Schumer has headed the Senate Democratic caucus since 2017. On November 4, he was already telling reporters that his reelection as Majority Leader was assured. But five newly elected Democratic senators have publicly said they will oppose him: Adam Hamilton of Kansas, Juliana Stratton of Illinois, Troy Jackson of Maine, Peggy Flanagan of Minnesota, and Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan. Five votes won't be enough to unseat Schumer, but they do make the prospect of a challenge more than idle speculation.
El-Sayed has endorsed Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland for the job. Van Hollen, however, has said he isn't seeking it; he's considering a run for president in 2028. (Why?) Someone on Twitter just moments ago floated Elizabeth Warren, and we know that's going nowhere—though Warren's guts, stamina, and economic righteousness would be fabulous. But dealing with that bunch of male egos...
Whoever might emerge as Schumer's rival, the returning members of the Democratic caucus should remember March 2025, when Schumer decided that the Republican-written government funding bill—with its assault on federal agencies and public services—was preferable to a government shutdown. So the Continuing Resolution passed the Senate 54–46 with Schumer and a handful of other Dems voting for it. It kept the government open only through September 30. Schumer had surrendered his leverage against MAGA without first testing how much pressure Republicans could withstand. Grassroots Democrats were furious. Progressives were especially vocal about Schumer's timidity, his paralyzing caution (he feared Democrats would be blamed for a shutdown), and what they saw as his fecklessness in the face of MAGA's accelerating cruelty.
As September 30 approached, Schumer seemed chastened on the whole subject of confrontation. He took the unmovable position that the next Continuing Resolution must include an extension of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies. John Thune, the Republican Majority Leader, and his caucus said no. The government shut down on October 1, 2025.
Schumer and the Democrats held out for weeks (some 42 days). Then, on November 9, eight senators broke with Schumer and voted to advance a compromise negotiated with Republican leadership: seven Democrats—Jeanne Shaheen, Maggie Hassan, Tim Kaine, Dick Durbin, Catherine Cortez Masto, Jacky Rosen, and John Fetterman—and Angus King, an Independent who caucuses with the Democrats. The agreement contained several concessions, though its most consequential promise would prove hollow:
It reopened the government and funded most federal agencies through January 30, 2026.
It provided full-year funding through September 2026 for veterans' services and agriculture, including SNAP and WIC.
It reversed shutdown-related federal layoffs and blocked further mass layoffs through the end of January.
And it promised a Senate vote in December on extending the enhanced ACA subsidies.
That last promise was a poison pill. Everyone knew how a vote in a Republican-controlled Senate was likely to go. Sure enough, on December 11, 2025, the Senate failed to advance a clean, three-year extension of the enhanced ACA subsidies. The measure received 51 votes—four of them Republican—but fell nine votes short of the 60 needed to overcome the procedural hurdle. The subsidies subsequently expired.
Schumer voted against the compromise his eight colleagues had agreed to advance. He chose to stand firm on a foundation of silt. And here's the thing about knowing when to hold 'em: in the March crisis, Schumer avoided confrontation before testing John Thune's cojones; in November, he went down with the ship—only it was a ship already abandoned by its crew, including his first mate, Dick Durbin. (The incoming Democratic majorities in both chambers say restoring the enhanced ACA subsidies will be an early priority in the new Congress.)
Schumer seems not to understand the point of strategic confrontation. I don't know when he's likely to give away the store, or when he'll court irrelevance because he hasn't gotten his own people behind him.
