Dem
47
GOP
53
Don't say she didn't warn you. A couple of weeks ago, Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) hinted that the fight to pass Prop. 50 might be her last big rodeo. And yesterday, she made it official, releasing a 6-minute video framed as a letter to the people of San Francisco, whom she has represented in Congress for nearly 40 years.
Pelosi was cagey at the beginning of her career, and she remains cagey as the end draws near. Although she certainly laid the groundwork for this announcement, she went to great pains to keep the final decision a secret. Not only did she entrust only a few close advisers with the news, she also recorded two versions of the video linked above, one in which she said "I'm done" and another in which she said "I'm running again." Only she and that handful of close advisors knew which one was the real one.
If you do watch the video, Pelosi doesn't actually let the cat out of the bag until the last minute. Most of it is about the city and about the things that have been accomplished in the last 40 years, and not about her. Is that because her ego is in control enough that she does not need to make everything about Nancy Pelosi? Is it because it's more dramatic to wait until the end to reveal what the news is? Probably both, we'd say.
The reactions to the news, across the country, were exactly as you would expect. Democrats praised Pelosi and celebrated her career, with many of them using some version of the line "Those are big heels the Party will have to fill." Joe Biden was among those who were laudatory; there was some tension between him and Pelosi last year, inasmuch as she led the movement to oust him as the Democrats' nominee. However, they have either moved beyond that, or else he's a big enough man, and a classy enough person, that he concluded this was not the time for sour grapes.
Most Republicans kept quiet. They are not fans of hers, given her politics and the number of victories she scored as leader of the House Democrats. But they also realize that "retirement day" is not the time for cheap shots and petty personal attacks, and that indulging in such things is a bad look. Of course, the one Republican who doesn't feel that way (or doesn't know how bad it looks, or doesn't care how bad it looks) is Donald Trump. So, he blasted Pelosi:
I'm glad she's retiring. I think she did the country a great service by retiring. I think she was a tremendous liability for the country. I thought she was an evil woman who did a poor job, who cost the country a lot in damages and in reputation. I thought she was terrible.
Everybody knows that Trump and Pelosi hate each other, and they have frequently shot venom at each other in public. But just about any other person, no matter how much they hate Pelosi, would have stood back for 24 hours. It's truly remarkable that Trump has spent nearly 80 years in a cocoon of wealth, and culture, and education, and manners, and has not absorbed even the tiniest bit of class. Oh, well. You can't teach an old dog new tricks.
In the world of sports fandom, it is quite common to discuss and debate whether [STAR ATHLETE X] would have prospered so well if they had played their sport in some different era. For example, would Tom Brady have done as well in the 1970s and 1980s, when defenses could absolutely maul both pass catchers and quarterbacks? Would Babe Ruth have done as well in the 2020s, if he had to face relief pitchers and non-white players? Would Steph Curry have done as well in the 1960s, with no 3-point line?
One might do the same basic thing with Speakers of the House. For example, Sam Rayburn was legendary because he was great at navigating the fault lines between the factions (mostly, "Southerners" and "everyone else") that made up his large, Democratic majority. That skill would be rather less useful now, since the Democrats don't have a conservative Southern wing and a more liberal non-Southern wing anymore. Tip O'Neill was great at reaching across the aisle, and coming up with bipartisan bills that could get majority support. Also a less useful skill these days, since bipartisanship is either dead or on life support.
As a black-belt-level herder of cats, Pelosi was well suited to her era of narrow majorities and small margins of error, which is why she was able to steer some very important legislation through Congress, including Joe Biden's Build Back Better bill and, of course, the Affordable Care Act. Our guess is that her talents are more transferable to other eras than those of Rayburn or O'Neill, but that's just a guess. Of course, that assumes that male politicians of other eras would have taken a woman seriously, and many/most of them probably would not have.
Meanwhile, question for discussion: Is Nancy Pelosi the most powerful, and the most important, woman in the history of American politics? She certainly has a very strong case. Who would be the competition for those titles? Kamala Harris? Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)? Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)? Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD)? Rep. Shirley Chisholm (D-NY)? Rep. Jeannette Rankin (R-MT)? Eleanor Roosevelt? Hillary Clinton? Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins? It's hard to think of too many people who are even in the conversation.
We have no doubt that it was a difficult choice for Pelosi to step down, since she loves, loves, loves to be in the arena. But she also saw what happened to her good friend Feinstein, and decided she didn't want to risk it. So, she left while she was on top, having played a significant role in shepherding Prop. 50 to a big victory. Undoubtedly, Pelosi will remain available to Democratic leaders as a wise elder, and her fingerprints will be visible on the next several elections, even if, after January 3, 2027, they are the fingerprints of Ms. Nancy Pelosi, rather than Rep. Nancy Pelosi. (Z)