Republicans have now gone through eleven failed rounds voting for a speaker. To sway holdouts, Republican Kevin McCarthy has made multiple concessions that would weaken him considerably in the role… if the holdouts ever vote for him. While it goes without saying this is terrible news for McCarthy, Jonah Goldberg at The Dispatch believes it might be good news for the country.

Goldberg’s conceit is a fascinating one. He posits that while powerful speakers can be effective, they can also be, and often are, problematic. They adopt a top-down approach to their agenda although voters’ concerns flow from the bottom up. Conference members from politically diverse districts find themselves locked into voting for bills they never in a million years would have proposed. As a result, they often lose their seats, and the nation is left more divided. 

On the other hand, according to Goldberg, weak speakers are beholden to their conference. With the conference negotiating the agenda, an array of policies can take the stage. Politics becomes more local, serving the district rather than the party leaders. And as voters see their concerns addressed, they regain faith in a system they previously feared had abandoned them.

As I said, it’s an interesting proposition. I’m not sure it holds true for Kevin McCarthy given all he’s surrendered and to whom he’s surrendered it. However, if moderate Democrats and Republicans come together to select a coalition speaker (who almost by definition would have to be weak), a halfway productive Congress seems possible. I’m not saying it’s likely, but no one thought eleven rounds of voting was likely either and look where we are.