Two moderate Democrats have triggered a backlash within their party after helping Republicans push a package of legislation through the US House of Representatives in a razor-thin procedural vote.
Jared Golden of Maine and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington crossed party lines on Tuesday, September 1, to support a Republican rule setting the terms for debate on several GOP-backed measures.
The rule passed by 210 votes to 208, with the two Democrats joining 207 Republicans and an independent in backing it. The move allowed the House to consider a resolution condemning socialism, alongside measures relating to elections, environmental regulation and other Republican priorities.
Democratic leaders said they had not been warned about the defection. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Minority Whip Katherine Clark and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar described it as a “significant breach of trust” and said they had asked the Committee on Caucus Rules to consider possible consequences.
“The decision by two of our colleagues to blindside the entire House Democratic Caucus and join with the Republican majority to pass a procedural rule on the brink of failing represents a significant breach of trust,” the three leaders said in a joint statement.
“It is an action that necessitates a serious response, and we have asked the Committee on Caucus Rules to take this up in short order.”
The House later approved the anti-socialism resolution by 220 votes to 192, with eight Democrats voting in favour. The measure condemns socialism “in all its forms” and opposes socialist policies in the United States.
Mr Golden said his decision was driven in part by a separate bill designed to protect Maine’s lobster industry. The procedural rule cleared the way for consideration of the Northeast Lobstermen Protection Act, legislation he co-sponsored that would extend a reprieve from some North Atlantic right whale regulations until 2035.
The bill passed the House by 219 votes to 196 on Tuesday and has now been sent to the Senate. Mr Golden said that, as the author of legislation intended to help his constituents, he had no reason to vote against a rule that allowed it to proceed.
“I think any member of Congress who introduces a bill for their constituents would be insane to turn around and sink a rule that contains that bill,” he said.
Democratic leaders consider response
Ms Gluesenkamp Perez offered no detailed explanation of the vote, but appeared to reject criticism from party officials in a post on X.
“Sunday night my son pulled his first fish out of the Columbia river,” she wrote. “What the DC bubble doesn’t get is that working waterfronts require working people.” She then highlighted several issues on which she has campaigned for her constituents in south-west Washington.
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also criticised the decision, saying that such a move would not have been contemplated when Democrats controlled the chamber.
“We never had that problem, so I’m disappointed that they did that,” she said.
The possible sanctions remain unclear. They could include removing one or both lawmakers from committee assignments, although the political consequences may be more serious for Ms Gluesenkamp Perez, who is seeking re-election in a closely fought district.
Mr Golden is not standing for another term, while Ms Gluesenkamp Perez has sought to present herself as “an independent voice for Southwest Washington” — a position likely to come under renewed scrutiny after the vote.
