House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) sent lawmakers home early for the pre-election recess, prompting Democrats to brand the 118th Congress a “do-nothing” body with scant legislative achievements. Johnson fired back, calling this House the second most productive in history and the most productive in 80 years. But those claims are contested.
Legislative productivity depends on how you measure it. Johnson notes the House has passed over 900 bills, 700 of which are stalled in the Senate. Yet as of Aug. 31, only 111 of the 732 House-passed bills and joint resolutions that could become law had done so. A Washington Post analysis found the Democratic 115th Congress (2017–2018) enacted 580 laws, while the Republican 118th Congress (2023–2024) passed just 274—the fewest in recent memory.
Amid the competing numbers, the real question is what defines a Congress’s success. Nonpartisan groups argue that beyond the volume of laws, success should be judged by the budgetary impact of major legislation, the social change it produces, and how well members advance their agendas. Ultimately, the answer is subjective: perceptions of Congress are relative, and its success or failure is not easily quantified. Neither polls nor election results will settle the matter—only history will.
In a recent New York Times Magazine piece titled “How Congress Fell Apart,” longtime Congress watcher Robert Draper interviewed 30 current and former members from both parties and key staff. He concludes that the institution’s decline stems from a shift away from legislating toward social media pugilism. Rep. Dave Joyce (R-Ohio) said too many members view Congress as their “green screen” to build a brand, caring little else. Former Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.) described two business models: legislating and being a social media influencer. Rep. Julia Brownley (D-Calif.) noted that “scrappy fighters” now win over legislators, while Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), retiring after 22 years, said members are elected to fight the other side, not to work with it.
Yet Draper’s piece ends on a note of hope: a bipartisan housing bill that passed both chambers after tough bargaining. The legislation initially had President Trump’s support, though he cooled on it to prioritize his “SAVE America Act” election changes. Trump downplayed the housing bill as “of minor importance,” but Johnson persuaded him not to veto it, arguing it gave Republicans a strong economic message. After the Constitution’s ten-day layover, the “21st Century Road to Housing Act” became law without Trump’s signature.
Such bipartisan cooperation is rare today, but it shows members can still work quietly across the aisle. It may earn little public attention, but it stands as a significant measure of success for a Congress with few other bragging rights.
Don Wolfensberger, a 28-year congressional staff veteran and former chief of staff of the House Rules Committee, is author of “Congress and the People: Deliberative Democracy on Trial” and “Changing Cultures in Congress: From Fair Play to Power Plays.”
