistleblower Protection Improvement Act brings us one step closer to ensuring that any federal employee who steps forward to report wrongdoing is protected from retaliation,” Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), the sponsor of the bill and the chairwoman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, said in a statement after the bill passed on Thursday.
“Whistleblowers are the first line of defense to hold those in power accountable. Congress relies on whistleblowers to exercise our constitutional oversight responsibilities, safeguard taxpayer dollars, improve federal programs, and even save lives,” she added.
House passage of the bill came roughly four months after the Pentagon’s Office of Inspector General found that Army Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman — the brother of Retired Army Col. Alexander Vindman, who was a key witness in former President Trump’s first impeachment — was likely the target of retaliation from Trump officials.
“We found, based on a preponderance of the evidence, that the Complainant was the subject of unfavorable personnel actions from administration officials,” the office of the inspector general wrote in a statement.
The Vindman brothers raised alarm about Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July 2019, which led to Trump’s first impeachment. The Pentagon’s report said Alexander Vindman told his concerns to his brother, and the pair then reported the worries to higher authorities.
Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, argued on the House floor Wednesday that the whistleblower legislation “is a step too far.”
“The whistleblower protection improvement act is a step too far and would help further entrench federal government employees in their job,” he said.
“Whistleblowers in the federal government are covered by some of the most comprehensive protections for employees in the country. Whistleblowers serve a valuable role in our government — especially under an administration like the Biden administration, which is subject to almost no oversight by Congress. But giving this bill a great title, Whistleblower Protection Improvement Act, does not and should not provide cover for the actual requirements and consequences of this bill,” he added.
Comer also referenced Trump’s first impeachment in his argument against the bill.
“In large part this bill is just an excuse to further idolize the people who pushed the sham impeachment against former President Trump,” he said.
At portrait of the late Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) was unveiled at the Capitol on Wednesday.
Cummings, who was first elected to the House in 1996, died in October 2019 at the age of 68. He was serving as chairman of the powerful House Oversight and Reform Committee at the time of his death.
Baltimore-based artist Jerrell Gibbs painted Cummings’s portrait, which will hang in the Rayburn House Office Building’s Oversight and Reform Committee hearing room.
According to the office of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), commissioning an official portrait is a customary honor for congressional lawmakers who serve as chairs of committees.
Cummings, who died during his 13th term in Congress, lay in state in the Capitol’s Statuary Hall. His office at the time said he died “due to complications concerning longstanding health challenges.”
The son of a sharecropper, Cummings was born on Jan. 18, 1951, in Baltimore. He graduated from Howard University and received a law degree from the University of Maryland. Before serving in Congress, the Maryland Democrat spent 13 years in the state House of Delegates.
Cummings was a frequent figure in the news in the weeks before his death for his involvement in the House impeachment inquiry focused on then-President Trump. As the chairman of the Oversight and Reform Committee, Cummings was one of the top three lawmakers leading the inquiry.
A number of lawmakers delivered remarks honoring Cummings at the portrait unveiling on Wednesday, including Pelosi, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.).
“He was my Baltimore brother,” Pelosi, who was born in the Maryland city, said at the ceremony on Wednesday.
“He was so astute, so smart, so wise, so strategic and the rest, and that's why he made such a big difference. He was a leader of towering integrity. Everybody knows that. A man whose life embodied the American dream,” Pelosi added, calling him “the north star of the House of Representatives.”
The Speaker noted that the room where the portrait unveiling took place is the same location where the Jan. 6 House select committee has held its public hearings.
“Elijah said, ‘When we’re dancing with the angels, when we’re dancing with the angels, what would we have thought that we could have done to make the future better for our children, for our democracy?’ That’s what they’re doing in this room. When we’re not honoring Elijah directly, we are indirectly for his patriotism,” she said.
The Speaker said she still has Cummings on her speed dial, adding, “I can’t separate myself.”
“I go to it frequently and just try to think of what he would be thinking of what is going on,” she added.
Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) announced that she will seek another term as House Republican Conference chair on Tuesday, ending months of speculation that she might seek the position of House majority whip if Republicans win control of the chamber.
“For the next 56 days, I’m laser-focused on working to ensure we earn a historic Republican Majority. I am proud to have unified the entire Republican Conference around our country in crisis message and shattered fundraising records as House GOP Conference Chair raising over $10M for candidates and committees this cycle. With the broad support of NY21 and my House GOP colleagues, I intend to run for Conference Chair in the next Congress,” Stefanik said in a statement on Tuesday.
Stefanik had long held her cards close to the vest on her plans for next year, often saying that she was focused on winning back the majority.
Her announcement of her intention to seek a second term as House GOP chair came shortly after news leaked that Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) planned to host an event on Thursday to formally launch his own bid, which his office confirmed to The Hill.
Donalds, one of only two Black House Republicans in the current Congress, told The Hill Tuesday evening that he is still running for Chair despite Stefanik's announcement.
"If you're going to ask Republicans who's the best messenger on our conference, I think I'm one of the best there," Donalds said. "As a conservative who has worked on policy at the state level, now here, I think I have the necessary tools to help our conference in the next evolution after the November elections."
Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa), another first-term member who was reported to be interested in the conference chair position if Stefanik did not run again, threw her support behind Stefanik.
“@RepStefanik has done an incredible job as our Conference chair and I’m proud to be on her team and support her. We will continue to work together to take back the House in November and get our country back on the right track,” Hinson said in a tweet responding to news that Stefanik plans to run again.
So did Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), the vice chair of the House Republican Conference, who had also been reported as a potential pick for chair if Stefanik did not run.
“Serving as Vice Chairman of House Republicans alongside Chairwoman Stefanik has been one of the great highlights of my time in Congress. I look forward to continuing our work together to retake the House majority this fall by promoting the Republican agenda, and I fully support her bid to serve another term as Conference Chair,” Johnson said in a statement.
Stefanik first took over the position, tasked with leading the House Republican message, in May 2021 after the conference ousted Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) from the position over her vocal criticism of former President Trump following the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack.
Stefanik, in contrast, has been a staunch defender and ally of Trump and first gained prominence as part of Trump's defense team during his first impeachment in 2020. She has proudly adopted the label of “ultra-MAGA” as Democrats and President Biden argue that “MAGA Republicans” are a threat to democracy.
After the FBI searched Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate last month, she called the episode a “dark day in American history” and accused the Biden administration of “weaponizing this department against their political opponents.”
If Republicans win back the House and Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) becomes Speaker and Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) moves up to the position of majority leader, that leaves open the No. 3 position of House majority whip.
Stefanik’s high profile and status as the No. 3 House Republican led to speculation about whether she would climb up the leadership ladder, but she would have joined a crowded field of contenders for the whip position.
Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Minn.), the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, has been careful not to formally launch a bid yet.
“There's nothing to run for until you win. I'm focusing on Nov. 8,” he told The Hill in an interview last week when asked about the whip race.
Reps. Drew Ferguson, currently the chief deputy whip, is also in the mix as a potential contender for the position, and Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), current chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee, is also weighing a run for whip.
One senior Republican source argued that the reaction to Stefanik's announcement showed her strength as a politician.
“It took Stefanik less than one hour to lock down the votes of the entire leadership team and 2/3 of the entire conference. And she hasn’t even hit the floor yet,” the source said.
Spokespeople for McCarthy and Emmer confirmed that they will each support Stefanik for the position, while one for Scalise did not immediately respond to an inquiry.
McCarthy brushed off the stakes of a match-up between Stefanik and Donalds.
"I don't think it'll be a race," McCarthy told reporters Tuesday evening. "Elise has done an excellent job and will continue to be Conference Chair."
At the time of her election in March 2021, Stefanik garnered criticism from some in the hard-line House Freedom Caucus for not having a conservative enough voting record. But a year into her tenure, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), the caucus's former chairman, said she has been a “step up” from Cheney.
Stefanik has aimed to show influence in other House GOP races.
She endorsed controversial businessman Carl Paladino in the race to represent New York’s 23rd District when Rep. Chris Jacobs (R) abruptly ended his reelection bid over backlash to his support for an assault weapons ban.
Paladino, who has apologized for once inadvertently emailing racist remarks about former President Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama to a local outlet, lost that primary race last month to New York GOP Chairman Nick Langworthy.
And in the Republican primary for New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District, she endorsed her 25-year-old former aide Karoline Leavitt while McCarthy and Scalise backed Matt Mowers, a former Trump appointee in the State Department.
Rep. G.K. Butterfield was proud to be in Congress. Some years ago, the veteran Democrat installed a vanity message on his congressional license plate, broadcasting the district he represents: North Carolina 1.
Those days are over.
In recent years, the number of menacing threats against sitting members of Congress has ballooned, forcing the Capitol Police to launch thousands of investigations; prompting a flood of new funding for lawmaker security back home and in Washington; and impelling lawmakers to take remarkable precautions to ensure they don't become the next target of political violence.
For Butterfield, that meant taking steps to become more anonymous when he's out in public.
"I've taken the congressional license tags off of my car, because I don't want to be identified publicly. It was right after Jan. 6," Butterfield said before the House left Washington for the long summer recess.
"I used to be proud to display the plate, had No. 1 on my plate for the 1st District — North Carolina 1," he continued. "Used to be a time when people would pull up beside me at the stoplight and give me the thumbs up. But now it's different."
The source of the concern is not merely anecdotal. Over the past half-decade, the number of threat investigations launched by the U.S. Capitol Police has skyrocketed, from 3,939 in 2017 to 9,625 in 2021 — a spike of almost 150 percent, according to numbers provided by the department.
As members of Congress head into a long Labor Day weekend of parades, barbecues and other district events — a holiday marking the unofficial launch of the final leg of public campaigning ahead of November's midterm elections — they seem to be keenly leery of what they might encounter.
"The threat level has been elevated," Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the select committee investigating last year’s attack on the U.S. Capitol, said Friday. "There has been a coarsening of discourse, and a perceived relaxation in inhibitions people would have about attacking public officials."
Raskin spoke Friday while flanked by a security detail matching those assigned to each member of the Jan. 6 investigative panel.
The spike in lawmaker threats has coincided with increasingly personal and bitter attack lines stemming from the Trump era, with Democrats maintaining that the blame falls squarely on the former president and his fiery rhetoric against perceived political enemies.
“We hear — you’ve heard it — more and more talk about violence as an acceptable political tool in this country. It’s not. It can never be an acceptable tool,” President Biden said Thursday night in Philadelphia, where he castigated Trump and those who do not condemn violence as "a threat to democracy."
“We can’t be pro-insurrectionist and pro-American. They’re incompatible,” Biden added.
Trump’s supporters have rushed to his defense, saying accusations that the former president encourages violence are merely political attacks designed to hurt his chances of returning to the White House in 2024.
Attacks aimed at members of Congress have targeted Republicans as well, they note, including recently when Rep. Lee Zeldin (R) was assaulted on stage while speaking at a campaign stop in New York for his gubernatorial bid.
Zeldin escaped largely unscathed, though other attacks have gone much farther. In 2017, Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) was shot on a baseball field during a GOP practice in northern Virginia, sending him to the hospital with critical injuries.
In another more recent incident, an armed man was arrested near Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's home in the middle of the night in June after making death threats. In that case, Republicans accused Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) of encouraging the situation when he warned Kavanaugh, in 2020, that the justice would “pay the price” if he rolled back abortion rights.
“Rhetoric that incites violence toward any elected or appointed member of the three branches of our constitutional government is dangerous and condemnable,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), former head of the far-right Freedom Caucus, said after the June incident.
Lawmakers who are critical of Trump remain among those most frequently targeted for violence. The long and diverse list includes Republicans who voted for an infrastructure bill he opposed; Democrats who managed the former president’s impeachments; Republicans who supported his ouster after the Jan. 6 Capitol attack; and most recently the nine House lawmakers on the select committee investigating the 2021 riot, all of whom have round-the-clock security details.
Rachel Kleinfeld, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Republicans critical of Trump are particularly prominent targets because they’re viewed to be disloyal in the eyes of the MAGA faithful.
“People who show that there's a way to be a conservative and not be part of the MAGA faction are in the targets because that's the most threatening group,” Kleinfeld said. “You see that in every country where you start having this kind of factional violence is that, what's called ‘in-group moderates’ — who might not be moderate in their policy beliefs, but who don't believe in violence — are the first to be targeted.”
After five years of steady threat increases on Capitol Hill, it’s unclear if 2022 will continue the trend. The Capitol Police reported opening “roughly 1,820 cases” between Jan. 1 and March 24 — on pace to top 8,000 incidents for the year, which would be well below the figure for both 2020 and 2021. But the department is now withholding the release of incremental figures and instead will provide annual numbers at the end of each year. The change, a spokesperson said, is designed to curb “confusion” surrounding the statistics.
The figures represent incidents of both “concerning comments and direct threats,” a determination guided by the Supreme Court, which has defined threats to be “statements where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals.”
Some incidents are more clear-cut than others.
In July, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), one of two Republicans on the Jan. 6 select committee, released a compilation of profanely violent threats made by phone to his office. This week, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), who served as one of the managers of Trump’s second impeachment, released a similar audio message from a man threatening to come to Swalwell’s office with a gun for the purpose of assassinating him. And a number of other lawmakers have comparable stories, even if they haven’t released the threats publicly.
"There's an escalation,” said Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.). “We have some new interns and they're shocked [at] the level of animosity that people talk about when they call us — the level of hatred and threats. They were absolutely stunned, and I said, 'No, that's what we live with. And it's getting worse.'”
One House Democrat, who spoke anonymously so as not to become a greater target, said that’s not all: Local law enforcers also monitor the family house.
"We have a police car that comes once in the morning, and once at night,” the lawmaker said. “It's just not a time when everyone feels safe.”
Republicans hoping to seize control of the House in November are already setting their sights on what is, for many of them, a top priority next year: impeaching President Biden.
A number of rank-and-file conservatives have already introduced impeachment articles in the current Congress against the president. They accuse Biden of committing "high crimes" in his approach to a range of issues touching on border enforcement, the coronavirus pandemic and the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan.
Those resolutions never had a chance of seeing the light of day, with Democrats holding a narrow control of the lower chamber. But with Republicans widely expected to win the House majority in the midterms, many of those same conservatives want to tap their new potential powers to oust a president they deem unfit. Some would like to make it a first order of business.
“I have consistently said President Biden should be impeached for intentionally opening our border and making Americans less safe,” said Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.). “Congress has a duty to hold the President accountable for this and any other failures of his Constitutional responsibilities, so a new Republican majority must be prepared to aggressively conduct oversight on day one.”
The conservative impeachment drive is reminiscent of that orchestrated by liberals four years ago, as Democrats took control of the House in 2019 under then-President Trump. At the time, a small handful of vocal progressives wanted to impeach Trump, largely over accusations that he’d obstructed a Justice Department probe into Russian ties to his 2016 campaign. The idea was repeatedly rejected by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), not least out of fear that it would alienate voters in tough battleground districts.
The tide turned when a whistleblower accused Trump of pressuring a foreign power to find dirt on his political opponent — a charge that brought centrist Democrats onto the impeachment train. With moderates on board, Pelosi launched a formal impeachment inquiry in September of 2019, eight months after taking the Speaker’s gavel. Three months later, the House impeached Trump on two counts related to abusing power.
The difference between then and now is that liberals, in early 2019, were fighting a lonely battle with scant support. This year, heading into the midterms, dozens of conservatives have either endorsed Biden’s impeachment formally, or have suggested they’re ready to support it.
At least eight resolutions to impeach Biden have been offered since he took office: Three related to his handling of the migrant surge at the southern border; three targeting his management of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan last year; one denouncing the eviction moratorium designed to help renters during the pandemic; and still another connected to the overseas business dealings of his son, Hunter Biden.
Those proposals will expire with the end of this Congress. But some of the sponsors are already vowing to revisit them quickly next year. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), the lead sponsor of four of the impeachment resolutions, is among them.
“She believes Joe Biden should have been impeached as soon as he was sworn in, so of course she wants it to happen as soon as possible," Nick Dyer, a Greene spokesman, said Monday in an email.
A noisy impeachment push from the GOP’s right flank could create headaches for Rep. Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), the Republican leader in line to be Speaker, and other party brass just as the 2024 presidential cycle heats up.
On the one hand, impeaching Biden could alienate moderate voters and hurt the GOP at the polls, as was the case in 1998 following the impeachment of President Clinton. Already, GOP leaders like Sen. Mitch McConnell (Ky.) are throwing cold water on the impeachment talk, suggesting it could damage Republicans politically in the midterms.
On the other hand, ignoring the conservatives’ impeachment entreaties might spark a revolt from a Republican base keen to avenge the Democrats’ two impeachments of Trump, who remains the most popular national figure in the GOP. McCarthy knows well the perils of angering the far right: The Freedom Caucus had nudged Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) into an early retirement in 2015, deeming him insufficiently conservative, then prevented McCarthy from replacing him.
McCarthy’s office did not respond Monday to a request for comment.
The challenge facing Republican leaders in a GOP-controlled House will be to demonstrate an aggressive posture toward the administration, to appease conservatives, without alienating moderate voters in the process.
Stefanik’s office did not respond to requests for comment.
Another strategy GOP leaders may adopt is to impeach a high-ranking member of the administration, but not the president himself. Several resolutions have been introduced to do just that, separately targeting Vice President Harris, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas and Attorney General Merrick Garland.
McCarthy, during a visit to the southern border earlier in the year, had floated the idea of impeaching Mayorkas if he is found to be “derelict” in his job of securing the border. And the concept has plenty of support among conservatives.
“Mayorkas and Garland have purposefully made our country less safe, politicized their departments, and violated the rule of law. In some instances, they have instructed their subordinates to disobey our laws. That is unacceptable,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), who has endorsed a number of impeachment resolutions this year, said in an email.
“Next January I expect the House to pursue my impeachment articles against Mayorkas as well as Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene’s impeachment articles that I co-sponsored against Attorney General Merrick Garland,” Biggs added.
Still, conservatives like Biggs, the former head of the Freedom Caucus, also want to go straight to the top by impeaching Biden. And it remains unclear if anything less than that will appease the GOP’s restive right flank — one that’s expected to grow next year with the arrival of a number of pro-Trump conservatives vowing to take on anyone they consider to be part of Washington’s political establishment.
Some Republicans said the decision whether to endorse impeachment next year will simply hinge on events. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), for instance, has endorsed two impeachment resolutions this cycle related to the Afghanistan withdrawal, but “has made no decisions yet on supporting impeachment articles next year with Republicans in the majority,” according to spokesman Austin Livingston.
“He will wait to see what those efforts look like, specifically how they align with Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution," Livingston said, referring to the section outlining Congress’s impeachment powers.
But others are eager to use a GOP majority to hold Biden’s feet to the fire. And that energy doesn’t appear to be fleeting, particularly when it comes to the border crisis, which could very well remain a hot topic six months from now.
Rep. Mary Miller (R), a strong Trump supporter who recently won an Illinois primary over the more moderate Rep. Rodney Davis (R), said Biden should be removed “for purposely ignoring our immigration laws.”
“Biden and Harris have failed their most basic duty,” Miller said, “which is ensuring the safety of the American people through the security of our borders.”
Correction: This story has been updated to reflect that the PAC Protect Our Future has only spent money in Democratic primaries.
Progressives are facing down a seeming disconnect over what’s politically achievable in Washington and what wins elections back home.
On one hand, they’ve won major policy battles from the White House to Capitol Hill this month, moving Democrats beyond what many thought was possible to accomplish under President Biden.
On the other, they’ve struggled to translate those victories to the campaign trail and are coming out of the primary season suffering damaging losses and bruised confidence.
In November, those two realities will be put to the test.
“Progressives continue to win the battle of ideas, we just don’t always win elections,” said Max Berger, a Democratic strategist with the social justice organization More Perfect Union and a veteran of Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass) presidential campaign.
After more than a year of setbacks, liberals have had a good few weeks in Washington.
They were pleasantly surprised by the multibillion-dollar investment they secured toward climate measures from the Senate and White House and were equally happy when certain tax reform and health care provisions were included in the Inflation Reduction Act. They saw the scope of the package as proof they can get much of what they want with enough pressure.
Liberals put student loan relief high on the president’s radar early in his administration and their push persisted even as he tackled massive crises, from inflation and gas prices to Russia’s war in Ukraine.
They argued that Biden could cancel borrowers’ debt through executive action, bypassing the ideological disputes of Democrats in the Senate that have stalled his agenda at other critical junctures.
And after Biden announced a plan this week to cancel $10,000 in debt for those making less than $125,000 and double that for Pell Grant recipients, some felt even more optimistic about the power of the progressive movement.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), the head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said her flank had been “doggedly pursuing this,” for months, dating back to a conversation with Biden in March. She has maintained a line to the White House on the issue.
Those accomplishments have the left wing swatting back at what they see as uncredible critiques that their goals aren’t realistic.
Moderates have made the case that independents in particular find progressive policies unappealing. They fought to trim the price tag on earlier versions of Biden’s climate and spending package as well as on certain health care and education priorities. Some centrist lawmakers lobbied against student loan forgiveness up until the final decision, arguing that it would further increase inflation.
But on Thursday, liberals got more good news. A Gallup poll taken in the wake of the series of progressive wins showed the president’s approval rating jumping to the highest spot in a year — 44 percent — in part due to an increase in support from independents.
Still, for all progressives' celebrations on the policy front, they saw plenty of disappointment at the ballot box.
One state with hit the left particularly hard: New York. Home to “Squad” members Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D) and Jamaal Bowman (D), the state is usually seen as a bastion of support for progressive lawmakers.
But Democratic Trump impeachment counsel Dan Goldman, who was seen as more moderate, is projected to win the primary in the state’s 10th Congressional District, besting a field of progressive candidates including Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.), who ran in the 10th District instead of the 17th. And Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.) dispatched a progressive challenger by 30 points.
Earlier in the year, former state Sen. Nina Turner, a co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s (I-Vt.) presidential campaign, lost for a second time to Rep. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio), who had the support of the party establishment. And in a closely watched primary in Texas, Jessica Cisneros, a young activist and attorney lost by a hair to the establishment’s choice, conservative Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar. Cuellar’s supporters — and congressional leadership who weighed into the race — argued a progressive could not win his district.
Strategists attributed many of the losses to the amount of money backing more moderate candidates.
“Fragmentation plays a big part, as divided lefty fields opened up paths for ... Goldman,” said Max Burns, a Democratic strategist who worked on the New York race. “But you just can't talk about progressives' primary hardships without addressing the tens of millions of dollars in corporate dark money parachuted into major races.”
The worry over so-called dark money has been weighing heavily on progressives this cycle. The left has been drastically outspent by special interest groups that poured money into several important races to defeat them.
Protect Our Future, the political action committee affiliated with tech megadonor Sam Bankman-Fried, has spent money in Democratic primaries, and a PAC called Mainstream Democrats has worked to protect moderate incumbents, including Cuellar.
Progressives also say the American Israel Public Affairs Committee has been spending more aggressively and out-in-the-open this cycle.
And Goldman, a Levi Strauss & Co. heir, angered his progressive challengers by pouring millions of his own money into his campaign.
Bill Neidhardt, a Democratic operative with Left Flank Strategies and former campaign spokesperson for Sanders, agreed with the damning influence he sees outside spending factoring into party primaries this cycle.
“Much of it comes down to big money in politics, with conservative Democrats using corporate PACs, or even self-funding in the case of millionaires like Dan Goldman,” said Neidhardt.
“But I would also challenge the notion that progressives are coming up short. The Congressional Progressive Caucus is going to be stronger than ever next Congress with new members who beat out moderates like Becca Balint, Greg Casar, Delia Ramirez and Summer Lee,” he added.
One notable sleeper came from Maxwell Alejandro Frost, a 25-year-old Sanders-backed gun control activist who won the primary for Florida’s 10th Congressional District on Tuesday. The district’s blue tilt means he will likely become one of the youngest members of Congress next year.
And on the Senate side, voters in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin opted to nominate two progressives — Lt. Gov. John Fetterman and Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes — to help Democrats with their quest to keep their majority.
“The candidates have gotten a lot better honestly,” said Berger, noting that left wing groups like Justice Democrats and the Working Families Party have fine-tuned their operations to recruit and train contenders to mount credible challenges. “There’s more people who have experience who have decided to take the lead.”
Some progressives also see the potential in future contests. Even if Democrats lose the House and their collective legislative power diminishes, there are signs of interest for a more liberal candidate than Biden or other possible contenders in 2024.
According to a new USA TODAY-Ipsos poll released on Friday, Sanders leads in favorability among almost two dozen candidates in a hypothetical match-up.
“Progressives are more popular than they appear,” said Burns. “And even with a torrent of money, corporate-backed candidates are still barely squeaking by.”
The race for the top Democratic seat on the powerful House Oversight and Reform Committee got more crowded on Friday when Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) entered the contest to replace the outgoing chairwoman, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.).
Maloney lost her primary race on Tuesday to Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), ending a 30-year career on Capitol Hill and opening up the top panel seat in the next Congress.
Raskin's decision to seek the spot pits him against two other, more veteran Oversight Democrats — Reps. Stephen Lynch (Mass.) and Gerry Connolly (Va.), who launched their candidacies on Wednesday.
Democrats have traditionally favored seniority when choosing top committee spots, which would seem to place Raskin at a disadvantage in the race.
Still, the three-term congressman has built a sturdy national profile in his short time on Capitol Hill, leading the House's second impeachment of former President Trump after last year's attack on the U.S. Capitol, and now playing a high-profile role in the investigation of the attacks.
A former professor of constitutional law, Raskin is now making the case that his legal background makes him the best candidate to lead the Democrats on the Oversight panel.
"We are still in the fight of our lives to defend American constitutional democracy and—by extension—political freedom and human rights all over the world," Raskin wrote Friday to his fellow Democrats in a letter obtained by The Hill.
Expect a Trumpier U.S. House of Representatives next year.
House Republicans are not only forecast to win control of the lower chamber in November's midterm elections, they're also poised to bring with them a roster of new arrivals who have embraced the former president and his false claims of fraud surrounding his 2020 defeat.
A number of Trump loyalists have bumped off more moderate Republicans in the summer primaries — a list that grew longer on Tuesday with conservative victories in Florida and New York — while a number of other centrists are stepping into retirement.
The combination foreshadows a power shift in the House GOP that has the potential to complicate any bipartisan compromise with President Biden, while creating headaches for Republican leaders who will face pressure to demonstrate their governing chops in a new majority.
“I believe that [House Minority Leader] Kevin McCarthy [Calif.] would have a rough time of it,” said David Mayhew, a political scientist at Yale University.
Joe Kent, a former Green Beret, defeated pro-impeachment Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler in a Washington GOP primary earlier this month with the help of an endorsement from Trump. Running as an “America First” Republican, he railed against the “establishment” and publicly said that McCarthy, the House GOP leader, should not be Speaker.
And he’s hardly alone.
In the most recent round of primaries, winners in safe Republican House seats include former Trump appointee to the Pentagon Cory Mills, who has said that the 2020 election was “rigged.” Mills would replace outgoing Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.).
New York State GOP Chairman Nick Langworthy, who heavily touted his previous support from Trump in the primary despite not getting a formal endorsement for the race, also won a primary in a safe GOP district on Tuesday. Rep. Chris Jacobs (R-N.Y.) ended his reelection bid for that seat due to blowback to his support for an assault weapons ban.
One of the starkest signs that incoming House Republicans will be friendlier to the former president is that Mills and Langworthy were considered the less extreme candidates in their races.
Langworthy defeated Carl Paladino, a gaffe-prone Trump supporter who was endorsed by Trump allies Reps. Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), and Elise Stefanik (N.Y.). And Mills faced Florida state Rep. Anthony Sabatini, who was also supported by Gaetz and Greene and accused Mills of being a “RINO,” an acronym for "Republican in name only."
Sarah Chamberlain, president and CEO of the Republican Main Street Partnership that supports “governing Republicans” who are willing to work across the aisle, pointed to the defeats of Paladino and Sabatini to argue that loyalty to Trump may not be a defining feature of incoming Republicans.
“When the members sit around a table, Donald Trump is not what they discuss. They discuss Joe Biden and getting things done to help the American people,” Chamberlain said of the candidates supported by her group. “They're not against them by any means. They voted for him. But he is not a topic of conversation.”
Still, several of the candidates highlighted as “Young Guns” by the National Republican Congressional Committee have also expressed skepticism about the 2020 election, even if they did not make loyalty to Trump a key part of their candidate pitch this year.
Derrick Van Orden, a retired Navy SEAL seeking to replace retiring Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.), attended the “Stop the Steal” rally at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, but has said he never entered the Capitol and has since distanced himself from the events of that day.
Contributing to the likely power shift, many House Republicans who were critical of Trump or did not overtly embrace him will not be returning in 2022.
Eight of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump after the Jan. 6 Capitol attack either declined to run for reelection or lost their primaries. Others, like Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) and Rep. David McKinley (R-W.Va.), lost in primaries against other Trump-backed members after being put up against each other due to redistricting.
Meanwhile, Trump allies like Gaetz and Greene sailed through their primaries.
The House Freedom Caucus, the group of hard-line conservatives, is likely to grow. A PAC affiliated with the group, the House Freedom Fund, is supporting Trump-endorsed newcomers Anna Paulina Luna in Florida, Bo Hines in North Carolina, and Jim Bognet in Pennsylvania.
If history is any guide, Republican leaders will have a delicate line to walk if they win back House control with a more conservative majority.
GOP leaders embraced the Tea Party movement in the late aughts, which provided the burst of energy leading directly to their House takeover in 2010. But it was those same conservative majority-makers — and eventual Freedom Caucus founders — who fought their own leadership over everything from government spending to the proposed impeachment of President Obama.
The far-right pressure pushed former Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) into retirement, prevented McCarthy from rising to the Speakership in 2015 and was a thorn in the side of Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) during his short stint with the gavel.
Some congressional experts predict the new wave of Trump loyalists will create similar headaches for GOP leaders next year — unless leadership jumps on board.
“Donald Trump was the first Republican candidate for president who truly understood what the Tea Party was all about. The Paul Ryans of this world thought it was about small government. Wrong! It was a populist uprising,” said Bill Galston, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “Trump got it right; everybody else got it wrong. And so he has now elevated that big Trump party, which is socially conservative but economically inclined to big government that serves their interests.
“These are not libertarians; they're anti-libertarians in all sorts of ways,” Galston added. “And that's the Republican Party now."
The influence of aggressive, Trump-loving House members and the number of headaches they create for GOP leadership next year may depend on how successful Republicans are in House races overall in this year’s midterms. Many of the newcomer GOP candidates in competitive races trying to unseat Democrats are more centrist, and largely do not talk about the former president.
The Congressional Leadership Fund (CLF), a super PAC aligned with McCarthy, has also swooped in to support incumbent members who fought off more extreme challengers.
The CLF deployed a last-minute $50,000 in phone calls to support Rep. Daniel Webster (R-Fla.) on Tuesday as he fended off a surprisingly strong challenge from far-right, anti-Muslim activist Laura Loomer, who has been banned from multiple social media platforms.
It also helped centrist Republican Rep. David Valadao (Calif.), who voted to impeach Trump, and Rep. Young Kim (Calif.) advance to the general election as they faced more conservative challengers.
Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) is facing down a new political future after losing her House primary on Tuesday to Trump-endorsed lawyer Harriet Hageman.
Speculation about what the three-term congresswoman who hails from a Republican political dynasty will do once her time in Congress comes to a close has steadily grown louder, and on Wednesday morning the Wyoming Republican said she is “thinking about” mounting a bid for the White House.
Cheney had delivered a defiant speech Tuesday night, slamming former President Trump, the movement he created and the candidates who repeat his claims about the 2020 election. It was at once a concession speech and a promise of a future in public life.
“So I ask you tonight to join me. As we leave here, let us resolve that we will stand together — Republicans, Democrats and Independents — against those who will destroy our republic,” Cheney said.
But even as she gave little indication of what she will do next, she vowed Tuesday to “do whatever it takes to ensure Donald Trump is never again anywhere near the Oval Office.”
“This primary election is over, but now the real work begins,” she said.
Here are five questions about Liz Cheney’s political future:
Does she launch a 2024 presidential campaign?
On Wednesday, less than 12 hours after major networks finalized Cheney’s defeat, Cheney said she is “thinking about” running for president and will make a decision in the coming months.
Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, had previously dodged questions about a potential 2024 run, preferring to bring the conversation back to her main goal: keeping Trump out of the White House.
But a presidential run would be her “next logical” step, said Republican strategist Scott Jennings.
“There are things you could do, but what better platform would there be than to be running a campaign?” Jennings told The Hill in an interview.
“You can bet that if Cheney launches a campaign for president, she's gonna, you know, the amount of coverage she will get, and the amount of media attention she will get, will far outstrip her standing in the polls,” Jennings added. “And so, it strikes me that if you're wanting to talk to Republican audiences about what you think is an important point of view, what better way to do that and to do it in the presidential cycle?”
Logistically speaking, a Cheney White House bid is possible.
The congresswoman skyrocketed to even greater national prominence through her work as vice chair of the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. She has name recognition, deep ties in the Republican Party and a sizable war chest, with $7.4 million remaining in her campaign account as of three weeks ago, according to NBC News.
And while Cheney, true to pattern, kept much of her speech Tuesday focused on Trump and Trumpism, she didn’t rule anything out for 2024.
Does she run to win the White House — or keep Trump out of it?
Insiders agree winning the 2024 GOP presidential nomination would be an uphill battle for Cheney.
Most hypothetical polls show Trump in the lead and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), a proponent of Trump’s policies, in second. And while votes are still being counted, Cheney appears to be trailing by 30 points or more.
But even with little chance of winning, Cheney may run to influence the outcome of the primary.
“How do you define success?” Jennings said. “For her it may be less about winning the nomination and more about keeping Trump from getting the nomination. So I think it just depends on how you define success.”
Her presence would also give a voice to anti-Trump Republicans who have been largely shut out of a presidential conversation dominated by Trump and people who espouse his policies and rhetoric.
“When it comes to people that are not part of the whole MAGA movement, who are not happy with the direction that the Republican Party has gone, who are more traditional conservative Republicans, like myself, from the past, I think that Liz Cheney is a more appealing option,” said Olivia Troye, a former aide to Vice President Mike Pence.
“I think it’s important to have someone like her be willing to continue to push back and tell the truth about what’s happening here,” she said.
Cheney on Tuesday referenced former President Lincoln, who fought to keep the U.S. unified.
“The great and original champion of our party, Abraham Lincoln, was defeated in elections for the Senate and the House before he won the most important election of all. Lincoln ultimately prevailed, he saved our Union, and he defined our obligation as Americans for all of history,” she said.
What does she do with her time left in office?
The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol is already racing against the clock, trying to tie up its investigation within the next few months in anticipation of Republicans winning control of the chamber in November.
But before then, the panel is vowing to hold more public hearings and present additional information to bolster its argument that Trump was at the center of a scheme to keep himself in power — presentations that Cheney will likely play a large role in.
“We’re not winding down right now,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) told reporters in the Capitol last month. “It’s been amazing to see, kind of, the flurry of people coming forward, so it’s not the time to wind it down.”
Cheney has played a central role in the committee’s previous hearings, delivering opening and closing statements and questioning witnesses appearing live before the panel.
And she has not shied away from criticizing Trump or her GOP colleagues during those presentations — a practice she will likely continue, if not ramp up, in the remaining months of her term.
Republican strategist Doug Heye told The Hill that whatever path Cheney takes after her primary defeat, she will make sure she remains a vocal presence in American politics, beginning with her work on the committee.
“What's clear is that her voice isn't going to go anywhere,” Heye said. “And that will start with, you know, the next hearings on Jan. 6, and then we'll continue in whatever form she decides to take them in.
What kind of support does she have for future moves?
Cheney may have lost her primary but she still has a vast nationwide network of supporters and donors who could be of help for any future political moves she might make.
The congresswoman broke her own record in the first quarter of the year, bringing in close to $3 million, and followed that up with a whopping $2.9 million in the second quarter.
In addition to grassroots donations, Cheney raked in money from notable Republican and Democratic donors across the country including former President George W. Bush, his former adviser Karl Rove, film producer Jeffrey Katzenberg, and billionaire hedge fund manager Seth Klarman.
However, in a Republican presidential primary, Cheney would need to appeal to a Republican primary base. And she may not be the only anti-Trump Republican in the field. Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) has repeatedly been floated as a potential 2024 GOP hopeful and has yet to rule out a run.
“I think it will be important for them to navigate how they will reach more moderate voters,” Troye said.
“These are longtime, respected Republican figures,” she continued. “And their voices can reach an audience in a way that many can’t.”
What could she do besides run for president?
While a 2024 presidential bid is the most talked-about possibility for Cheney, there are other avenues the congresswoman can pursue as she looks to continue her crusade against Trump.
One would be joining the cable news circuit as a commentator or analyst, which would give the congresswoman a sizable platform to take on the former president and denounce his false claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.
That route is a popular one for former lawmakers. Ex-Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who was unseated by then-Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley (R) in 2018, joined NBC News and MSNBC months after the race as a political analyst, and former Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was hired by Fox News as a contributor one day after he resigned from the House in 2017.
Cheney could also join a think tank or form her own PAC, as Kinzinger, who is not running for reelection this November, has done.
Kinzinger — another top Trump critic and Cheney’s fellow Republican on the Jan. 6 panel — launched a PAC, titled “Country First,” as a movement to challenge the GOP’s embrace of Trump.
Another option for Cheney is writing a book, a popular move for top figures leaving Washington. After bowing out of running for a third term in 2020, former Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas), who criticized Trump on a number of occasions, penned a book titled “American Reboot: An Idealist’s Guide to Getting Big Things Done.”
While it remains unknown what Cheney will choose for her next act, Jennings says the congresswoman likely has a plan driving her recent — and future — political moves.
“I know the Cheneys and I know how smart they are and I know how they operate, and I would be surprised if this wasn’t part of a larger plan, but a plan that fits within a mission,” Jennings said. “I think she believes she’s on a mission here to keep Donald Trump out of the White House. So if that’s your mission, then they’re the kind of people who would build a plan to try to achieve that mission.”
Rep. Liz Cheney may be about to lose her day job. If so, she’s totally OK with that.
Cheney, a third-term Wyoming Republican, is charging into Tuesday’s primary in the Cowboy State defiantly embracing the very message that’s sparked the conservative backlash brewing to oust her: Namely, that former President Trump, with his baseless claims of a “stolen” election, poses an existential threat to the country’s democratic foundations and should be barred from holding future office.
That argument, combined with Cheney’s national prominence, has made her both the public face of the anti-Trump movement and a pariah in the eyes of the MAGA faithful, including those in ruby-red Wyoming where the former president remains wildly popular.
Some recent polls have Cheney’s challenger — an election denier named Harriet Hageman — leading by almost 30 points.
The Cheney name has been revered in conservative Wyoming circles for decades; the seat she holds was once held by her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney. And two years ago, the thought of her losing that seat would have been laughed out of Laramie.
Then came last year’s attack on the Capitol — a riot aimed at overturning Trump’s election defeat. Since then, Cheney has pursued the 45th president with a crusader’s zeal, becoming one of only 10 House Republicans to support Trump’s second impeachment, which deemed him responsible for inciting the insurrection, and then joining the Jan. 6 select committee investigating the rampage.
It was then, political experts say, that Cheney decided the fight against Trump and his election lies was more important than keeping her job in Congress.
“She's almost certainly toast,” said David Barker, a political scientist at American University. “My guess is that she knew that the second she decided to really join the Jan. 6 committee and pursue the president in that way.”
“She hasn't just been kind of a passive member of the committee,” Barker added. “She's been really leading the whole charge and doing so in the most provocative and high-profile ways.”
Indeed, Cheney, as vice chair of the select committee, has been the most prominently featured figure throughout the eight public hearings the panel has staged this summer. And heading into the final stretch of what appears to be a doomed campaign for a fourth term, Cheney is not dodging the anti-Trump sentiment that’s put her in hot water with Wyoming voters. She’s amplifying it.
“America cannot remain free if we abandon the truth. The lie that the 2020 presidential election was stolen is insidious — it preys on those who love their country,” Cheney said in a closing-argumentcampaign video released Thursday. “It is a door Donald Trump opened to manipulate Americans to abandon their principles, to sacrifice their freedom, to justify violence, to ignore the rulings of our courts and the rule of law.
“This is Donald Trump’s legacy, but it cannot be the future of our nation.”
Cheney is 56 years old, and her own legacy — along with her political future — remains uncertain. But this much is clear: She’s gambled both on the notion that, in challenging the most popular figure in her own party, she can prevent him from becoming president once again. In that campaign, she’s essentially arguing that the GOP needs saving from itself — and she’ll either be the one to do it, or fall hard trying.
“She faced a binary choice between doing what she thought was right and necessary, after Jan. 6, and continuing her political career in the Republican Party,” said Bill Galston, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “And unlike most politicians, she made a clean and honorable choice. And she's obviously prepared to take the consequences.”
In a last-ditch effort to gain ground in Tuesday’s primary contest, Cheney last week aired a public endorsement from her father. Appearing in a cowboy hat and questioning Trump’s masculinity, Dick Cheney called the former president “a coward” who “tried to steal the last election using lies and violence.”
“In our nation's 246-year history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump,” he says in the minute-long ad.
Still, 70 percent of Wyoming voters chose Trump in 2020 — the highest number of any state in the country. And even the appeals of a state institution like Dick Cheney aren’t expected to save his daughter in Tuesday’s race. The experts say the simple reason is that the GOP, as old-guard power brokers like Dick Cheney knew it, no longer exists.
“Donald Trump executed a hostile and irreversible takeover of the Republican Party,” Galston said. “The Reagan party that appealed to so many of the now middle-aged or even aging Republican conservatives in the 1980s and '90s is gone. It's not coming back.”
Cheney is hardly alone among GOP lawmakers suffering politically for clashing publicly with Trump over the Jan. 6 attack. Of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump last year, only two are in line to return in the next Congress. Four others are retiring, while three more lost their primaries to Trump-endorsed conservatives who backed his false election claims.
Cheney, of the 10, is the last outstanding race, and the outcome appears certain.
“Yeah, he won — in the short term, at least,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), one of the impeachment-supporting retirees, acknowledged to WGN-TV in Chicago last week. “There’s no use in pretending somehow I scored some major victory and saved the party.”
To Trump’s allies, the former president remains a heroic figure — the single most electrifying force in the GOP who launched the populist movement that toppled Hillary Clinton and continues to fuel expectations that Republicans will flip control of the House in November’s midterm elections. In that light, Cheney, Kinzinger and the other Trump critics are seen as apostates to the larger cause of winning power.
In February, the Republican National Committee took the remarkable step of voting to censure both Cheney and Kinzinger for their involvement in the Jan. 6 investigation. It said the two were “participating in a Democrat-led persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse.”
Cheney’s likely defeat on Tuesday has raised plenty of speculation about potential next steps, including the possibility that she’d make a presidential run of her own in 2024 — an idea she has not ruled out.
Still, her success in such a contest would hinge squarely on the collapse of Trump’s popularity within the party, which is likely to endure, some experts said, longer than Cheney would prefer.
“My sense is that if it is [her plan], she's going to have a long wait,” Galston said. “I don't think that Donald Trump supporters will ever forgive her, nor do I think they're going away.