Well, well, well. You’d think Democrats might take a break from lecturing America about “threats to democracy” long enough to look in the mirror — but not this week.
In a House floor moment that had all the drama of a bad political soap opera, Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA) dropped a grenade on her own party just before a critical vote on ending what Republicans are calling the Schumer Shutdown. And no, it wasn’t about spending or policy. It was about good old-fashioned Chicago-style political maneuvering — the kind that makes regular voters wonder if the swamp ever really drained at all.
Here’s the quick version, though it reads more like a plot twist in a Netflix political thriller: On October 27, Rep. Jesús “Chuy” García (D-IL) filed to run for reelection. Okay, nothing unusual there. But then, just minutes — yes, literal minutes — before the November 3rd filing deadline, his chief of staff, Patty Garcia (no relation, conveniently), suddenly filed paperwork to run for the same seat.
Cue the raised eyebrows.
Shortly after, Rep. Garcia confirmed he was not seeking reelection after all, citing health and family concerns. So what did that conveniently timed filing do? It left Patty Garcia with no primary opponent, no general election opponent, and basically handed her the seat like it was a retirement party gift. If you’re thinking, “that sounds rigged,” well, you’re not alone — especially if you’re from Chicago, where this kind of last-minute political backflip is practically a hometown tradition.
Rep. Perez wasn’t having it. She introduced a privileged resolution to formally condemn Rep. Garcia for what looks a lot like gaming the system. And how did Democrats respond?
They attacked her.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), the same guy who’s spent the last five years claiming democracy is “under attack,” argued to table the resolution, calling it a “distraction.” A distraction from what, exactly? Exposing shady backroom deals? Giving voters a real choice? Or maybe just the embarrassment of getting caught with your hand in the political cookie jar? You can watch his statement here.
Jeffries wasn’t alone. The entire Democrat caucus turned their fire on Perez, not Garcia. Not the man allegedly pulling strings to keep power in his inner circle. Nope, they went after the one Democrat actually calling for accountability.
The motion to table failed anyway — thanks to Perez and Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME) crossing the aisle and siding with Republicans. That’s right. Two Democrats said enough is enough. The rest? They looked the other way, because party loyalty apparently outweighs transparency.
Rep. Garcia’s office tried to spin it, saying anyone could have filed to run during that week-long window. Sure — if they had known Garcia wasn’t actually planning to run. But as NBC’s local Chicago affiliate pointed out, several Democrats later admitted they would’ve run if they’d known the seat was open. They just didn’t — because Garcia hadn’t told them. A coincidence? You decide.
Now the House could vote on the resolution as soon as Tuesday, and it’s safe to say all eyes will be on how many more Democrats decide whether they’re going to defend backroom deals or stand up for basic political fairness.
The irony here is almost too rich. For years, Democrats have scolded Republicans for supposedly trying to “undermine democracy.” But when one of their own allegedly pulls a fast one to hand-pick his successor behind closed doors? Crickets — or worse, attacks on the person who dares to call it out.
The message seems loud and clear: when Democrats talk about protecting democracy, they might really mean protecting their version of it. The kind that just so happens to include a last-minute switcheroo, no competition, and zero transparency.
So if you’re wondering where the real threat to democracy is, it might not be coming from the places we’ve been told to look.
And this Tuesday? We’ll see which side of the aisle really believes in open, fair elections — and which side prefers coronations in disguise. Stay tuned.
