Can House Democrats change their party?

0:00Good morning, I'm Anna Palmer. And I'm Jake Sherman. And welcome to the Daily Punch, brought to you by Punchwell News. It's Thursday, September 3, 2026. Let's get into the mix here. Are you washing your headlines of the day? Number one, more on House Dems plans to try and punish members who sided with Republicans on a rule vote this week. How they are handling Democrats who don't contribute the D-Triple C. Number two, Rod Whitman's hyper-local case in Virginia. And number three, some more inside baseball. How do House Republicans are souring on committee waivers? All right, Jake, let's get to it. We have part two of the House Dem drama. And let's take it in two parts. The first bite of the apple, looking at how House Democratic leadership, Kim Jeffries as minority leader and his team are considering the pathway forward of punishing potentially

1:06Democrats who don't get on board when it comes to some of these procedural votes. This is coming into focus this week because of a vote on the rule, but it could have long standing, you know, kind of ramifications here as Democrats look to get into the majority, there are potentially more DSA align Democrats who might not always want to be on the party team. Yes. So we've figured we, you know, we've spilled enough ink on Mike Johnson and Republicans over the last two years time to just keep spilling it on, Ikeem Jeffries and Dems. So two things are going on and you mentioned them. There's this punishing MGP and Jared Golden and then there's a kind of a parallel effort that they say was going on beforehand. I mean, I guess I don't, I'm not doubting that. I'm just saying it's, it's happening at the same time, this parallel effort to change the, what it means to be a member in good standing in the Democratic caucus.

2:09So the punishing MGP and, and Golden thing is about them voting for this rule the other day to allow a bunch of bills to the floor. Now they voted for it, they say they voted for it because there was a lobster ring bill, which was important to Golden and, and also important to MGP. They, they, the leadership felt blindsided whether everyone in the leadership was blindsided or not, I cannot tell you, but they say they felt blindsided by this, by this vote. It is, it is very unusual to vote like this, but they're to vote with Republicans on a rule like this, especially because it unlocked at least one messaging vote, which Democrats are not a fan of, which is this socialism vote, whether socialism is, is good or bad and Democrats, you know, didn't want to vote on that. Now there is some disagreement about whether these people should be punished, whether MGP and Golden should be punished for this.

3:10He, Peter Scott Peters of California said, talk about, do, talking about losing your committee for one bad vote might be a little bit overboard. Yeah, I guess that's, that's, you know, I asked Mike Johnson about this yesterday. He doesn't really have the luxury to punish people. So that's the retribution piece of it. And what do you think about retribution? Then we can move on to the member in good standing situation. Listen, I think this leadership team is at a crux. They so far have really been able to unite Democrats and they're, we haven't seen any cracks, right? It's easier to be in the minority and to kind of be against the majority party in the house that is typically the case. Now you're looking at a very different power structure, right? And I get the desire to get ahead of this, right? Like this Jeffries leadership team is saying, okay, wow, this really screwed us this time. We were embarrassed. We don't want to have this happening, happen on a weekly basis going forward, right?

4:11We need to kind of create a team environment that the betterment of the whole is that, you know, necessarily then just thinking about yourself as a singular member. That said that, that, that. I think it is also very, very difficult in the current structure. How money is, is the party is weaker than ever, right? Leadership teams are weaker than ever right now because they, they can't afford to lose a bunch of these members on these votes. And there's not a lot of carrots and sticks to be had. So it'll be, I think we'll be interesting to see how this resolves itself because, you know, if they, if there is no punishment, if there is no, okay, you do X then Y is going to happen to you. It's a little bit like parenting, right? Like all of a sudden, you know, that there's, there's really, really little incentive for a rank and file house members to stick with the team. And that becomes, and I just, I think it's so important, Jake, and you put in the item here. It's, there's going to be a new crop of democratic socialists that arrive in 2027, many of

5:14whom I listed in comments by pledging to defy the party's establishment. We write, and that to me is going to be a real power challenge for Jeffries. And this is just, I think like the tip, tip, tip of the ice. And if he, and on this issue, and on the next issue, we're going to talk about if, if, if they don't move now to do something, not great, not, not on a, on a substantive basis, but it just looks, it looks weak. Yes. You alluded to that. But I wanted to put, has fine of a point as I can on that. Now on this changing a member in good standing thing, like a lot of the frustration here is that a lot of people, according to the most recent, douche sheet, I believe 38 people have paid zippo to the detrick. And, and some of them are excused from paying any money because they say that, you know, they have tough races and they want to stockpile the money for themselves.

6:16And that I could, I can understand I could be down with that. Now there's another theory that people in, in, you know, some districts are poorer than others and they cannot raise money. I think that is, that, while that might be true, there are other ways to raise money than just from your district, right? Like a million different ways to raise money than, from not, you know, from anything, you know, but you're just from, from outside of your district. You know, putting something in place that would limit your ability to get on committees or to be a committee chair based on votes and, and donations to the G, D trip is going to be controversial. It just is, you know, and I don't know that they end up doing this, but this has been a real problem for Democrats for a very, very long time. And they're trying to put some, some guardrails around it because while some people are spending,

7:18you know, are putting a half a million dollars into the D trip, there are those who are putting zero into the D trip and getting good committees and having no, no issues with it. So, you know, it's, it's a problem that they're trying to solve. I don't know how they're going to solve it. It's, we, in the item, we just, we talk about all the things that are fraught in, within that decision making tree. And I think, I think it's going to be tough for them. Yeah. I mean, this is as you say. I mean, I feel like I'm in covering House Dems and I covered them every day in, in the, in the Capitol for, for years. I mean, this to me is something that they have struggled with, have not found a good pathway forward for, for a very long time. I think the question, no, it's less of maybe some of these may be filed, the problem for, for Jeffries and for the D trip going forward is as these more, you know, progressive candidates come online and become members of Congress. Do they contribute to the overall party or not? And I think the question is, is really it's, it's maybe less of certain districts, you

8:19know, right now a lot of the excuses that members had, oh, you know, we can't, we can't raise within our district. Online fundraising is bigger than ever. Going to, you know, bigger donors. I mean, there's a lot of opportunities. And to your point, you're a chairman eight committee. You're a chair of the, you know, House Financial Services Committee. There should not be a challenge for you to be able to raise money than contributes to the party. And that's, they'll have to decide. I don't know. I mean, I think this is something, the, I feel like they might take a look at it and it's probably a lot harder to kind of enforce something, but it's really more of a culture tone, right? Of setting, what does it mean to be a member of the, the, the team? Yes. Of the team, you know, of the team. And you're telling me that some of these people, some of the most prominent progressives in the party cannot raise a half million dollars to satisfy their obligations with the D-Triple C. Come on. I mean, they might run for president shakes. They're going to have to raise a lot more than $1,000. Yes. So anyway. All right, stick with us after the break.

9:20We are looking at how an endangered Virginia Republican is making his case. All right, Jake. Let's move on to the number two story of the morning. Representative Rob Whitman, the Republican for Virginia is keeping his focus hyper local as he seeks to steer clear of a potential blue wave, a really interesting item here looking at how Whitman is trying to go against the kind of headwinds right now. What's happening across the country with Republicans, with, you know, kind of Donald Trump, the president's popularity. And we'll have to see if kind of doing that local effort is can actually bear some fruit for him. Yeah. Rob Whitman is on the precipice, at least theoretically. He is trying to become the chair or the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, the House Armed Services Committee. And he is not talking at all about that on the trail. And that it's just very interesting. I mean, he, especially in Virginia, which has, you know, has a lot of connection to the

10:25military. And I'm sure he's talking about it in some places, but, but, but, but, Anthony made a bunch of stops with him in Virginia. And he talked about local projects, a traffic connector in Chesterfield County, dredging projects in Matthews County, school bus funding in Essex County, a highway exit ramp project for Henrico County. Nothing to do with ask and the, and beat, and the idea that he is on the precipice of this huge role. So it's very interesting item. I, we were, I was just telling the team yesterday and a, we need to get out on the trail over the next couple of weeks. We got a lot of, a lot of stories to cover, a lot of people to, to catch up with on the trail over the next couple of weeks, 61, I believe. So that right? 61 days. 61 days until election day. All right, let's look at the number three story of the morning, some more inside baseball, the House Republican Conference is turning into a waiver bananza. This is super interesting because I think as you talk about the dynamics of Democrats earlier and, and Republicans in the house, one of the marquee decisions that House

11:28Republicans made as a leadership change was saying you could serve three consecutive terms. So, as ranking or chair of a committee, and then it was time for you to go, new blood needed to come in, that was part of the refresh and I think also kind of getting beyond the democratic consternation that some of these people sit atop committees for 10, 20, 30 years. But now Republicans are looking for some waivers, Jake. Yeah, and, and the main point here, and I'll say this, GT Thompson is seeking a waiver at Ag, Mike Rogers at Hask, Bruce Westerman on natural resources may or may not even say Republican members of the steering, members of the Republican steering committee believe he will, but the steering committee seems quite sour on waivers. I mean, I, you got to say like they have Republicans do mostly stick to this. They didn't with Sam Graves and I thought they would with Sam Graves and Sam Graves will not let me forget that I didn't think you would get a waiver. He said it during an event we hosted with him, Anna.

12:29So anyhow, this will be a contentious issue and listen, it, Republicans think it's one of their good features. You know, they think it's something that distinguishes them from the Democrats. So an interesting item from Emma and I guess I, me, I worked on this with her. So an interesting item for me too, which is unusual because I write a lot of stuff that's just not interesting. All right. Before we let, I'm not going to comment on that, but before we let you go, I want to know we have a new event Wednesday, October 14th at 9 a.m. Jake, you are going to be joining CMS administrator doctor, Oz to talk about news of the day as well as the impact of wireless, powered wearables for health and fitness. Uh, going to be a topic that a lot of people personally are always interested in as well as what that means for Congress and Washington regulating it. You can RSVP for that event at our events page at punchpool.new slash events. Thanks for listening. We appreciate it.

13:30Have a safe day, everybody.