Undaunted: Sen. Chris Van Hollen to the Rescue

He is challenging Schumer.

Just as Democrats were resigning themselves to another (at least) two years of Sen. Charles D. Schumer (D-NY) as Democrats’ Senate leader, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) has stepped forward to offer a rare opportunity: a fresh start for a body sagging under the weight of history and a Democratic caucus badly in need of a revamp.

On Thursday night, Van Hollen released a statement that set out the stakes: “In this election, the American people called for change. They called for a change from Donald Trump’s disastrous policies — but even bigger than that, a change from the status quo that isn’t working for working people.” He continued, “It’s now on us to meet this moment, and to do that we need new leadership. This is not about any one person — it’s about answering the call of the American people. That is why I’m running for Senate Majority Leader.”

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) in Saint Paul, Minnesota, on August 8. (Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)

Schumer replied with a condescending post on the Elon Musk-owned X, saying he welcomed “discussion about the future of our caucus.” He continued to insist he would be “leading our new Democratic majority and delivering for the American people.”

Appearing with Jen Psaki on MS NOW, Van Hollen argued that the election was a call to “reject the status quo.” To do that, he said, “We need new leadership. … We can’t earn [voters’] trust with old leadership.” He also pledged to cut off money for the Iran war, pass a “livable minimum wage,” end the practice of Senate leadership in picking winners in competitive primaries, end receipt of AIPAC money, defund ICE, progress toward Medicare for All (in stages, beginning with Medicare expansion and a public option within the Affordable Care Act), and the elimination of superPACs. Though he embraced the effort to impeach Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, he said impeachment of Donald Trump should not be a “focus.” Surprisingly, he also threw cold water on impeaching Attorney General Todd Blanche, although he called for hearings and “accountability.” Most important, he showed himself to be an energetic and forward-looking, a stark contrast with the doddering figure of Schumer. Van Hollen’s shout out to No Kings exemplified his identification with and support from the progressive grassroots.

Progressive groups such as 5051, an early Van Hollen endorser, were jubilant. The battle in public and behind closed doors now gets underway. How did we get here?

Even aside from the more recent complaints from activists and progressive lawmakers about Schumer (e.g., his recruitment of clunkers like Rep. Haley Stevens and Gov. Janet Mills for disastrous 2026 Senate runs, the collapse of the ACA-inspired shutdown on his watch, his attachment to Wall Street money, and his complete identification with the inflexible pro-AIPAC line), every time his hunched figure, glasses tipping on his nose, appears on TV to utter some hackneyed phrase with an off-putting grin on his weatherworn face, millions of Democrats cringe. Schumer sounds and looks older than his 75 years, no doubt the result of spending 45 years in Washington, D.C., marinating in every Beltway affectation and habit (e.g., excessive courtesy to loathsome fascist Republicans, infatuation with legacy media).

Regardless of the election outcome — or because of it — many Democrats see his continued presence as a drag on a party eager to show it has listened to the base, understands the mandate for radical change, and possesses the deftness to operate in an upended media landscape.

Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan and Sen. Bernie Sanders, the independent from Vermont, have endorsed Van Hollen, and several newly elected superstars (e.g. Peggy Flanagan of Minnesota, Adam Hamilton of Kansas, Troy Jackson of Maine) have already said they do not support Schumer.

Until this week, replacing Schumer seemed like a pipe dream. But now that Democrats have won the Senate race in Mississippi, replacing a caucus leader past his prime seems entirely doable to many activists, essential even. That in large part is because Van Hollen — someone who early on grasped the moral and political imperative of ferociously opposing violent mass deportation, never wavered in full-throttled opposition to the Trump agenda, and shares the voters’ opposition to unconditional military assistance for and cooperation with Israel — kicked open the door to running for majority leader.

Indivisible’s co-founders have publicly urged Democrats not to give their votes away unconditionally. “Last week’s election sent a clear message: voters want new energy and leadership that’s ready to fight for them. Senate Democrats shouldn’t answer that by handing Chuck Schumer a coronation,” Leah Greenberg told Newsweek. “The last two years have shown he’s part of an old era of politics that voters just put to rest.” She added: “Indivisible isn’t picking the next leader,” but, in calling for “a real, contested leadership election, held in the open where the people who just delivered this victory can see it,” the group is snatching away Schumer’s strongest playing card: the sense of inevitability.

Momentum for a challenger got a lift from organized labor this week. The 600,000-member International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers sent Schumer an open letter urging him “not to seek another term” as Senate Democratic leader, Politico reported.

“The IAM Union’s Workers vs. Billionaires movement reflects a growing desire for an economy and political system that puts working families ahead of wealthy special interests,” the union explained. “We have a tremendous opportunity to build on this momentum, but doing so will require fresh ideas, new energy and a new generation of leadership. This election also proved that we are bringing a new generation of working-class voters into the Democratic Party—people who are putting their faith in us to deliver real change.” And, the letter warned, “We cannot take their trust for granted. We must deliver on that promise and prove that the Democratic Party will fight for working people, not the wealthy and well-connected.”

It is not yet clear if Van Hollen has the support to dislodge Schumer. However, at the very least, Van Hollen can offer members a realistic shot to obtain some coveted goals (which many find it hard to imagine Schumer pursuing with vigor), including a commitment to shut down the government if needed to obtain reinstatement of Medicaid and SNAP funding, restoration of Affordable Care Act subsidies, and elimination of funding for ICE and Customs and Border Control in their current form; no vote to fill any Supreme Court vacancy; no vote for any election-denier nominee; a full-blown impeachment trial for any articles sent over by the House; a flat ban on stock trading (as a rule, even without legislation); a vote on mandatory ethics and term limits for the Supreme Court; and, arguably the biggest, filibuster reform/modification.

Filibuster reform/modification might seem premature. (Why not wait for a Democratic president who can sign legislation?) However, unshackling the Senate from the filibuster opens a wide array of bills it can force Trump to sign or veto, and thereby compel Republicans to go on record in opposition.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said it well at a speech on Tuesday:

[W]here Democrats agree reconciliation is not an option, like with bills to ban stock trading by federal officials or crack down on Trump’s corruption in plain sight, Democrats should put the bills up for a vote. Let the Republicans decide if they want to stay tied to such corruption and, if they do, then let’s clear away Senate filibuster rules and pass the laws anyway.

Look, I get it. These bills could still face a veto from Donald Trump. But for me, that’s not enough reason not to try. Democrats must deliver popular, meaningful legislation to Trump’s desk and dare him to veto it. Dare him to veto an increase in the minimum wage for hard-working Americans. Dare him to veto a ban on price gouging. Dare him to veto a ban on AI surveillance pricing. Dare him to veto a ban on stock trading . Dare him to veto legislation that gets money out of politics so no one can buy our democracy.

Democratic voters expressed forcefully their demand for fresh faces and uncompromising pugnaciousness. If Democratic senators are listening to the voters, they will think twice before automatically reelecting the personification of the status quo. At the very least, they can lock Schumer into an agenda and approach responsive to the voters who entrusted them with the majority.

None of this would be possible without Van Hollen’s willingness to step out of line, take on one of the most powerful men in politics, and offer Democrats a rare shot at a fresh start. His undaunted, unwavering pursuit of progressive values and his refusal to go along to get along deserve Democrats’ gratitude and praise. And Democrats can now weigh in as well, calling their senators to register their support. The two senators, in the spirit of democracy and transparency, demonstrating that they are listening to the voters, should agree to a public debate. Allow Democrats around the country to decide: Do they want a fresh start or more of the same?

---