In a New York Times op-ed titled “What’s the Point of Congress?” Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) shares her frustrations with the House of Representatives, recounting her experiences, describing institutional dysfunction, and calling for reform.
Mace opens her essay by writing, “I came to Congress five years ago believing I could make a difference for my constituents, for South Carolina and for a country I love deeply,” but she quickly shifts to a sweeping critique of House procedures, party leadership, and the institution overall. She raises concerns about closed rules, backroom negotiations, and a lack of transparency, but does so without offering concrete legislative solutions beyond the rarely-used discharge petition process.
Mace states that the House “has not considered a single open rule since 2016” and accuses both parties’ leaders of having “systematically silenced rank-and-file voices.” She lists policy ideas such as banning congressional stock trading, term limits, and voter ID laws, then complains the House cannot vote on them. But she does not say what bills she has introduced this term to support those policies or how she has voted on them, although she has recently introduced legislation to combat SNAP fraud through photo ID requirements and authored a resolution to censure Rep. Cory Mills over allegations of misconduct.
The op-ed takes a striking turn when Mace praises former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, declaring: “Nancy Pelosi was a more effective House speaker than any Republican this century.” Mace insists she disagrees with Pelosi “on essentially nothing,” but contends that Pelosi “understood something we don’t: No majority is permanent.”
She depicts Pelosi as “ruthless,” yet credits her for delivering results, noting that Democrats “ram through the most progressive policies they can,” while Republicans “become petrified of losing” their majority and instead pass “the most moderate policies we can pressure conservatives to accept,” which she frames as a betrayal of “the coalition that delivered us here.”
Mace writes that Speaker Mike Johnson is “better than his predecessor,” but argues that “women will never be taken seriously until leadership decides to take us seriously.” She calls the position of House Republican Conference chair “the token slot, the designated leadership role for the top woman in the conference, while the real power lies in other offices.” Referencing Rep. Lisa McClain by name, she adds, “I’m sure Lisa McClain, the current chair of the House Republican Conference, is a wonderful cook. I’d wager she’s an even better legislator. But we’ll never know, because that’s not the box she’s been assigned.”
The essay ends: “Let us vote. Let the people see. Let the chips fall. That’s democracy.” But much like the body of the op-ed, these closing lines lack specifics. There is no roadmap, no policy plan, no legislative vehicle offered. The message is less a call to action than an airing of frustrations without a strategy.
Mace’s decision to publish her op-ed in the New York Times, a mainstream outlet widely regarded as biased against Republicans, comes as she campaigns for governor of South Carolina and calls herself “Trump in heels.”
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), who recently announced she will resign from Congress, praised Mace’s op-ed as “masterfully written” and agreed with its claim that Republican women are not taken seriously. Greene has repeatedly criticized what she calls the “pissing contest in Washington D.C. between the men,” and has backed Mace’s push to force a vote on releasing the Epstein files using a discharge petition.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.