How to Make the Loyal Opposition Real

A Few Puzzles

In my last few pieces, I’ve argued that the time has come to pivot from building resistance to offering a positive governing alternative. I’ve argued that some legislators and civil society organizations from across the political spectrum are already working hard to protect people from arbitrary power through stronger democratic governance. I’ve dubbed them members of the Loyal Opposition.

These patriots from both parties want to re-establish Congress as the first branch. Rein in an overreaching executive. Provide protection against retaliation, chaos, and abusive power. Fix the rules so no one can again abuse power with impunity or profit corruptly from government service. And work for a constitutional democracy that is representative, accountable, governable, and responsive to ordinary people.

In Congress, members of the Loyal Opposition have come together to defend and use the War Powers Act, to assert rights of review on tariffs, to restore science funding, and — as Sam Daley-Harris pointed out in a recent post — to restore global aid. These LO members are not necessarily moderates or centrists. They include libertarians like Thomas Massie (KY) and Rand Paul (KY), progressives like Ro Khanna (CA), Maria Cantwell (WA), and Peter Welch (VT), and conservatives like Jerry Moran (KS) and Todd Young (IN).

That diversity drives home a critical point: The Loyal Opposition is not about moderation. It’s not about centrism. It’s about constitutionalism and constitutionalists. It’s for the people who believe that government will be for the people — and not for crony capitalists, would-be monarchs and oligarchs — only when it is also by the people.

There’s a problem though. These members of the Loyal Opposition probably don’t have any deep sense of being on the same team. Current partisan politics offer little space for members of the Loyal Opposition to help each other politically. This presents the greatest challenge for bringing the Loyal Opposition into true existence.

To make the Loyal Opposition a real political force there are a few puzzles to solve.

For instance, three Republican House districts — unlikely to be flipped by Democrats — have Loyal Opposition representatives who are facing MAGA primary challenges or attacks from President Trump: Thomas Massie (KY-04), Jeff Hurd (CO-03), and Young Kim (CA-40). Will other members of the Loyal Opposition have their back?

Could Democratic members of the Loyal Opposition, in other words, imagine counting it as a win if these three survive? If so, what help could they lend? Vocal public help is hard to imagine, as Democratic backing is more likely to hurt than help these candidates.

Right now, there is essentially no organization that raises grassroots money from ordinary voters for the specific purpose of supporting cross-partisan, independent-minded, Congress-first candidates. Anybody want to step up to build that vehicle? Send me a note if you do.

Maine presents another puzzle. There, Sen. Susan Collins, clearly a member of the Loyal Opposition, is battling for her political survival against two strong Democratic contenders: Gov. Janet Mills and oyster-farmer Graham Platner. If the Democratic nominee is Platner, there’s a very good chance he wins. Maine is one of the most important Senate pickup states for the Democrats. Neither Platner nor Mills has yet signaled that they would be likely to serve in the legislature in the sort of cross-partisan way that defines members of the Loyal Opposition.

Here, I think, the question of what you do depends on which political party you call home.

For Republicans, having a Republican member of the Loyal Opposition is currently preferable to having a Democratic one. Republicans need to support Collins.

On the other side, however, a very interesting situation presents itself in the battle between Mills and Platner. Democratic LO members don’t have to support Collins just because she’s in that tribe. Just as Republicans would rather have an additional Republican member of the Loyal Opposition, Democrats reasonably prefer an additional Democratic member.

Maine has an exceptionally distinguished tradition of political independence. Republican Sen. Margaret Chase Smith, the first woman to serve in both the House and the Senate, stood up to her co-partisan, Sen. Joseph McCarthy, with her famous 1950 floor speech, her “Declaration of Conscience.” She denounced McCarthy’s debasement of the Senate and said, “I don’t want to see the Republican Party ride to political victory on the four horsemen of calumny — fear, ignorance, bigotry, and smear.” Democratic Sen. George Mitchell was famous for his ability to negotiate compromises, ultimately being tasked with brokering peace in Ireland because of his skill. Republican Sen. Bill Cohen stepped up as secretary of defense for Democratic President Bill Clinton.

This is no tradition of establishment complacency. Democratic Mainers who want to see the Loyal Opposition grow stronger should test their candidates to see which one is willing to forge a new generation of independent-minded leadership for Maine. Either Mills or Platner could position themselves that way. Mills has the pragmatic experience and profile of a governor. On the trail, Platner charges that the enemy is oligarchy. The Founders would have agreed. They designed tools to fight exactly that problem — the Emoluments Clause, congressional control of the purse, and legislative authority over trade. Platner has an opportunity to channel the populist energy of his campaign into the specific institutional reforms that would make oligarchic capture of government off-limits, not just a rhetorical stalking horse. Platner, as a constitutionalist, would be a powerful force.

I agree fervently that we need to break oligarchy’s grip on government. The reason oligarchs have so much power right now is that Congress has ceded its authority to the executive, and the executive has been captured by billionaire interests. Think Elon Musk and DOGE, and so many government contracts steered to cronies.

But to fight oligarchy, electing populists isn’t enough on its own. We’ve also got to rebuild Congress as an independent institution that can’t be bypassed by executive orders. Tariff review legislation isn’t a weak tea procedural reform; its purpose is to block any president from unilaterally restructuring the economy to benefit personal friends. War power resolutions aren’t constitutional extras; they ensure that billionaires and defense contractors can’t push the country into war without democratic consent. The Congress-first agenda is the anti-oligarchy agenda expressed in institutional language.

If you are a Maine Democrat who wants to join the Loyal Opposition, then putting this conversation on the table is the next step. Let’s see which candidate — Platner or Mills — has more to offer for the Loyal Opposition. And if you’re an independent, you have a choice. Collins’ version of the Loyal Opposition? Or whatever version Mills or Platner might offer before the campaign is through?

All right, two puzzles down. Now we need to figure out who might act on either of these action pathways, and what the puzzles are in other races and states. Is it possible to crowdsource an operational plan for how to make the Loyal Opposition real? I don’t know. But I’d like to find out. Tell me what state or race is creating puzzles for you when you think about your political stance through a Loyal Opposition lens.