The radical left in the Democratic Party is at war with the slightly insane left, while the moderate left is trying to keep its head down as the missiles fly overhead from both directions.
That's the best description I have of the Democratic Party civil war that has been heating up the closer we get to the midterms.
Earlier this week. Two centrist Democrats caused a huge ruckus in the Democratic caucus when they joined the Republicans in a procedural vote to bring a package of GOP bills to the House floor.
Reps. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-Wash.) and Jared Golden (D-Maine), both fighting for their political lives in competitive pro-Trump districts, defected on a vote to bring several Republican bills, including a Russia sanctions bill strongly opposed by the House Democratic leadership, to the floor for a vote. It was the second time this month the pair had thumbed their nose at Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and the leadership on a procedural vote, and it brought angry calls for punitive action from radical Democrats.
"People thought the first time was a mistake. The second time is defiance," said a House Democrat, telling Axios the two "operate like they are above the caucus."
Can you blame them? Why should they tie their political futures to a party made up of kooks and crazies?
Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), along with Jeffries, was seen on the House floor in an animated conversation with Gluesenkamp Perez about her defection. The heated exchanges were in full view of members of the press, a highly unusual dressing-down in public by a member of the leadership.
Several House Democrats called for Gluesenkamp Perez and Golden to lose their choice committee seats on the Appropriations Committee. But Jeffries doesn't want to set any precedents on rebellious caucus members, especially if Democrats take the House in November. If Jeffries is re-elected leader, he'll have a gaggle of newly minted, radical-left Democratic socialists to deal with. And they will be all about rebellion.
The rebellion came after Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) forced a vote on impeaching President Trump without support from leadership.
The vote angered many House Democrats, who complained Green was muddying the party's message on a crucial week.
Jeffries and Clark voted "present" along with 44 other Democrats. 147 sided with Green and 18 voted with Republicans to quash the impeachment effort.
Leadership's neutrality on that vote drew frustration as well, with a fifth House Democrat telling Axios: "Our constituents don't send us here to be 'present.' They send us here to use our judgment."
What they're saying: OurRevolution executive director Joseph Geevarghese said Jeffries "never seems to have this much trouble figuring out what to do when progressives are in his sights."
"You cannot demand discipline from progressives while treating defections to the right as an unsolvable procedural dilemma," he told Axios.
The Democrats are less ideologically divided than they might seem. It's a question of emphasis and rhetoric rather than positioning. Barack Obama was as radical in some of his ideas as any Democratic Socialist, but his rhetoric soothed and softened the masses. And then there's the generational civil war that appears to be reaching some kind of climax.
The Washington Sun reports that, "When the lawmakers return to Washington after the midterms, some Democrats plan to bring up a proposal in their caucus organizational meetings that would limit how many years leaders remain in top committee stops, according to multiple House Democrats familiar with the plans."
“It will only happen if members approve it. It’s an uphill battle, but I think the tide is turning,” said one of the House Democrats who was granted anonymity to address internal deliberations. “We are working on it. It’s a very touchy topic.”
A second House Democrat said that next Congress, “there’ll be many more members that are five terms or less” and there is an “appetite” to add limits so that younger and newer members can move up.
The new discussion around term limits comes at a time when the Democratic base is calling for new faces in the party and multiple incumbents have lost primaries to younger, more progressive candidates. Already, Democrats are starting to mount challenges for top committee slots: Rep. Jahana Hayes of Connecticut announced she’d challenge Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia for the top job on the House Education and Workforce Committee. Scott ascended to that position in 2015.
Unlike Democrats, Republicans impose a strict six-year limit on lawmakers serving as chairs or as ranking members when their party is in the minority. The first House Democrat said the limits could be similar to Republicans’ but without counting the years as ranking members, though the details on the restrictions are still being worked through. The lawmaker also said that an additional proposal is to allow committee leaders who have reached their limit to request a waiver.
The Democratic civil war is about branding and, to some degree, ideology. But I think the generational divide is what's going to roil the Democratic Party for the next several years. It'll be hard to displace members who have served for decades. In the end, they will probably have to wait until members retire or die off before a generational change is effected.
Related: Midterm Polls Come With an Asterisk
