Congressional Democrats see a target-rich environment next year. But they're also worried that if they investigate everything, they may appear to investigate nothing.

Why it matters: Democrats want to move beyond the one-off hearings, fist-pounding document demands and subpoena threats that defined much of their oversight during President Trump's first term.

• The goal, according to senior Democrats, is to build a sustained narrative around the administration's "cost, chaos and corruption" — while showing voters they have legislative solutions to the problems they uncover.
• "We're trying to get to the answers that point to solutions," a senior Democratic aide said.

Zoom in: Senate Democrats are actively coordinating investigations across committees and with their House counterparts, looking to turn Day One oversight of the Trump administration into a sustained case for their own legislative agenda.

• Think more Jan. 6 committee investigation, with slick videos and compelling witness testimony, than impeachment 1.0.
• The coordination, underway for months, is increasingly happening at the senator level, with lawmakers working to divide investigative responsibilities and avoid overlapping efforts.
• "We want to deconflict these with some of the other committees, right? We don't want to be duplicative with other committees," Sen. Chris Van Hollen told us.

The other side: Rep. Robert Garcia, the likely chair of the House Oversight Committee, has a four-pronged plan to investigate the Trump administration.

• But he has a two-word taunt: "LAWYER UP."

Between the lines: Nearly every House committee has the power to subpoena without getting sign-off from the minority party.

• In the Senate, only the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and its Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI) can issue subpoenas unilaterally.

Trump's war in Iran will likely be the Senate's first focus, with the Senate Armed Services Committee preparing for hearings — and planning to call Hegseth to testify — in January.

• There will also be an immediate vote on a war powers resolution.
• "I've been very clear that we need to use every tool at our disposal to end the illegal [incentives] war in Iran, and that's beginning day one," Van Hollen said.

What's next: As the scope of their victory comes into focus, Democrats across committees are eager to get to work.

• "I'm looking at you — Big Tech CEOs, Wall Street executives, and giant corporations. If you break the law, there will be consequences," Sen. Elizabeth Warren thundered on X.

Read more

— Hans Nichols

Democratic House members and members-elect are being bombarded with phone calls and emails urging them not to elect Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries as speaker, more than a dozen lawmakers and aides tell us.

Why it matters: The calls point to a fundamental disconnect between House Democrats — most of whom are likely to vote for Jeffries — and at least a portion of their grassroots base.

• Jeffries remains the overwhelming favorite to become speaker, House Democrats say. Nobody has offered even a hint of a whisper that they would be willing to run against him.
• A senior House progressive who said they've gotten a lot of calls told us there is a "0.0%" chance of Jeffries not securing the gavel.

Zoom in: An incoming House Democrat told us they are "getting inundated" and have received "about 150" calls since the election urging them not to vote for Jeffries.

• A senior House Democrat said they received "over 500" calls in the last two days, telling us they also got asked about it in-person at a Chamber of Commerce meeting in their district.
• "I think our numbers are higher" than 500, said another House Democrat. "It's our No. 1 issue, and it's not close."

A Democratic chief of staff who said their office got "about 300" calls told us: "Lots of people are saying make Jamie Raskin speaker."

• Raskin has expressed no interest in mounting a bid. A spokesperson for his office declined to comment.

The intrigue: One House Democrat, who said they've "gotten between 300-400" calls, told us actor Mark Ruffalo's post on X calling for "a new speaker" has been driving much of the outreach.

Go deeper

— Andrew Solender

The four most persuasive ads from Democrats' top Senate super PAC accused Republicans of protecting sexual abusers, according to internal testing we've obtained.

Why it matters: Democrats turned Republicans' 2024 demands to release the Jeffrey Epstein files against them, using accusations of protecting sexual predators to erode trust in the GOP, even in deep-red states.

• "Anger over the Iran War, corruption, and costs drove the election, and the vast majority of our communications focused on showing voters how the Republican candidate abandoned their state's interest," Senate Majority PAC spokesperson Lauren French told us.
• "Communications on Epstein or actions to protect child predators were especially effective as a tandem message to further erode trust in Republicans," she said.

Zoom in: One ad hit Texas GOP Senate nominee Ken Paxton over a plea deal offer he worked on for a sexual abuser. It persuaded voters toward Democratic nominee James Talarico by an estimated 10.6 percentage points, according to internal SMP analysis by Blue Rose research provided to Axios.

• Another featured a Republican, church-going voter, saying Paxton "even let a child sex abuser with ties to his rich friends off the hook. That's not a man of God."
• In Kansas, two ads hit Sen. Roger Marshall (R) over the Epstein scandal, accusing him of accepting money from Epstein associates and voting against releasing the Epstein Files.

Read more

— Stef Kight