| The historic midterm blowout this week was a well-deserved rebuke to the Trump administration and the Republican majority in Congress. The last two years have been an unprecedented constitutional debacle. There are too many offenses to list, but the Republican majority aided and abetted some of the worst abuses of executive power in American history, and it confirmed quite possibly the most corrupt and incompetent Cabinet in the country’s history. |
| In the days since the election, several related points of contention have emerged among political commentators and media outlets seeking to interpret the results — whether Democrats have a “mandate” for an aggressive oversight agenda, whether Democrats should instead prioritize legislation and efforts to improve economic conditions, and whether there is any point in passing “messaging bills” if Democrats know that Trump will veto them. |
| In fact, there is no tension between these objectives, and given the political calendar, Democrats are well-positioned to use Trump’s lame-duck period to lay the groundwork for a Democratic presidency and agenda after the 2028 election. |
| To start, there is no real question that Democrats in Congress have a mandate from the public for a robust oversight agenda, particularly concerning the business dealings of Trump and his family and corruption within the government. |
| A group of leading news outlets conducted a poll of over 80,000 voters in the weeks leading up to the election to gauge their interests, and the results bear this out. Over half of the respondents said that government corruption was a “crucial” reason for their vote, and within that group, voters preferred Democrats by a 28-point margin. A plurality of respondents said that the Democratic Party was better able to handle government corruption, and within that group, voters favored Democrats by a 91-point margin. |
|
| Along similar lines, nearly two-thirds of the respondents (62%) said that Trump prioritizes his personal interests over the country. Within that group, voters favored Democrats by a 74-point margin. An even larger number (71%) said that Congress is not doing enough to provide checks and balances on the presidency, with voters in that subgroup favoring Democrats by a 51-point margin. |
|
| Every congressional race is unique in its own way, but these numbers tell a coherent story, and that is no accident. |
| Democrats have been beating this drum all year, both at the national level and at the local level. Party leaders have seized on stories about alleged corruption on the part of Trump and others in the administration, and members in line to lead oversight committees were clear on their intentions to aggressively investigate the Trump administration if they got the majority. |
| In February, I interviewed Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia, who is in line to lead the House Oversight Committee, about all of this. The point of that interview, at least on my end, was to understand his interests and priorities for oversight after the midterms, and Garcia did not hesitate to sit down with me and talk about these issues at length. |
| “This is the most corrupt president to ever serve in the history of our country, and it’s the most corrupt administration to ever exist in the history of our country,” Garcia told me. “There’s no scenario where this shouldn’t be at the center of our [work] moving forward.” |
| Garcia also made clear that he and his colleagues were pursuing two themes for the election and after: corruption and affordability. You have probably heard a great deal about these things in recent weeks and in the days since the election, but again, that is no accident. A political party did that on purpose. |
| That has not stopped some media outlets and pundits from claiming confusion on this point. After the results came in, Garcia sent out a two-word statement — “Lawyer up” — that prompted some on-air anxiety on Fox News. |
| In all seriousness, I do not know what to say to anyone who is surprised by this. Garcia was more than willing to talk with pretty much anyone in the media about his oversight plans. All you had to do was be interested. |
| The same is true of Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin, who is on track to lead the House Judiciary Committee. Raskin has not been shy about his criticisms of the administration and his plan to conduct aggressive oversight. Just this past Sunday, he was on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” where he said that the Trump administration was engaging in “continuing corruption” and a “full criminal tour of the federal government,” involving efforts to turn the executive branch into a “money-making operation” for the president and his family. |
| The concept of a political mandate is an amorphous one, but this is about as clear as it gets. A political party spent a year leading up to the midterm elections talking about what its members would do in the majority, they emphasized oversight and corruption along with affordability, and they were swept into office in a historic wave. |
| Still, this will not be a simple process. Given that Democrats took both the House and the Senate, they have twice the oversight bandwidth they would have with only one chamber. There is, for instance, a Judiciary Committee in the House and a counterpart in the Senate, which will likely be led by Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse. |
| Whitehouse has been talking about accountability for Trump for years (including with me). He also has a strong interest in the conduct of the justices and Supreme Court reform that he has pursued and discussed for years (including with me). It is safe to assume that he will use his perch to do serious oversight work. |
| The most important near-term task, however, is for Democrats to set their investigative priorities and divvy up work among committees and staff to avoid duplicative efforts, as I recently discussed with Tim Heaphy, who led Congress’ Jan. 6 investigation. That process is underway as we speak. |
| As for the Democrats’ legislative agenda, they plan to pass laws to bring down the cost of living for Americans and perhaps legislation concerning AI, prediction markets, and other tech-related issues. They may be able to reach narrow compromises with the administration on some of these issues, but Trump has indicated that he will veto a lot of it, which has led some Democrats to preemptively complain about pointless “messaging bills.” |
| This criticism fails to appreciate the significance of the political terrain and the political calendar. The “messaging bills” will be public signals for what a Democratic president might sign in 2029 if elected. Democratic primary candidates are likely to be pressed during the campaign on which bills they would sign if elected and which they would try to change. |
| Done correctly, this could lay the groundwork for a Democratic agenda in 2029 with control of both Congress and the White House. Whether any of that happens, I don’t know, but given the fact that the 2028 race is now underway in earnest, the standard critique of “messaging bills” is not particularly compelling. |
| There was a significant and much-needed realignment in American politics this week, and it is likely to reverberate in the years to come — including through the 2028 presidential election. |
| Accountability for Trump and the Trump administration deserves to be at the center of American politics during this period. The last Democratic administration had a chance to do something about this (and also to prevent Trump’s reelection), but they blew it, and the whole world has suffered the consequences. |
| We cannot have a replay of this debacle after Trump leaves office. |
