Geoff Bennett:
Democrats have few options for challenging President Trump and the GOP majorities in the House and Senate. But some on the left say they had a chance to do just that last week, when Senate Republicans needed votes from their Democratic colleagues to pass the government funding bill.
The top Democrat, Senator Chuck Schumer, however, voted with the GOP and supplied the needed votes, angering many in his party.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA):
Let me be clear. In my time in Congress, never, ever has one party written partisan, full-year appropriations bills for all of government and expected the other party to go along without any input.
Gov. Josh Shapiro (D-PA):
I would have liked to see when Chuck Schumer had leverage here to say, we need A, B, C and D for the Democratic Party and force the Republicans to meet him halfway.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY):
To see Senate Democrats even consider acquiescing to Elon Musk, I think it is a huge slap in the face and I think that there's a wide sense of betrayal if things proceed as currently planned.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):
I myself don't give away anything for nothing. And I think that's what happened the other day.
Geoff Bennett:
We spoke with Senator Schumer earlier today about that criticism, Democrats' path forward and his new book, "Antisemitism in America: A Warning."
Leader Schumer, welcome back to the "News Hour."
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY):
Glad to be back.
Geoff Bennett:
I want to start with your support of the GOP funding bill and the criticism that you have received as a result.
I know that you maintain that a shutdown would have been far worse than passing the Republican bill. What do you see that the vast majority of Hill Democrats don't see? Why are they wrong in saying that you should have blocked?
Sen. Chuck Schumer:
Well, Geoff, I knew when I made my decision there'd be a lot of people who disagreed with it, but I felt it was imperative that I do.
The C. — we had an awful choice, a Hobson's choice, between a C.R. bill, which had no Democratic input, a continuing resolution to fund the government, and a government shutdown. As bad as the C.R. bill was, the shutdown, I'd say, would be 15, 20 times worse, and let me explain.
In a shutdown, the whole government shuts down, and then the executive branch solely determines what is — quote — "essential" and what is not essential. So they could say on day two of the shutdown, SNAP, food for kids, not essential. On day four, no transit funds, mass transit or other, are essential. We will only declare as essential in the transportation bill air traffic controllers.
On day six, Medicaid, half of it not essential. We can cut Medicaid, cut rural hospitals, cut community health centers. And who has the power to do this? The executive. The courts have ruled that they have no say, that the executive makes the sole determination.
Now, in the old days with a shutdown, they might do little things around the edges, but look who's in charge now, Musk, DOGE, and probably worst of all this man, Vought — you spell his name, V-O-U-G-H-T — he's in charge of OMB, which determines the shutdown. They want to slash the federal government. They want to cut it in half, all so they can give tax breaks to their billionaire friends.
And making it even worse, there's no exit strategy. In other words, how long do you stay in the shutdown? It's totally up to those evil people who hate the federal government, who hate all the good things that we have been able to do.
One of the Republican senators told the Democratic Senator, if you go to shutdown, we will be in it for six, nine months until we destroy the federal government. So, while certainly the C.R. was bad, when you just had those two choices, in my view, the shutdown had to be avoided.
Geoff Bennett:
But when you hear the governor of Pennsylvania say that you squandered your leverage, or Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi saying that you gave up the votes and got nothing in return, how does that strike you?
There are Democrats who say that, if the government had shut down, you force Republicans to own it. All the pain that Americans would feel that you just described, Republicans would pay the political price. Why not be as tactically ruthless as Republicans have shown themselves to be?
Sen. Chuck Schumer:
Well, first, there was no choice. The Republicans had given us, when they sent it over from the House, just two choices. C.R. as is or shutdown. There was no other choice.
But, second, if you think that these Republicans would come to us and say, oh, we shouldn't have shut down the food stamps, we shouldn't have shut down Medicaid, we shouldn't have slashed the federal government, I don't think that's at all an accurate reading of who they are and what they are.
And the danger that my prognosis is correct, which I believe it is, was so, so great, in terms of destruction, they could furlough employees forever and just have the federal government shrink to half its size en masse. That would have been the worst, worst, worst alternative. And there was no — no — to rely on Republicans, oh, we surrender, we will come to the table because what we're doing is bad, doesn't make sense to me.
Geoff Bennett:
Beyond the questions about this bill, there are deeper questions, as you well know, about the approach, the sense among Democrats that the Donald Trump of the second term is more emboldened, more defiant, more divisive, more dangerous, many Democrats believe, than the Donald Trump of the first…
Sen. Chuck Schumer:
Right.
Geoff Bennett:
… and that Democrats appear divided…
Sen. Chuck Schumer:
Geoff, I believe that too. I believe that too.
Geoff Bennett:
… and ill-equipped to put up a fight.
So what's the strategy to meet the goal?
Sen. Chuck Schumer:
Yes. Well, look, OK, so we — there were divisions, as I said. I knew that some — many people would disagree with me.
I felt, Geoff, as a leader, my job, if there was such danger, such tragedy, such horror a little bit around the curve, that I as leader had the obligation to make sure that didn't happen, even though I knew there'd be disagreement.
But, going forward, we are all united, Hakeem and I and all of us. And what are we united doing? Focusing on how bad Trump is.
Geoff Bennett:
Channeling what I would imagine would be some of the pushback from the Democratic base, it would be that naming and shaming with Donald Trump doesn't work. That's what Democrats have done for the past two years.
Sen. Chuck Schumer:
Well…
Geoff Bennett:
In this last election, he won the popular vote, the Electoral College, every battleground state. So the rules of political gravity, press conferences and bold statements and coordinated tweets, it doesn't work.
(Crosstalk)
Sen. Chuck Schumer:
No. No.
Geoff Bennett:
I mean, what does the fight look like in 2025?
Sen. Chuck Schumer:
We're going to go after — we're going after him in every way.
And, by the way, the people before who said he'd be shamed and come to the table, that's the exact opposite of what that is. So you can't have it both ways. But I would say this. We are — we — in 2017, when he was last here, Nancy Pelosi and I said we're going to go after him on health care. He was very unpopular with that. We're going to go after him on tax breaks for the rich.
And then we won the House and picked up some seats in the Senate in 2018. Same thing is going to happen now. And we're going to go after him in so many different ways. We are doing much better on the social media led by Cory Booker and Tina Smith in our house. And so we're reaching people who were not reached before.
We are — we are mobilizing in New York. We have people going to the Republican districts and going after — going after these Republicans who are voting for this and forcing them to either face — change their vote or face the consequences. This is a long, relentless fight that we fight every day.
And I am confident that we will bring Trump's popularity numbers and strength down if we keep at it and keep at it and keep at it.
RecentWTF is up with this Clown... by Somewhere in Mn
TRANSFER PORTAL 2026 by Reacher
Total Members: 142