Two House Democrats defied their party's leadership for the second time this month by voting with Republicans to advance debate on a Russia sanctions bill and EPA rollback measures, and Democratic leaders are now openly threatening consequences.
Reps. Jared Golden of Maine and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington crossed the aisle Tuesday to help the Republican majority clear a procedural hurdle that GOP leaders could not have passed on their own. Five Republicans, including Reps. Andy Harris of Maryland and Ralph Norman of South Carolina, voted against debating the bills, leaving Speaker Mike Johnson's slim majority short of the votes needed. Golden and Perez filled the gap, just as they did on September 1, when they rescued the GOP agenda in a nearly identical fashion.
The rule passed 210, 208, according to Just The News, making the two Democratic crossover votes the margin of victory. The bills now headed to the floor include the late South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham's Russia sanctions legislation, which passed the Senate with bipartisan support in August, and a package of measures targeting EPA regulations.
Golden framed his vote as a matter of urgency. He told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the House was in its last week of session before November, and that letting the sanctions bill die over a procedural vote was too high a price.
"Last month, the Senate passed the Russia sanctions bill. It's a bill that will go a long way toward supporting our allies in Ukraine, who I have supported ever since Putin's invasion began. The stakes for Ukraine are too high to let this good bill, which already passed the Senate with overwhelming, bipartisan support, die as a result of a procedural vote."
Golden also explained his September 1 vote by pointing to the Northeast Lobstermen Protection Act, which would extend a pause on strict federal fishing rules for lobster crews in his home state. He voted for the earlier rule, he said, to advance that bill.
Perez posted a statement on X defending her vote on different grounds. She represents a district she described as home to one of the largest Ukrainian communities in America.
"I'm proud to represent one of the largest Ukrainian communities in America, people who have lost fathers, mothers, sons and daughters in the fight to defeat fascism. I'll always stand with my community's values, and am grateful for the 86 senators who voted to send this bill to the house."
Perez's office did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation's request for comment beyond the public statement.
When Golden and Perez first crossed the aisle on September 1, their own party wanted them punished. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Minority Whip Katherine Clark, and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar issued a joint statement calling the vote "a significant breach of trust."
"The decision by two of our colleagues to blindside the entire House Democratic Caucus and join with the Republican majority to pass a procedural rule on the brink of failing represents a significant breach of trust. It is an action that necessitates a serious response, and we have asked the Committee on Caucus Rules to take this up in short order."
Two weeks later, no formal punishment had materialized, and the same two members did it again. Clark escalated the rhetoric Wednesday, telling CNN that committee assignments are on the line. "In my opinion, we need team players," she said. "And team players get to sit on exclusive committees."
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi weighed in after the first defection, saying she never faced anything like it during her tenure. "Voting for the rule is something that I, as Speaker, never, We didn't even consider that anybody would do that," Pelosi said. "We never had that problem, so I'm disappointed that they did that."
Pelosi has a track record of enforcing discipline. She denied former New York Rep. Kathleen Rice a seat on the House Judiciary Committee after Rice voted against Pelosi for speaker. She also rewarded members who endorsed her leadership in a November 2018 letter after they had previously opposed her. Zero rules votes failed under Pelosi's speakership, a number that stands in sharp contrast to the nine that have failed under Johnson.
Johnson's own conference nearly sank the rule before Golden and Perez stepped in. Harris and Norman voted against debating the bills outright. Three other Republicans, Reps. Tim Burchett of Tennessee, Andrew Clyde of Georgia, and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, voted yes only after extended talks with House leaders.
The pattern is not new. On June 30, thirteen Republicans voted against a rule that would have opened debate on attaching the Safeguard America Voter Eligibility Act, a voter-ID measure, to the National Defense Authorization Act. They objected to the way Johnson attached the bill, not to the bill itself. On September 1, five Republicans voted to shut down the floor to protest a continuing resolution that passed the House.
The internal GOP divisions echo an older chapter. In January 2023, Kevin McCarthy made several concessions to Freedom Caucus members to win the speaker's gavel, including lowering the threshold required to remove a speaker to just one member. That concession came back to end his speakership when former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz filed a motion to vacate the chair in October 2023. Cross-party defections in tight House votes have become a recurring feature of this era's razor-thin majorities.
The political calculus for the two Democrats could not be more different. Golden is retiring at the end of his term and has publicly criticized his party's direction. He told Breitbart that Democrats are "allowing the most extreme, pugilistic elements of our party to call the shots." A retiring member has little reason to fear losing a committee seat.
Perez, by contrast, is considered one of the most vulnerable Democratic incumbents heading into November. Punishing her risks alienating a swing-district member whose seat the party can ill afford to lose, or whose voters might reward independence over loyalty. Some Democrats have warned internally that disciplinary action could backfire ahead of the midterms.
The tension mirrors broader turmoil inside the House Democratic caucus over how tightly leadership should enforce party-line voting. Clark's threat about committee assignments drew a clear line. But the question is whether Jeffries and his team will follow through, or whether the warning, like the September 1 statement, will go unenforced while Golden and Perez keep voting their districts.
Speaker Johnson, for his part, has framed the broader political environment in stark terms. "This is going to come down to a race of about 19 seats that will decide the fate of the Republic," he said, adding that he expects the Republican base to turn out and hold the House. Every procedural vote in a chamber this closely divided carries outsize weight, and Johnson has now benefited twice from Democrats who are willing to break ranks.
The dynamic is not limited to the House. Senate Democratic leaders have faced their own loyalty crisis as members drift from the party line on high-profile votes. In both chambers, the pattern is the same: leadership demands unity, a handful of members refuse, and the consequences remain vague.
Clark told reporters that team players earn exclusive committee seats. Golden and Perez looked at that bargain, weighed it against their constituents and their convictions, and chose the floor vote over the caucus meeting. Democratic leadership now has to decide whether threats without follow-through are a strategy, or a confession.