Progressives in the House of Representatives face the biggest threat to their power in years following the election of Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D). Impeachment in New York.
Bowman, member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), became the first “Squad” member to lose re-election after defeated by moderate George Latimer in a race marked by heated intra-party tensions surrounding the war between Israel and Hamas.
The left also faces the possibility of a second major loss, as Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), another member of the Squad, faces a mighty Democratic challenger in Augustwhich raises questions about the influence of progressives in Congress.
“I supported Jamaal and it is sad that he lost this election. Of course he is a colleague, a member of the CPC and a fellow progressive,” said Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.).
“The loss of a CCP member is damaging to the progressive movement,” Frost added. “Often [you] Take a few steps forward, a few steps back and keep moving forward.”
Bowman’s defeat exposed the weaknesses of the left’s campaign. He had already lost the confidence of his progressive party colleagues, who thought his re-election against Westchester County Executive Latimer was unlikely. Many organizers who believed Bowman would win an improbable victory knew his chances were slim.
Progressives saw the election as a referendum on “big money” in politics, with the 16th Congressional District serving as a laboratory for pro-Israel groups. The race was the most exorbitant Democratic House primary in history, thanks in gigantic part to donations from these groups.
At the center of the race for money was the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which pumped about $14 million into the election campaign to run ads against Bowman and for Latimer.
“I think it was about money,” said Democratic Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin, a former chairman of the CPC. “The messaging in the primaries got a little muddled, that’s part of the problem, but when that much money is influencing what’s being talked about and it’s not coming from one of the candidates, that’s basically the problem.”
Michael Ceraso, a veteran Democratic strategist, said excessive spending in races like Bowman’s could influence candidates’ positions and have a “ripple effect” on other progressives.
“Unfortunately, politicians from both camps often agree on where the money is,” said Ceraso.
Bowman’s criticism of Israel in the wake of the ongoing war with the Palestinian militant group Hamas following the Oct. 7 attacks turned his campaign into a referendum on how acceptable his stance is, especially since his district has a gigantic Jewish population. Now Democrats are trying to figure out what lessons his campaign can teach the party nationwide.
“You can never lose touch with your constituency,” said one Democratic lawmaker, speaking without citing a source, to criticize Bowman. “You have to know who your constituents are. And when you lose touch with your constituents, this is what happens.”
“Of course, a lot of money was spent on the election campaign, but I think above all he has lost touch with his constituency,” the MP added.
Since the October 7 attack, which claimed more than 1,000 lives and sparked retaliation that led to the deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinians, progressives have stepped up their criticism of Israel. Bowman has emerged as one of the most vocal critics of Israel in Congress, calling for a ceasefire earlier than other House colleagues and drawing attention to the collective death toll in Gaza.
Many prominent progressives rallied around the vulnerable Bowman, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (DN.Y.), who drew crowds in the Bronx the weekend before the primary.
Until Tuesday, Bowman, 48, was trailing well behind Latimer, 70, in the polls and was struggling to fend off attacks over phrases such as “genocide” and “apartheid,” which he frequently used to describe Israel’s actions against the Palestinians.
Many of his Democratic colleagues in the House criticized his terminology. Jewish Representative Josh Gottheimer (DN.J.) was the first sitting congressman to endorse Latimer in the days before the election.
“I just think the Democrats won last night with common sense,” Gottheimer told The Hill on Wednesday.
Pro-Israel groups seized on Bowman’s comments and spent extensive amounts of money to construct a narrative that made it seem as though the incumbent was promoting anti-Semitic sentiments. The most prominent group, AIPAC, and its affiliated Super PAC invested $14.5 million in the campaign, which progressives see as one of the biggest factors in Bowman’s defeat.
“It shows my friends on the progressive left that you can go out and fight for the Palestinians, you can go out and fight and be against the war. But when people are on the street chanting ‘Kill the Jews’ or ‘Go back to Poland,’ you can’t stay silent,” said Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), another Jewish Democrat. “And many of them here have been silent.”
“You can do both,” Moskowitz added. “I think you can absolutely be against anti-Semitism and fight for the people of Gaza at the same time. And I think the voters in his district have decided he’s not going to do that.”
Progressive voters, on the other hand, viewed the influx of money as part of a larger problem amid a growing divide between progressives and moderate Democrats in the House of Representatives.
Hassan Martini, executive director of No Dem Left Behind, an organization that helps progressive candidates get elected to higher office, called AIPAC and the pro-Israel lobby “undemocratic and anti-free speech” – a common criticism among leftists who have seen a resurgence since Ocasio-Cortez’s surprise victory against an establishment incumbent in 2018.
“This is not about progressive versus non-progressive; this is about the ability to speak freely without being attacked by special interest groups,” Martini said. “The more money AIPAC pours into it, the more they unite everyone else against them. The consequences of these damaging actions will be felt politically for the pro-Israel lobby far into the future.”
The result represents a remarkable turn of events from just a few years ago, when Bowman defeated staunchly pro-Israel Rep. Eliot Engel (DN.Y.) for the first time as part of a left-wing surge that included Bush’s success in Missouri.
Pro-Israel groups are also now helping to financially support Bush’s opponent, St. Louis County District Attorney Wesley Bell, in the hope of repeating Bowman’s defeat in her district. The morning after Bowman’s loss, the Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) released up-to-date polling results in conjunction with the Mellman Group showing Bush and Bell statistically tied in this district, previously considered a safer bet for Bush.
“Voters in their district, but also across the country, have to be very cautious about the enormous expenditure that can be incurred, because they could simply be overwhelmed by the volume of ads,” Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), another newer member of the Squad, said of Bush’s upcoming primary.
“Mr. Bowman’s campaign is opening the floodgates for potentially tens of millions of dollars spent in primaries. Tens of millions of dollars that will be spent in their ads not necessarily on the issues that the major interest groups care about, but on something else,” Casar said.
“In the short term, it’s going to be very important for voters in the Democratic primaries across the country to be aware that unprecedented amounts of money are being spent right now to vilify progressives and that they should be much more skeptical of what they constantly see on Hulu, in their social media streams or on television,” he added.
While progressives were largely demoralized, moderate Democrats viewed Bowman’s fate as a positive sign for the centrists.
Rep. Annie Kuster (D-N.H.), chair of the centrist New Democratic Coalition, called a “moderate, pragmatic approach” the path to victory this fall. Like others in her wing, moderates are turning their attention to Biden and the possibility of Republicans allied with former President Trump retaking parts of Washington as the ultimate measuring stick for voters.
“There’s so much at stake in this election that voters understand that our freedom is on the ballot, our democracy is on the ballot,” Kuster said. “And so they understand that they have to make a pragmatic choice in this primary to put the right person in position to win them back.”
Progressives are not as fixated on the Biden-Trump effect and still see benefits in promoting a left-leaning agenda. Many say Bowman’s defeat and Bush’s uncertain future underscore the problems within the party.
A Bowman defeat would show “how far things have regressed since we submitted to Biden’s centrist and openly pro-war worldview,” said Cullen Tiernan, political director of a local union based in New Hampshire.
“The goals of the progressive movement, be it world peace, health care for all, the elimination of dark money from politics – they have all been pushed into the background in favor of subservience to Biden and the party,” he said.
