Dozens of Democratic candidates running for U.S. House seats nationwide told Axios they either would not support House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) for party leader or were not prepared to commit to voting for him.-The responses suggest growing unease within some parts of the Democratic Party about its current leadership as the 2026 election cycle approaches, the outlet reported this week.
Since assuming the role of Democratic leader in 2022, Hakeem Jeffries has maintained unanimous support within his caucus. That unity, however, may be tested in the next Congress amid rising frustration from grassroots activists, particularly on the party’s left flank.
While Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has drawn much of the criticism from progressive circles this year, Jeffries is increasingly becoming a focal point of dissatisfaction as well, Axios noted.
Axios contacted nearly every Democrat running for a U.S. House seat considered potentially winnable for the party in 2026, receiving responses from 113 candidates through phone interviews or written statements.
Of those surveyed, 20 said they would not vote for Hakeem Jeffries as speaker or minority leader, while another five indicated they were likely to oppose him. Fifty-seven candidates declined to commit to supporting Jeffries, describing it as too early to decide or citing concerns over ideology, strategy, messaging, or leadership style.
Only 24 respondents said they would definitely back Jeffries, and seven more said they were likely to do so, the outlet said.
However, his office pushed back on the narrative that he’s lost support.
“Leader Jeffries is focused on battling Donald Trump, ending the Republican shutdown of the federal government and addressing the crushing GOP health care crisis,” Jeffries spokesperson Justin Chermol told Axios.
Many of the Democrats expressing skepticism toward Hakeem Jeffries are political outsiders or long-shot candidates, while several front-runners in key battleground races declined to respond to Axios’ inquiries. Still, a number of Jeffries’ critics and noncommittal candidates have credible paths to winning seats in Congress.
Among them are Daniel Biss and Kat Abughazaleh, two leading contenders in the Democratic primary to replace retiring Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), both of whom stopped short of pledging to support Jeffries.
Other prominent challengers — including Luke Bronin, Donavan McKinney, Mai Vang, Saikat Chakrabarti, and Patrick Roath — have also withheld their support. Each is running well-funded campaigns aimed at unseating long-serving Democratic incumbents.
Heath Howard, a New Hampshire state representative running for an open U.S. House seat, told Axios regarding the Democratic leader: “I think we need to have a new type of leadership that’s … going to fight back significantly harder against the Trump administration.”
Abughazaleh, meanwhile, told Axios she will support a leader who is “taking actual action against this administration” and that the left should use “our leverage to demand progressive change.”
“We’ve got to see improvement, without question,” Amanda Edwards, who was a member of the Houston city council and is now running in a Texas special election, told the outlet.
Harry Jarin, a firefighter mounting a primary challenge to former House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), told Axios: “The anger of the base right now is not being matched by Democratic leadership … and that is going to have to change one way or another.”
A recurring theme among candidates who declined to back Jeffries was his refusal to endorse socialist New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani — a decision that has also become a source of frustration among left-wing members of Congress.
“His refusal to endorse Zohran makes me nervous that, if I were to become the nominee in my race, he and the party would not support me,” noted Jacob Lawrence, who is set to challenged Rep. Chuck Edwards (R-N.C.).
Chakrabarti, when asked whether he would support for Jeffries, quipped: “What is it that Hakeem said about endorsing Zohran? ‘I’ll have conversations with him and see where it goes.’”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer walked away from a Republican colleague on the floor of the chamber on Saturday after he was cornered over a so-called “fix” he offered for Obamacare subsidies as the government shutdown he is leading entered its 39th day.
Schumer was engaging with Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) after the Democratic leader offered a proposal to reopen the government: A one-year funding extension of taxpayer-funded subsidies for Americans who buy health insurance under the Affordable Care Act.
During the exchange, Schumer admitted to Moreno that he did not yet have a written proposal.
“We can’t give you a counter in writing, but it’s very simple,” Schumer said. “Because we have two sentences we would add to any proposal which would extend the ACA benefits for one year.”
Moreno the revealed that the Schumer proposal did not seem to contain income caps, meaning people who make millions of dollars a year can obtain taxpayer-subsidized health care.
“It does still have no income caps, so people who make $1, $2, $3 million a year,” Moreno said before Schumer interrupted him.
“Once we pass the one-year fixed so people right now aren’t in difficulty, we would sit and negotiate that,” Schumer said. “[Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.)]has said that he won’t negotiate before. We’re willing to negotiate once the credits are extended, plain and simple.”
The Ohio Republican then responded, “So for one year, people making millions of dollars would still receive these COVID-era subsidies?”
At that, Schumer accused Moreno of caring more about billionaires before disengaging and leaving the chamber, according to reports.
“I was going to ask him before he stormed out of the room because evidently he doesn‘t want to hear any opposing views or actually engage in meaningful negotiation … Would he continue 0 dollar premiums, which we know for a FACT, have enormous levels of fraud,” Moreno said.
“If he had stayed, I would have asked him a third question: Does he want these monies to go directly to insurance companies?”
President Donald Trump appeared to gain some leverage in the ongoing government funding standoff Thursday after Senate Democrats sought to link a funding deal to an extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies.
What began as an effort by Democrats to pressure Republicans during the shutdown negotiations has shifted in Trump’s favor, following a new proposal he unveiled on Truth Social.
In his post, the president announced a plan to redirect hundreds of billions of dollars in Obamacare subsidy payments from insurance companies to direct payments for American citizens.
“I am recommending to Senate Republicans that the Hundreds of Billions of Dollars currently being sent to money sucking Insurance Companies in order to save the bad Healthcare provided by ObamaCare, BE SENT DIRECTLY TO THE PEOPLE SO THAT THEY CAN PURCHASE THEIR OWN, MUCH BETTER, HEALTHCARE, and have money left over,” Trump wrote.
“In other words, take from the BIG, BAD Insurance Companies, give it to the people, and terminate, per Dollar spent, the worst Healthcare anywhere in the World, ObamaCare. Unrelated, we must still terminate the Filibuster!” he added.
Conservative commentators lauded the proposal as “genius,” noting that the former president has effectively recast himself as an advocate for direct-to-consumer healthcare freedom. They said the plan reframes the debate as “healthcare for the people” versus the Democrats’ defense of “big insurance.”
Shortly after Trump’s post, Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) announced that he was working on legislation to turn the proposal into reality.
“Totally agree, @POTUS! I’m writing the bill right now,” Scott said. “We must stop taxpayer money from going to insurance companies and instead give it directly to Americans in HSA-style accounts and let them buy the health care they want. This will increase competition & drive down costs.”