哈基姆·杰弗里斯与民主党领导层称这一突袭行为是“严重的信任破坏”，需要严肃应对
2026年9月8日 美国东部时间下午2:13 / 福克斯新闻
作者：查德·珀格拉姆
两名众议院民主党议员脱离本党，投票推进共和党提案
众议院民主党议员贾里德·戈尔登和玛丽·格卢森坎普·佩雷斯在叛党与共和党议员就关键提案投票后，面临党内强烈反对。福克斯新闻首席国会通讯员查德·珀格拉姆报道了国会山引发的政治余波，领导层称此举破坏了信任。
NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻文章！
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/837e9c98-b36a-4517-872e-2bf453e4919e
收听本文
8分钟
缅因州民主党众议员贾里德·戈尔登明年可能会退出国会，他在民主党同僚中的口碑绝非光鲜。
华盛顿州民主党众议员玛丽·格卢森坎普·佩雷斯正在竞争连任，其所在选区竞争激烈。但如果她在1月重返国会山，一些同僚可能会认为“MGP”（格卢森坎普·佩雷斯的昵称）声名狼藉。
众议院再次休会，直至9月14日。此前众议院已在夏季休会六周。但如果没有戈尔登和格卢森坎普·佩雷斯，众议院共和党领导层几天前可能别无选择，只能让议员们提前返乡。这两名议员做出了近乎议会异端的举动，为共和党在程序性事务上提供了必要票数，从而为多数党解锁了议会 floor（议事场地）。
共和党单靠自己的票数无法做到这一点——若非戈尔登和格卢森坎普·佩雷斯出手相助。
杰弗里斯在民主党人助共和党推进反社会主义投票后威胁“严肃回应”
然而，最具分裂性的背叛在于，两人都未就其计划投票事宜向民主党领导层通报。两党国会领导层都对偏离本党路线的议员感到不满。尤其是在程序性投票中，这几乎总是多数党的责任。但至少，领导层希望提前知情。如果他们了解背后的原因，可能会放过某人。
“他们有没有提前告诉你他们打算在该规则投票中支持共和党？”福克斯新闻的凯利·费尔斯询问众议院少数党党鞭马萨诸塞州民主党众议员凯瑟琳·克拉克。
“没有。他们让我们措手不及，”克拉克回答道。
笔者曾对纽约州民主党众议员蒂姆·肯尼迪说，在政坛中，“正面捅刀”总比“背后捅刀”要好。
“这话很有道理，”肯尼迪回应道。
我们先来看看戈尔登和格卢森坎普·佩雷斯的异议性质。
众议院的大多数主要立法提案都需要所谓的“规则”，之后议会才能就该法案进行辩论。众议院必须先辩论并通过一项“规则”，规定辩论时长和可接受的修正案类型。众议院只有先批准一项规则，才能就法案进行辩论。除极少数情况外，多数党预计将推动该规则通过。这几乎是少数党极少会协助的事项——除非在极端情况下。
上周，众议院计划就一项谴责社会主义的决议进行辩论，批准《拯救美国法案》，维持最高法院大法官人数为9人，并审议一项帮助美国龙虾产业的计划。众议院以210票对208票通过了该规则。但有5名共和党议员投了反对票。
这关乎票数计算。
这些共和党议员的倒戈本会导致该规则被否决，并让议会在本周剩余时间陷入停滞。事实上，这次投票可能迫使众议院共和党领导层让所有议员离开国会山。众议院当时正陷入停滞，无法审议任何立法事务。
众议院听证会爆发紧张局势，共和党推进反社会主义决议，民主党愤怒抨击：“愚蠢季”
但戈尔登和格卢森坎普·佩雷斯投了赞成票，为本周剩余时间解锁了议会议事场地。
民主党人对同僚突袭他们的行为怒不可遏。
“这两名投票推进程序性法案的民主党人做得不对，”肯尼迪说。
众议院少数党领袖纽约州民主党众议员哈基姆·杰弗里斯、克拉克和众议院民主党核心小组主席加利福尼亚州民主党众议员皮特·阿吉拉尔罕见地联合发表声明，谴责这两名持异议议员。他们将此次反叛定性为“严重的信任破坏”，并补充称这“需要严肃应对”。
“投票反对本党核心小组是错误的。我们必须团结一致，”宾夕法尼亚州民主党众议员玛德琳·迪恩说。
戈尔登表示，他投票支持共和党是为了让众议院能够通过保护缅因州龙虾产业的法案。
“这关乎保护这些男性和女性所支持的工薪阶层社区。在我的选区，龙虾捕捞是沿海各城镇的支柱产业，”戈尔登说。“在一些城镇，20%至40%的居民持有龙虾捕捞执照。”
政治观察人士认为，这场内讧对民主党在11月的选举来说是一步错棋。
“作为议员，你应该能够与领导层沟通你的投票意向，”内华达州民主党众议员苏西·李说。“有些环节在过程中被遗漏了。”
虽然一些议员将矛头指向戈尔登和格卢森坎普·佩雷斯，但也有人认为这是杰弗里斯的过错。还有人将其归咎于克拉克。仍有人将此事归咎于整个领导层团队。
前众议院议长加利福尼亚州共和党议员凯文·麦卡锡对自己的议员削弱他的情况深有体会。共和党人在近三年前剥夺了麦卡锡的议长职位。但这位加利福尼亚州共和党人认为，戈尔登和格卢森坎普·佩雷斯的问题出在杰弗里斯身上。
“你本应知道会有5到8名民主党人利用这次投票，”麦卡锡说。“你本应主动联系他们。”
一位前民主党助手指出，问题甚至不在于杰弗里斯、克拉克和阿吉拉尔的声明内容。而是发布声明这一事实本身。前众议院议长加利福尼亚州民主党议员南希·佩洛西绝不会发布这样的声明。她的领导权是隐性的。每个人都知道不要挑战她。或者，如果有问题，至少应该进行沟通。
众议院保守派在《拯救美国法案》对决中破坏共和党议程
杰弗里斯并非众议院多数党中的最高民主党人。如果民主党在今年秋季赢得众议院多数席位，情况可能会改变。但麦卡锡认为，这份声明充分暴露了杰弗里斯的弱点。
“如果哈基姆必须发表声明强调自己很强硬，这恰恰表明他很软弱，”麦卡锡说。
一位资深众议院民主党领导层消息人士称，普通议员要求杰弗里斯承担责任。戈尔登的任期将于1月结束。格卢森坎普·佩雷斯在一个倾向于总统唐纳德·特朗普的选区多次逆势赢得选举。该消息人士认为，民主党领导层与格卢森坎普·佩雷斯之间不存在任何权谋算计。但该消息人士暗示，格卢森坎普·佩雷斯与民主党高层的争执可能有助于这位华盛顿民主党议员在其家乡选区获得支持。
尽管如此，一些民主党人要求采取报复措施。
“我认为应该有相应后果。归根结底，我们核心小组必须团结一致，对抗共和党试图做的一切，”监督委员会最高民主党人、加利福尼亚州民主党众议员罗伯特·加西亚说。
行动胜于雄辩。请记住，戈尔登和格卢森坎普·佩雷斯在众议院投票反对了一项“规则”。次日，格卢森坎普·佩雷斯出席了一个与该议题无关的规则委员会会议。在她作证时，该委员会最高民主党人马萨诸塞州民主党众议员吉姆·麦戈文转过身去，背对着这位民主党同僚。
杰弗里斯希望与反叛者和解。他与戈尔登进行了简短交谈。但与格卢森坎普·佩雷斯进行了更深入的对话。
“我与众议员玛丽·格卢森坎普·佩雷斯进行了非常前瞻性的交谈，讨论了如何确保我们在中期选举及以后都保持一致，”杰弗里斯说。
他表示，麦戈文和格卢森坎普·佩雷斯也进行了交谈。
但当被问及为何甚至需要发布谴责声明时，这位领导人言辞含糊。
众议院民主党人在被问及社会主义者的胜利是否会威胁民主党团结时大发雷霆
“这是否表明了民主党核心小组的现状，以及他们是否追随你的领导？”笔者追问杰弗里斯。
“Res ipsa loquitur，”杰弗里斯回答道。“这是拉丁语，意思是‘事实本身不言自明’。”
实则不然。
这份声明只是杰弗里斯在有望成为议长并于明年主持民主党多数党事务前，试图展示权威的警告信号吗？民主党领导层提到的“严肃回应”在哪里？
一些对这种叛逃感到愤怒的民主党人将要求采取行动。如果杰弗里斯不采取有力行动——尽管此前已有声明——一些议员可能会将这份警告性声明视为空谈。
话虽如此，民主党需要格卢森坎普·佩雷斯赢得其选区，才能获得众议院多数席位。更具体地说，如果明年民主党控制众议院且席位差距很小，杰弗里斯需要格卢森坎普·佩雷斯支持他担任议长。
点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用程序
Res ipsa loquitur？如果杰弗里斯不采取行动——这也不言自明了。
查德·珀格拉姆目前担任福克斯新闻频道（FNC）首席国会通讯员。他于2007年9月加入该网络，总部位于华盛顿特区。
Reporter’s Notebook: Dem rebels expose cracks in Jeffries’ House leadership
Hakeem Jeffries and Democratic leaders call the surprise move ‘a significant breach of trust’ requiring a serious response
September 8, 2026 2:13pm EDT / Fox News
By Chad Pergram
Two House Democrats break from party, vote to advance GOP measures
House Democrats Jared Golden and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez face intense party backlash after defecting to vote with Republicans on key measures. Fox News chief congressional correspondent Chad Pergram reports on the political fallout from Capitol Hill, where leadership calls the move a breach of trust.
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/837e9c98-b36a-4517-872e-2bf453e4919e
Listen to this article
8 min
Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, may retire from Congress next year with a reputation that is anything but gilded among his fellow Democrats.
Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., is seeking re-election in a competitive district. But some of her colleagues may consider “MGP” to be notorious if she returns to Capitol Hill in January.
The House of Representatives is now out — again — until Sept. 14. That follows a six-week sabbatical over the summer. But were it not for Golden and Gluesenkamp Perez, House Republican leaders may have had no other choice but to send members home early a few days ago. The duo committed something close to a parliamentary heresy, handing the GOP the necessary votes on a procedural matter to unlock the floor for the majority.
Republicans lacked the votes to do it on their own – had Golden and Gluesenkamp not intervened.
JEFFRIES THREATENS ‘SERIOUS RESPONSE’ AFTER DEMOCRATS HELP GOP ADVANCE ANTI-SOCIALISM VOTE
Reps. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez and Jared Golden are among the Democrats who voted to rebuke Rep. Jesus “Chuy” García despite House Democratic leaders urging against it.(Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images; Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images ; Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
However, the most schismatic betrayal was that neither one briefed Democratic leaders on what they planned to do. Congressional leaders from both sides are never pleased with members who stray from the party line. Especially on a procedural vote, which is almost always the responsibility of the majority to pass. But at the very least, leaders like to be clued in. They might give someone a pass if they understand the reasoning.
“Did they give you a heads up that they were going to vote with Republicans on that rule?” asked Fox News’ Kelly Phares of House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass.
“They did not. They surprised us,” answered Clark.
Yours truly observed to Rep. Tim Kennedy, D-N.Y., that in politics it’s always best to “stab someone in the front” rather than “in the back.”
“There’s a lot to be said for that,” replied Kennedy.
Let’s start with the nature of the dissent by Golden and Gluesenkamp Perez.
Most major pieces of legislation in the House need what’s called a “rule” before the body can debate the measure. The House must debate and approve a “rule,” dictating how much time and what amendments would be in order. The House can’t debate a bill until it first OKs a rule. And except on rare occasions, the majority party is expected to carry the rule. It’s simply something the minority party rarely assists with – except in extreme circumstances.
Last week, the House planned to debate a resolution to condemn socialism, green-light the SAVE America Act, maintain the number of justices on the Supreme Court at nine and consider a plan to help the nation’s lobster industry. The House adopted the rule, 210-208. However, five Republicans voted nay on the rule.
It’s about the math.
Those GOP defections would have killed the rule and frozen the floor for the rest of the week. In fact, the vote may have compelled House Republican leaders to cut everyone loose from Capitol Hill. The House was stalled considering any legislative traffic.
TENSIONS ERUPT IN HOUSE HEARING AS GOP ADVANCES ANTI-SOCIALISM RESOLUTION WHILE DEMS RAGE: ‘SILLY SEASON’
Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., and Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., attend a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on June 30, 2026.(Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
But Golden and Gluesenkamp Perez voted yes, unlocking the floor for the remainder of the week.
Democrats seethed at their colleagues for blindsiding them.
“The two Democrats who have voted to move a procedural bill forward didn’t do the right thing,” said Kennedy.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., Clark and House Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., issued a rare, joint condemnation of the dissenting duo. They characterized the revolt “a significant breach of trust,” adding it “necessitates a serious response.”
“It’s a mistake to vote against our caucus. We have to be unified,” said Rep. Madeleine Dean, D-Pa.
Golden said he voted with Republicans so the House could pass the bill safeguarding Maine’s lobster industry.
“It’s about protecting the working-class communities those men and women support. In my district, lobster fishing is the backbone of towns up and down the coast,” said Golden. “In some towns, 20 to 40% of residents hold a lobster license.”
Political observers view the infighting as a misstep for the party ahead of November.
“As a member, you should be able to communicate with your leaders and how you intend to vote,” said Rep. Susie Lee, D-Nev. “Something was skipped along the way.”
While some lawmakers blamed Golden and Gluesenkamp Perez, others said this was the fault of Jeffries. Others put it on Clark. Still, there were those pinning this on the entire leadership team.
Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., knows something about his own members undercutting him. Republicans stripped McCarthy of the speaker’s gavel nearly three years ago. But the California Republican believes the problem with Golden and Gluesenkamp Perez falls on the shoulder of Jeffries.
“You would know who would be the five to eight Democrats who would leverage that [vote],” said McCarthy. “You would have reached out to them.”
One former Democratic aide noted that it wasn’t even what Jeffries, Clark and Aguilar said in their statement. But it was the very fact that a statement appeared. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., never would have sent a statement. Her leadership power was implicit. Everyone knew not to cross her. Or, if there was an issue, at least have a conversation.
HOUSE CONSERVATIVES DERAIL GOP AGENDA IN SAVE AMERICA ACT SHOWDOWN
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., waves to the crowd during the 52nd annual San Francisco Pride Parade on June 26, 2022.(Arun Nevader/Getty Images)
Jeffries has not been the House’s top Democrat in the majority. That could change if Democrats win the House this fall. But McCarthy argued the statement said a lot about Jeffries.
“If Hakeem has to put out a statement that he’s strong, it’s a sign that he is weak,” said McCarthy.
One senior House Democratic leadership source said rank-and-file members demanded accountability by Jeffries. Golden is done in January. Gluesenkamp Perez has repeatedly defied political gravity in a district which favors President Donald Trump. The source didn’t believe anything Machiavellian was afoot between Democratic leaders and Gluesenkamp Perez. But the source indicated that Gluesenkamp Perez tussling with the Democratic brass probably helps the Washington Democrat back home.
Still, some Democrats demanded retribution.
“I think there should be consequences. I think at the end of the day, we have a caucus united against what Republicans are trying to do,” said Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee.
Actions speak louder than words. Remember that Golden and Gluesenkamp Perez voted against a “rule” in the House. Gluesenkamp Perez appeared at an unrelated meeting of the Rules Committee the next day. During her testimony, Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., the top Democrat on the panel, swiveled around in his chair and sat with his back to his fellow Democrat.
Jeffries hoped to turn a corner with the renegades. He spoke briefly with Golden. But had a deeper conversation with Gluesenkamp Perez.
“Congresswoman Marie Gluesenkamp Perez and myself were able to talk in a very forward-looking way about how to make sure that we’re all on the same page as we approach the midterm elections and beyond,” said Jeffries.
He indicated that McGovern and Gluesenkamp Perez also talked.
But the leader was cryptic when pressed why he even had to issue an admonition.
HOUSE DEMOCRAT LASHES OUT WHEN GRILLED ON WHETHER SOCIALIST VICTORIES WOULD THREATEN DEM UNITY
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., speaks onstage during “The New Power Structure: Black Politics in the Age of Resistance” panel at the National Association of Black Journalists Convention in Atlanta, Ga., on Aug. 13, 2026.(Getty Images)
“Does that say something about where the Democratic Caucus is and if they follow your leadership?” I pressed Jeffries.
“Res ipsa loquitur,” answered Jeffries. “That’s Latin for ‘the thing speaks for itself.’”
Not really.
Was the statement just a warning shot as Jeffries tries to flex his muscles in anticipation of becoming speaker and presiding over a Democratic majority next year? Where’s that “serious response” that Democratic leaders spoke of?
Some Democrats who are angry about the desertion will demand action. And if Jeffries doesn’t respond forcefully – despite a declaration otherwise – some members may interpret the warning statement as prattle.
That said, Democrats need Gluesenkamp Perez to win her district in order to claim the majority. And more specifically, Jeffries needs Gluesenkamp Perez to support him for speaker if Democrats have control next year and the margin is close.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Res ipsa loquitur? If Jeffries doesn’t take action – that speaks for itself, too.
Chad Pergram currently serves as Chief Congressional Correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC). He joined the network in September 2007 and is based out of Washington, D.C.
发表回复