Democrats agree that if they retake control of Congress in 2027, they’ll set down the scalpel and instead take up a sledgehammer. 

During a gathering of Democrats at the Center for American Progress’ Ideas Conference on Tuesday, lawmakers and governors agreed that the Democratic era of naivete is over. In its place, prominent Democrats are pitching a movement ruthlessly focused on winning.

“Yeah, it’s uncomfortable fighting fire with fire,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom said. “Yes, we all want the better angels. Yes, we want the Sorkin sound and music — a little West Wing. I know. But we’ll lose our country.”

Play

While discussing GOP leaders’ opposition to health care subsidies, releasing the Jeffrey Epstein files and union membership for federal employees, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., vowed to “break their spirit.”

And New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill offered another hardnosed message: “We cannot be the party of strongly worded letters.”

For the most part, the tough talk aligns behind a broad agreement on a basic policy agenda. Most of the speakers at the liberal think tank’s eight-hour conference on Tuesday focused largely on affordability. 

Jeffries summed his approach up with a concise — and characteristically alliterative — commitment to “costs, care, combatting corruption.” And Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., urged Democrats to fight harder for federal investments in childcare, saying Democrats took a “weak and ineffectual” approach on an unsuccessful attempt to enact changes during former President Joe Biden’s administration.

But time and again Tuesday, Democrats argued for a much sterner approach to handling President Donald Trump if they take back a chamber next year.

Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, emphasized that impeachment was on the table, though he warned that Democrats also had to offer a more proactive platform.

“It’s not off the table,” Garcia said of impeachment, “but we have to have a broader agenda and message.”

But beyond the core platform and a general agreement that Democrats must toughen up, the party’s willingness to overhaul, or simply throw out, some established institutions is still under debate — particularly when it comes to the U.S. Supreme Court, Senate rules and the powers of the presidency.

A conflicted mix of quiet groans and light applause broke out when Rep. Lauren Underwood, D-Ill., called for an end to the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster rule. 

“I don’t want to hear it — ‘but, but, but, but’ — no,” Underwood said. “It’s got to go.”

Play

On the question of the power of the presidency — including Trump’s unilateral implementation of tariffs — Democrats also appear to have some philosophical differences.

Recommended

Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas, the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, has previously backed efforts to expand the Supreme Court. But he said he wasn’t interested in using the court to tie the hands of a future Democratic president, citing Franklin D. Roosevelt’s brief proposal to pack the court.

“We have to be willing to say that we need to take on the Supreme Court, make sure the voters’ concerns and voices are heard, so that we actually restore abortion rights, so that we actually restore civil rights, and so that we actually can show people we made their lives cheaper and less expensive,” Casar said. “That’s what FDR had to try to do, or at least threatened to do. And what I hear from folks all the time is that they would vote for the Democratic Party of FDR and LBJ.”

Jeffries took a different tone on the powers of the presidency, citing James Madison — and King Charles III’s praise of the Magna Carta’s ideal of placing checks on executive power.

“Much to my surprise I saw Republicans standing up and giving him an ovation,” Jeffries said of the king’s address to Congress. “And I’m thinking to myself, don’t they know King Charles is talking about them right now? But checks and balances, that’s an American thing. It’s not a partisan thing.”

The economic threats posed by artificial intelligence, including warnings of spiking unemployment and criticism of energy and water use by data centers, also provoked differences among Democrats — at least in tone. 

Casar urged Democrats to “take on villains in the AI industry that are price-gouging you,” citing warnings of 20% unemployment due to AI job replacement.

Newsom touted his state’s regulations on AI, calling for changes to the tax code to disincentivize automation while also saying AI is here to stay.

“The tech genie is not going to go back in the bottle,” Newsom said. “Just saying that you should not or cannot build data centers is not going to slow this technology down. What can be, will be.”

While the wide array of Democrats didn’t go into detail on an agenda for their party should Democrats take back the House or Senate, it was clear that Trump investigations would be a primary focus — particularly when there’s a Republican president who’s shown little interest in working with Democrats legislatively.

“It can’t just be a forward-looking agenda — which we have to have,” Garcia said. “There also has to be accountability. We also have to be able to tell people what’s happening right now is wrong and our kids and grandkids and students cannot just pass this moment by and think that this was OK.”

Jack Fitzpatrick

Jack Fitzpatrick covers Congress for MS NOW. He previously reported for Bloomberg Government, Morning Consult and National Journal. He has bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Arizona State University.