Dems Plan for Future Without Pelosi

For House Democrats, planning for a future without Nancy Pelosi is neither pleasant nor easy.

But as the polls worsen and a Republican-controlled House looks more and more possible, Democrats are beginning to realize they face a top to bottom leadership shakeup if the powerful speaker steps aside in a Democratic minority.

For the most part, Democrats have no obvious roadmap, no heir apparent to the Pelosi mantle, and a fairly thin bench around which to plan the future of their party. After the election, Democrats would face a power vacuum in the lower ranks – assuming current Majority Leader Steny Hoyer takes the helm as minority leader in a post-Pelosi Democratic caucus.

“This is a subject that everybody in town is thinking about,” said a former House Democrat who keeps close contact with his former colleagues.

Pelosi herself has privately discouraged any talk of a Democratic minority – despite multiple predictions that as many as 80 Democratic seats are in play.

The most likely scenario after a Republican takeover would be for Pelosi to step down, with Hoyer replacing her. But the idea of a clean sweep of Democratic leadership - forcing out all the elected leaders is clearly something being considered by rank-and-file.

“If we lose it badly, Pelosi would have to leave, as might the whole leadership team,” said a veteran House Democrat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “I can see Hoyer becoming Minority Leader. And I can imagine that Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) would stay as Whip, but then retire. They could become transitional leaders as we look for new leadership. It would have to sort itself out.”

Pelosi allies contend that the Democratic caucus would still be deferential to her – even in losing.

“She can declare victory and retire. She would be rewarded by history, with a great career. But she has a competitiveness and she can say that the worm may turn, especially with the economy, and that Democrats may be rewarded” in 2012, said the former Democratic member.

Others contend that her fundraising and party-building skills could position her to lead Democrats back to the majority in 2012, though her low-profile in the past month has shown her limitations, especially in swing districts.

Even with the obvious options, House Democrats have mostly avoided the discussion.

"It is impossible to imagine Nancy thinking anything negative at all, so therefore you can't get a read on what she would do if bad things happen," said a Democratic lawmaker who has worked closely with Pelosi.

And Democrats understandably have focused on their top priority of keeping House control, which would make this discussion largely academic.


“The speaker has not considered this and Democratic staff hasn’t discussed it,” said Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee deputy executive director Jennifer Crider, who also serves as Pelosi’s political director. “We are focused on winning in November. We do not believe Democrats will lose control of the House.”

Whatever she decides, the ambiguity over an heir apparent reveals that Pelosi’s dominance among Democrats since she entered the leadership nine years ago has mostly stifled the ambition of rank-and-file members. To paraphrase French King Louis XV, Democrats may face their own revolution: Apres Nancy, le deluge.

Virtually all of the other current Democratic leaders were installed by Pelosi, usually without a challenge, which is why there has been little maneuvering within the ranks. Those who failed to receive Pelosi’s blessing have been forced to step aside.

Ironically, the chief exception has been Hoyer, who stands to emerge the strongest in a Democratic minority. He narrowly lost to Pelosi in October 2001 in their brutal showdown for Minority Whip. But he relentlessly pursued his leadership ambition and in November 2006 easily defeated Pelosi’s preferred candidate, late Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.).

Mostly below the radar, Hoyer has moved cautiously to stake his claim to the Democratic post in case Pelosi exits. Hoyer has spent the past month traveling to key swing districts, and he gave a handful of major economic, budget and national-security speeches earlier this summer to lay out his relatively centrist views.

But Hoyer dismisses the suggestion that that he might become Minority Leader. “It won’t happen. We will hold the majority…..I am not considering that prospect.” But even if he ascends as Democratic leader in the House minority – and Clyburn hangs on in leadership – he may not represent a long-term solution for Democrats.

Like Pelosi, Hoyer and Clyburn each turned 70 in the past 15 months. With the grueling demands of House leadership positions, they might be reluctant to commit to a long-term effort to regain Democratic control. And the rank-and-file may be eager for generational change.

“Leading the party in the minority, I expect challenges at every level, from much younger members who have the legs and the stamina to bring about an articulate message that could regain the Democratic majority when it’s available,” said a veteran progressive House Democrat.

With Pelosi’s guidance, a second-tier of party leaders has moved into place – though no front runner has emerged. The next generation of Democratic leaders includes caucus chairman John Larson (Conn), vice-chairman Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.), Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and DCCC vice-chairs Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) and Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.). Except for Larson, who is 62, none are older than 52.

It’s unclear what positions these young leaders would compete for – and if they are even are ready to make a run at Hoyer and Clyburn.


Pelosi’s iron control of the Democratic caucus has discouraged the emergence of liberal leaders, which is why her potential departure as speaker could set off a frenzy of maneuvering.

“There is no Prince Charming or liberal alternative out there,” said a party activist who is well-connected to House Democrats.

History does not necessarily provide a clear roadmap for Democrats.

After Democrats unexpectedly lost House control in 1994 and Speaker Tom Foley (D-Wash.) lost reelection in his home state, the next tier of party leaders took over with little challenge – a scenario that does not seem likely in 2010. Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), Minority Whip David Bonior (D-Mich.) and Caucus chairman Vic Fazio (D-Calif.) essentially moved up the ranks in 1994. But that team failed to recapture the majority. And it wasn’t until Pelosi became Whip after Bonior stepped down in 2001 and, and she took over from Gephardt a year later, that Democrats developed sufficient energy and fundraising to take back the House in 2006.

This time around, things could be much more wide open, potentially creating an opening for several leaders.

Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) has long been a leading House liberal – and would be a natural fit to carry on Pelosi’s work in leadership. But in recent years he has focused chiefly on serving as Pelosi’s chief adviser and Education and Labor Committee chairman. Many expect that he would retire if Democrats lose the majority.

Although Van Hollen seems well-positioned to move up the leadership ladder, he could pay a price if Democrats suffer big losses in November, since he’s running the campaign committee. Van Hollen also faces potential obstacles that he and Hoyer are from the same home state, and because speculation persists that his long-term interest is election to the Senate.

Regardless of the election outcome, President Barack Obama will have to make key decisions over the Democrats’ future direction.

For Republicans seeking potential areas of compromise under potential Speaker John Boehner, they may hope for the selection of a relative moderate such as Hoyer in place of Pelosi. “Steny has shown that he is a professional, and can be bipartisan on big issues,” said a House GOP leadership source.

But that hope may be illusory, given the strongly liberal leanings of the Democratic Caucus. If forced into the minority, a progressive House Democrat added, “I expect there to be less tolerance of the conservative, Blue Dog compromises and concessions than we’ve had in the past, because their message has been the Republican message.”

Plus, Democrats are skeptical that Boehner would have sufficient support from the Republican Conference for bipartisanship, given the likely conservative bent of a large new Republican freshmen class.