75-Year-Old Democrat Who Beat AOC for Key Role Resigns After 4 Months

[Brenda]

Reminder that in December, Nancy Pelosi, from her hospital bed, whipped the vote for Gerry Connolly—who'd recently been diagnosed with throat cancer—against Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

On Monday, Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) tendered his resignation as ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, a key role during a presidential administration that’s churning out hourly (minutely???) corruption scandals. He’ll be “stepping back as Ranking Member of the Oversight Committee soon,” he wrote in the resignation letter, without offering a precise date, and adding that this will also be his last term in Congress. Six months ago, Connolly, who’s 75 years old, announced his throat cancer diagnosis—in his letter, Connolly shared the devastating news that “the cancer, while initially beaten back, has now returned.”

Hey Democratic leadership: You're doing it wrong!

https://www.jezebel.com/75-year-old-democrat-who-beat-aoc-for-key-role-resigns-after-4-months

[BeyondGeography]

1. Who'da thunk it?

[Autumn]

2. I've known three people who have had that cancer. He lasted longer than what I

thought he would last In office. The treatment is brutal. Damn shame Nancy had to have him instead of someone who would last.

[onenote]

41. And I'm married to someone with that cancer and she's doing fine three years in.

And I also know Gerry, who has been a force for his constituents, both in local government and Congress.

[Autumn]

50. I'm glad your wife is doing so well. My cousins son wasn't so lucky. nt

[Hekate]

69. Thank you for speaking out for the Congressman, who has always had a good reputation as a strong Dem

Best wishes to you and your wife for her continued recovery.

[onenote]

75. Thanks

In our 28 years of marriage she has had cancer three times— breast cancer twice and then esophageal. She is a fighter and still is active, traveling, scuba diving, and attending protests.

[Hekate]

82. A fighter indeed

[JBTaurus83]

3. Perhaps this is the time

to place AOC in the position.

[getagrip_already]

30. Or not... there are more senior and experienced people ahead of her....

Being part of the squad, calling for dems to not vote, isnt a cause for advance.ent.

[onenote]

42. She's not even a member of the Committee.

So that's probably not happening.

[gab13by13]

51. She was a member though, wasn't she.

It's past time for Democratic leadership to drop the notion that they must elect moderates to head certain committees, and they must nominate moderates to run in certain districts.

How about picking the best candidate?

[onenote]

52. She was, but she chose instead to become a member of Energy and Commerce

She's not going to be allowed to be ranking on oversight and retain her membership on energy and commerce.

[IzzaNuDay]

4. Who didn't see this coming?

Though I feel some bit of sympathy for Rep. Connolly that he had this condition, the fact remains he knew this cancer is a hard one to fight, even if he were not leading the oversight committee. He could have been more effective not taking the role, allowing AOC to lead and he and/or others mentor her.

But it’s all about power and control. SMH.

[Raven123]

18. Exactly. Connolly has served well, but should have stepped down from that position.

[LymphocyteLover]

20. maybe it was his last wish? Give the guy a break

[Shipwack]

23. "Give him a break"? With Democracy on the line? That's a big negatory, good buddy. nt

[LymphocyteLover]

34. He was not going to be the difference FFS. The GOP controls that committee and have not even had

hearings of any note.

[Alpeduez21]

24. My last fucking wish could be America doesn't become

A fucking fascist regime. I guess for some people being in congress isn’t considered enough. We need people who will fight for us not dreamers from the make a wish foundation

[delisen]

32. A fascist Demicratic party would have dumped him.nt

[LymphocyteLover]

33. He wasn't going to keep us away from fascism, FFS

[Meowmee]

107. Agree and it's delusional to think otherwise imo

[yorkster]

84. Bit of a harsh take, I think. Make a wish?

Could we have a little grace for someone who has been a powerful, intelligent fighter in the House. Some of his Virginia constituents have spoken highly of him here. I suspect Nancy thought he would be an effective choice, no doubt hoping his treatment would also be effective.

[Celerity]

46. The US Congress isn't the Make-A-Wish Foundation, especially in these times of the darkly looming Trumpian dictatorship.

[Duncan Grant]

89. A fine strategy at the country club, but not Congress.

Last wish or not, these responsibilities transcend individual desires. All this is hypothetical, of course, but it’s not how an opposition party should work.

[IrishBubbaLiberal]

5. " hasn't exactly been energized to take on an existential political fight for the soul of the nation..."

Jezebell:

(…….)

It’s entirely understandable that he hasn’t exactly been energized to take on an existential political fight for the soul of the nation over the last few months. What’s not understandable is why he even ran for this position, and why top Democrats like Nancy Pelosi so determinedly went to bat for him. The Oversight Committee is charged with ensuring efficiency and accountability in the federal government. So, Democrats on the committee are naturally taking on an incredibly dire role right now. Trump’s first term was nothing if not a hotbed for corruption, what with his lack of tax returns, or all the suspicious activities surrounding his businesses. In his second term so far, Trump and his entire family appear to be profiting massively off scam-y memecoins, while other members of his administration, including Vice President JD Vance, are partaking in their own suspicious activities.

Trotting out a justifiably fatigued 75-year-old man recovering from cancer to lead such a dogged fight was never a good idea. In the last three-and-a-half months, Connolly has routinely disappeared during key moments when Democrats needed visible leaders front and center, communicating to the American public and highlighting the stakes of everything that’s happening. And it’s not as if Democrats didn’t have other options with the demonstrated ability to do all of that: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who’s far and away the party’s brightest star right now, also ran for the role in December.

[Skittles]

11. not just a bad idea

pretty fucking insulting

[Shipwack]

25. But... but... but... You don't understand!

It was his turn!

[Skittles]

27. OH! OH! and it would be AGEIST to not give him his turn!

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[Dan]

7. I am thinking that the Democratic Party that survives this Trump mess

Is going to be one lean mean fighting machine. A take no prisoners type of party with no tolerance for peace with the republicans.

[sop]

9. One would hope.

[LymphocyteLover]

21. it will be a different party, for sure

[IrishBubbaLiberal]

8. Pelosi's belief in the Old School DEMs to the detriment of all Democrats.

He obviously is a good man.
Been in Congress a long time.
A dependable Democratic Party member.

Thank you Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.)
I hope you get well.


BUT I never understood how bizarrely Pelosi thought it was so
important to defeat AOC.

Pelosi has seen her crown age, it’s really rusty and crusty, tarnished now,
And for whatever reason Pelosi belief in the Old School DEMs
to the detriment of all Democrats.

I would LOVE to see more young DEM new faces.
Democrats in their 20s and 30s in office, in Congress
Instead of the elderly DEMs of 70s and 80+ years old.

Yet some of the Congress who are old,,
Like Independent Bernie…have THE FIRE RAGING STILL.
JOHN LEWIS when elderly STILL HAD THE FIRE RAGING STILL.

[Skittles]

10. gee, who would have thought that about a 75 year old with cancer

WTF

[IrishBubbaLiberal]

12. Think u and I also used to agree a lot when DU first started

In 2001, 2002,
I believe my DU name back then was
ProtectFreedomImpeachBushNow

(Or maybe that was my 2nd DU name,,, can’t remember anything
anymore in detail for sure)

Anyway

GOOD TO SEE YOU ARE STILL HERE

😎

From July 2003
https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x75626

[Skittles]

13. heyyyyy!

excellent that we are still here to FIGHT

[Ms. Toad]

14. What ageist and ableist claptrap.

Trotting out a justifiably fatigued 75-year-old man recovering from cancer to lead such a dogged fight was never a good idea. . . . It shouldn’t have taken a 75-year-old man receiving a second cancer diagnosis for the party to see that.

I'm "only" 69, but I have two cancer diagnoses - breast cancer and sarcoma; the latter extremely aggressive and hard to treat. The first is from 9 years ago; the second from 4 years ago. None of those things render me incapable of doing my job. I was back on the job Monday after a partial mastectomy for the first - and worked through radiation therapy, and I was teaching from home via zoom 3 days after the final stage of limb-sparing surgery for the latter. Between the two, I broke my tib-fib (spiral fracture) and was back to work 7 days later. It would have been earlier, except that my University initially violated the ADA by refusing to allow me to return until I was able to work in the building 40 hours a week without accommodations.

Asserting that someone is incapable of doing a job based solely on the fact of their age, or the fact of their diagnosis is ageist and ableist claptrap and has no place on a progressive discussion board.

Was he the best for the job? I don't know. Was he impaired by either his age or cancer? I don't know.

But I find the suggestion offensive that we should have known better based solely on his age and cancer diagnosis.

[Brenda]

15. No, it is not ageist, it is about truth.

And Ageism in reverse. Ignoring young people got us here.

[Ms. Toad]

17. That would be true IF the fact of AOC's age were what was used to reject her.

Or to justify giving her the job.

There are competent and experienced 35 year olds - and competent and experienced 75 year olds. Simply reciting an age and rejecting someone based on that age is ageist. As to age, the article recited the fact of his age, and no more (beyond that he was a young 75 year old) as a reason we should have known better. That is the very definition of ageist.

[Oopsie Daisy]

92. Preach!

[Cuthbert Allgood]

97. So why was AOC passed over for a guy with cancer that admits he wasn't doing the job and is stepping down.

[Ms. Toad]

99. Was someone stating it was the fact of her age that was used to select him over her?

And if so, I expect a link - since I was addressing an opinion piece which expressly used age and cancer diagnosis, without more, as reasons we should have known better.

If you can provide a link to someone saying that her age, without more, was why she was not selected, I will agree that that opinion is ageist.

[ancianita]

16. Totally agree. This isn't about any old school Dem leadership.

The House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee voted 34 to 27 to appoint Connolly -- Ranking Democratic Member of the House Oversight Comte. -- with the full caucus vote being 131–84.

[blue_jay]

19. I agree, will never understand why so many are so quick to throw experience out with the bath water...

Don't get me wrong. I understand the frustration and impatience of youth and getting things moved forward (I was rooting for AOC too) but am not convinced that allowing the elder dem some dignity and reward that he put in the work and hours for to have the opportunity to achieve this, (before he either got better from illness or didn't) caused irreparable harm. Also think we can never truly know which the better choice would have been. Perhaps he did things the younger gen dem would not have known to do, perhaps we lost time. Honestly haven't been able to pay any attention to his committee so I may be way off base (so please forgive my ignorance). Just think perhaps they knew this would/ could happen and ultimately gave both people the opportunity to fill that position and not dishonor someone who has put in more of the hours. I hope I'm right. I know politics is a vicious dicey game and who knows who will replace him or if it will be fair. Perhaps whatever happens next will change my views in the future.

All that said, I am still against the suspicious and consistent agenda against the progressives and am looking forward to more and more like AOC gaining seniority and changing the dynamic of this party. I believe it can/ will happen sooner than we think.

[MadameButterfly]

22. I do believe Conolly got the job because Pelosi stepped in and Pelosi's

reason was not age but resistance to a Progressive firebrand. She will not be able to stop AOC's rise in the end. She and the DNC will attempt to keep her from a presidential run, and don't want to give her the limelight to help her get there. So AOC did rallies with Bernie instead and got even more attention. I was glad she was free of the chairmanship so she could do that. Now it's time for her to run again.

The wisdom of running another woman with a double glass ceiling who looks like a child of the 60's for president--if indeed that's where she is headed-- is not mine to know right now. We just need to use all the talent we've got. And nothing the establishment tries to do will keep AOC down.

I want to add that I deeply respect Pelosi who I think is the greatest Speaker in history. I think AOC could follow in her footsteps.

[Rob H.]

72. The same thing happened in Texas when Jessica Cisneros ran against Henry Cuellar

Pelosi endorsed and recorded last-minute robocalls for an anti-abortion moderate under active FBI investigation in Cuellar's case to keep progressive Cisneros from winning, Cuellar went on to be indicted for bribery, unlawful foreign influence, and money laundering, so, yeah. Great choice.

[EdmondDantes_]

49. Congress is the worst example to use for throwing experience out

Literally the opposite happens because it's a system built on relationships.

[Hekate]

71. Thank you for saying this

[Gore1FL]

26. Thank you, Gerry Connolly, for your years of service. I hope you recover from your cancer.

I hope AOC slides into the position of the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee.

[lapucelle]

35. AOC will not "slide in" to the position of Ranking Member on the Oversight Committee.

Nobody "slides into" a leadership position. The Democratic members of the committee vote, the Steering Committee votes to recommend, and then the entire Democratic Caucus votes.

Besides, AOC is no longer on the Oversight Committee.

[Gore1FL]

45. I apologize that I didn't spell out the complete process.

Please forgive my use of vernacular.

It is weird that people cannot be re-assign committees. I didn’t know that.

[Celerity]

48. She can still be elected the ranking member of the Oversight Committee, but she needs a waiver from Dem House leadership

in order to switch over from the Energy Committee.

Pelosi may well put paid to that notion, behind the scenes. If not Pelosi, then perhaps others will try and stop the manoeuvre, if AOC actually tries to do it, which I am not sure she even will.

[comradebillyboy]

63. She also needs the votes of the Democratic members.

It seems to me AOC has not done much to earn the support and trust of her fellow congressional Democrats.

[lapucelle]

79. Lots of folks don't seem to have any idea about how any of this works.

They are not aware that AOC is no longer a member of the Oversight Committee.

They think that a member can "slide in" as a Ranking Member of a committee they no longer belong to.

They think that committee leaders are "selected" by nefarious power players rather than elected by the entire Democratic Caucus in a secret ballot.

They don't understand the concept of exclusive committees and waivers.

The don't even understand that AOC herself has long sought to be a member of the exclusive Energy and Commerce Committee and might not want to leave that role.

[Nixie]

96. Yes, one of the chronic disinformation mongers was blaming

Nancy Pelosi when it was a 131-84 vote against AOC that defeated her against Connelly. So 64% voted against her, but that’s too much reality to acknowledge so they just blame Nancy.

[lapucelle]

98. And it was a secret ballot.

And all the insta-experts are clueless as to how these things actually work according to House rules.

A lot of them didn't even know that AOC is no longer a member of the Oversight Committee.

And then there are others who think AOC can simply be reassigned with some kind of magical waiver. They don't realize that Democrats have exactly 21 seats on the Oversight Committee. A Democrat would have to leave the committee for AOC to be reassigned.

[Nixie]

104. As always, a perfect explanation and needed reality/info.

TY

[NoRethugFriends]

81. Well, that's a glorious pile of Malarkey (nt)

[Celerity]

88. well, of course she needs the votes, I was only discussing the procedure where she could even run for the position

[comradebillyboy]

101. I certainly appreciate your explanation of the procedures.

It adds much needed context.

[lapucelle]

68. AOC applied for a waiver to be allowed to serve on both committees. It wasn't granted. N/T

[onenote]

77. And she chose energy and commerce over oversight

She could have stayed on Oversight but she has wanted to be on energy and commerce since she was elected to Congress

[lapucelle]

80. Indeed she did. She's wanted to be on Energy and Commerce since her first term. N/T

[Oopsie Daisy]

95. 😂🤣

LOL

[Gore1FL]

100. What part was funny? nt

[riversedge]

28. Cancer is so horrid! Just when you think you have it beat--it pops up its head again. I have known

some friends that this has happened to. It is so horrible-not just for the person with cancer but for their families.

[Chasstev365]

29. Not A Good Look, Nancy

I sincerely mean this: You did so many great things for us, but shutting out AOC as the ranking member for Gerry Connolly with his age and cancer was not one of them. She's not that far left.

AOC's "radical" ideas were the mainstream views of the Democratic Party of FDR, JFK, LBJ, and RFK. She's also a fighter. Please give her a chance.

[question everything]

31. Sorry to hear this. I hope that he gets treatment. This does not mean that AOC should just slide

into the position.

[lapucelle]

36. AOC is no longer on the Oversight Committee.

https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/members

[Arazi]

37. And folks are excoriating David Hogg for proposing we boost new fighters

If a current Dem fighter appears to be tired and out of fire

[Prairie Gates]

38. What is it y'all used to say? "Your sons and your daughters are beyond your command..."

So live up to your own advice and get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand.

Pro-AOC
Pro-Hogg
Democrat!

[tritsofme]

39. These positions are won by convincing members you are the best person for the job. No matter how much whining is done

AOC didn’t do that.

[Arazi]

40. I'm sure the Dems most powerful member putting her thumb on the scale meant nothing

[tritsofme]

43. It was an open vote of the Democratic caucus, AOC overwhelmingly lost.

No one is at fault for failing to convince her colleagues but herself.

Pelosi is free to endorse who she chooses, another Pelosi endorsee lost his race on the same day, she doesn’t have some sorcerous power over the caucus. It’s not a scandal for this woman to speak her mind.

AOC just didn’t make her case in that race.

[Arazi]

44. Pelosi is absolutely welcome to weigh in

But let’s not kid ourselves that Nancy’s prodigious power on every level (contacts, fundraising and $$ for members) means nothing.

[tritsofme]

47. Yes, Pelosi has done much to earn the respect of her colleagues, and her opinion matters to them.

A putative rising star in the party would seem to have much to learn from such a person.

[Arazi]

56. Are you implying AOC was wrong to challenge Connelly?

And AOC appears to have certainly moderated and learned from Pelosi and others.

[tritsofme]

60. Not at all, I think it was a valuable learning experience for her.

She ultimately got more support than I expected, but she owns her own loss.

[Arazi]

62. Was she not "owning" her loss? Did I miss something?

You (again) appear to be impugning her, implying that she somehow had sour grapes about this.

Fairly sure she’s not a newbie anymore and understands the political games afoot. Nobody’s fooled on what happened here imo

[tritsofme]

64. No, you're right, she handled it fine. However some supporters, OPs like this being a good example

Attacking Democrats and whining about the outcome, are a whole other story.

[Renew Deal]

53. And in typical fashion, the deciders got it wrong.

[tritsofme]

54. She's free to try again.

[Sky Jewels]

59. No. A lot of times they're won because the leadership is pleasing the corporate donors

who prefer centrists who won't make waves and upset the old guard Dems who are more passionate about fighting progressives than they are about fighting fascists.

[tritsofme]

61. If you think that is an accurate description of Nancy Pelosi, you are off your rocker.

What a disgusting attack on good Democrats.

[betsuni]

66. It's disgusting slander meant to discourage support of Democrats and encourage hate for them.

[lapucelle]

86. Down thread, someone called supporters of Connolly the "cancer of the party". N/T

[SunImp]

105. Dt, someone called people slipping in needless digs at AOC in their praises for Rep Conolly "cancer of the party

Sorry, I didn't want what I said to be misinterpreted to make it seem like I was calling everyone who supported Rep Connolly "cancer" just the ones in these threads using every little opportunity to trash AOC. I admit I have been having a bad few days & that cancer comment was uncalled for & a poor word choice.

[W_HAMILTON]

106. Yep. And while going after fellow Democrats might earn you a lot of likes on social media...

...(with some of those likes coming from Russian and Republican trolls looking to drive wedges, *cough cough*), it doesn't go over well with the Democrats whose votes you need to be voted into these leadership positions everyone thinks they are ready for.

[JohnSJ]

55. It is so nice to see the enthusiasm at DU regarding someone's demise, and open the door

to bash Pelosi, Schumer, and any Democrat who doesn't doesn't fit "the mold", while opening the door to celebrate David Hogg whose main experience is surviving a mass shooting, advocating "defund the police, and elimination of ICE".

I am done with DU for a while, and no I won't let the door hit my ass on the way out.

The more things change, the more they stay the same, and we will keep reliving 2000, 2016, and 2024, where it is either my way or I will take my marbles and go home.

Enjoy, and have a good day.

[betsuni]

58. Yes, that lust to hate Democrats.

[themaguffin]

57. I wish him well - truly. I will add, health aside, he wasn't right for the moment. I hope that the party...

recognizes the moment and elevates someone who is ready for the moment. We need war time leaders. We are not in business as usual times.

[Oopsie Daisy]

65. I wish him well and I hope his replacement is someone who's as experienced and respected as he is.

It's unclear to me why this should be seen as (yet another) opportunity to shit on Democrats and the Democratic party.

[betsuni]

67. It's part of the rule of never giving Democrats the benefit of the doubt, assuming evil corrupt motives

and always, always taking every opportunity no matter how baseless to shit on Democrats and the party. Solidarity. For the Yelling Revolution of Stupidity and No Progress Just Punishing Democrats or whatever. I still haven't figured out is the reason for preventing progress.

[Oopsie Daisy]

90. Reasons? You want reasons? --- Well... I'd start by suggesting that vanity and arrogance and virtue signaling...

... those are the most logical (??) or obvious reasons I can think of for the treachery of continually and willfully shitting on the Democratic party and our loyal and experienced leadership. I fear that a repeat of 2016 is at hand.

[betsuni]

103. I have to remind myself: Nothing is better than something, incrementalism and compromise for progress is a sin.

Only one's personal purity-vanity matters. It's not about governing to help people as best you can against extremist right-wing fanatic Republicans, it's about a moral purity revolution to punish the Democratic Party.

Medicare for All is coming back as the main all-or-nothing purity test like in 2016.

[Rob H.]

70. Well, his selection kept AOC from getting the job, so he's served his purpose nt

[lapucelle]

73. Connolly was elected by the Oversight Committee, recommended by the Steering Committee,

and then elected by the full Democratic Caucus by a vote of 131-84.

It's an elected position. AOC didn't win the committee vote and she didn't win the full caucus vote.

If by "selected" you mean "elected by a large majority of his peers in a secret ballot", then Connolly was "selected".

[SunImp]

74. The usual cancer of the party out here complimenting Connolly, but at the same time

weasely attacking AOC. How can people cry about people "attacking" Democrats while also feel the need to subtlety attack AOC in the same post?

[Rob H.]

83. There's a pretty sizable portion of DU posters comprised of older, conservative Democrats nt

[lapucelle]

85. "The usual cancer of the Party are out here..."?

What does that mean?

It sounds like you’re calling some members the “cancer of the Democratic Party”.

How can anyone cry about apocryphal attacks on one Democrat while calling other Democrats “a cancer of the Party”?

Does calling some Democrats “the cancer of the Party” qualify as a “weasely attack”, or is it different because referring to members as “a cancer of the Party” is overtly disgusting as opposed to an imaginary subtle attack?

[Oopsie Daisy]

91. That was shameful and disgusting, wasn't it?

[lapucelle]

93. It was shameful and disgusting.

Imagine calling members a "cancer" because you disagree with them. It sounds like the kind of thing Stephen Miller would say.

[tritsofme]

94. It is definitely MAGA level discourse. For shame.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

76. Gee

I wish I had known that the fate of the US and democracy depended upon one man on a MAGAt Republican led committee.

If half of the Dem bashers bashed MAGAts half as much as they bash Dems, maybe something positive for American democracy would result.

[marble falls]

78. Little early for grave dancing.

[orangecrush]

87. We can't afford this kind of bullshit

[DJ Synikus Makisimus]

102. Perhaps Jared Golden can take his place.

Or perhaps Ed Case or Henry Cuellar. Just sayin'.

[AZProgressive]

108. The big decision that could shape AOC's future

Nicholas Wu and Holly Otterbein
Wed, April 30, 2025 at 1:45 AM MST

Five months ago, she chose to play the inside game with her fellow House Democrats, running for her party’s top post on the high-profile Oversight Committee. She came up short to a more senior lawmaker, Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia, and left the committee entirely.

Now she has a second chance. Connolly unexpectedly announced Monday he will soon step aside for health reasons, leaving her with another critical choice — one made even more momentous by how much has changed inside the Democratic Party since she last chose to try and move up the House ranks.

Faced with the stresses of President Donald Trump’s second term, Democratic voters are yearning for younger and more assertive leadership. Many see exactly what they are looking for in Ocasio-Cortez, 35, who has traveled the country in recent months, packing rally after rally with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and fueling speculation about a potential White House run.

In other words, the stage afforded as ranking member of the House Oversight Committee is suddenly looking a whole lot smaller, and Ocasio-Cortez is remaining publicly and privately noncommittal as speculation swirls about Connolly’s successor.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/big-decision-could-shape-aoc-084500156.html

I decided to post this story here instead of starting another thread but is related to the topic of this thread.