Center on Representative Government

Back in early October, as parts of the South were still reeling from Hurricane Helene’s impact and Hurricane Milton had begun its run toward Florida, House Speaker Mike Johnson gave an interview to Fox News. Even though the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, was facing possible staffing and funding shortages as it prepared to deal with both the short-term and long-term aftermath of the crises, Johnson said extra funding would have to wait until after the election.

In the midst of one of the most closely fought, tensest elections I can remember, it’s hardly surprising that a House speaker would take politics into consideration—even as ordinary Americans faced real hardship. But that moment also served as a potent reminder that in our system, the federal government’s ability to respond to everything from immediate crises to the country’s long-term needs rests in multiple hands—Congress’s just as much as the President’s.

Put another way, our nation’s ability to get things done depends in no small part on Congress’s ability to get things done. And with the elections approaching, that’s something to keep in mind as you look at the candidates. I’ve no doubt that this year in particular, you’ll be thinking about party and ideology. But I also hope you’ll look closely at temperament and political skills.

What do I mean by this? Skills include things like the ability to communicate—not just to speak persuasively, but to listen to and understand what others are trying to say. They include an ability to forge consensus among constituencies with different viewpoints. And they include the capacity to pull a diverse group of people together to focus on key problems, one of the most difficult tasks in politics. These aren’t just nice-to-haves. They’re vital to the functioning of our representative democracy. It takes true skill to create a functioning government that reflects the will of the people.

But temperament matters, too, because perhaps more than anything, I put the willingness and ability to forge compromise at the top of what Congress needs from its members. This has been true for our entire history. In the very first session of Congress, our forebears were confronted not just with a new form of government, but with the challenging question of how to make it work. The stakes were high, and members back then carried political agendas that were just as sharply divided and keenly felt as on Capitol Hill today. Yet even so, the historian Robert Remini once wrote, "The members disagreed at times, and even quarreled, but never to the point of creating irreconcilable factions within the House. This cooperation and harmony...was essential in the beginning.”

To my mind, it’s essential today, too. It may be too much to expect harmony, of course, but cooperation and compromise are part and parcel of making this country work. For years now, politicians have tended to sneer at compromise, at least in public. But for just as long, the reality on Capitol Hill has been narrowly divided chambers: Whichever party’s been in the majority, it’s had to take the other party into account. It may be fine to rally the base when you're campaigning, but when you actually have to legislate, scorched-earth tactics just alienate the people you need to work with.

We’ve seen where that gets us. Congress’s historically low standing in the polls stems from the widespread perception that it's unable to act, even in the face of immense challenges at home and abroad. Fixing this will require electing politicians who know how to build rapport with people of different political persuasions, who treat political adversaries with respect, and above all, who aren’t afraid to compromise and who know how to do it. We all have an interest in addressing our nation’s challenges, whether it’s unemployment, crime, immigration, or natural disasters. We need members of Congress who are willing to roll up their sleeves and show that they do, too.