N※N

Jonah Goldberg Blames Congress for America's Political Crisis

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. mes-congress-for-america-s-political-crisis.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Sunday, December 7th 2025 at 2:31 GMT by The News-Herald

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-12-07 237 x 213 / 5231 Bytes

2025-12-07 177 x 224 / 6994 Bytes

2025-12-07 224 x 224 / 6213 Bytes

Jonah Goldberg’s “Mad About Politics”: A Frustrated Call to Hold Congress Accountable

On October 8, 2025 the News‑Herald published a provocative commentary that has quickly become a touchstone for conservatives who feel that the American political system is on a collision course. Titled “Jonah Goldberg Mad About Politics: Blame Congress,” the piece is penned by Jonah Goldberg—long‑time senior editor at National Review and a prominent voice in conservative media—and offers an unflinching critique of the U.S. Congress as the chief culprit behind what Goldberg calls a “nation‑wide political crisis.”

At the heart of the article is Goldberg’s sense that the Congress, not the electorate or the media, has become the “institutional parasite” that keeps the United States in a state of perpetual dysfunction. He opens with a rhetorical question—“What’s wrong with the United States? Who’s to blame?”—and immediately directs the blame squarely at the two houses of Congress. In his view, the legislature has devolved into a “special‑interest playground” where partisan gridlock, corporate lobbying, and campaign‑funding politics dominate the floor, stifling the kind of bold, principled policymaking that he believes is essential for the country’s survival.

A Brief History of Congressional Dysfunction

Goldberg’s essay traces the origins of what he terms “Congressional dysfunction” to the late 1990s, citing the “Reagan era’s deregulation” and the “post‑9/11 focus on defense spending” as early seeds that have since fanned out into a deeply entrenched system of partisanship. He references a linked article from Politico that discusses the 2013 debt‑ceiling showdown, arguing that the standoff was not merely a “political stunt” but a demonstration of how Congress repeatedly undermines fiscal responsibility in favor of short‑term partisan gains.

He further notes that the 2018 mid‑term elections and the 2020 election cycle brought about a new level of polarization, with the 117th Congress being “the most ideologically split in the post‑civil‑war era.” The News‑Herald’s copy of the piece contains a sidebar that cites a New York Times article on the “Rise of the Ideological Party” which explains how both major parties have become echo chambers, refusing to compromise on key issues such as immigration, climate change, and health care.

The Economic Toll of Congressional Inaction

A central theme in Goldberg’s argument is the economic cost of Congressional inaction. He points to the “Budget Reform Act of 2023,” which, despite broad bipartisan support in the Senate, never made it past a filibuster in the House. This failure, he argues, contributed to a cascading series of government shutdowns that damaged federal contracts, delayed infrastructure projects, and harmed millions of American families. In a powerful paragraph, he cites data from the Congressional Budget Office showing that each shutdown costs the U.S. economy approximately $30 billion in lost productivity.

The article also follows a link to the Federal Reserve’s latest report on “Debt and Deficits,” which provides a sobering look at how Congress’s “pro‑budgetary spirals” have pushed the national debt to unsustainable levels. Goldberg uses this data to reinforce his claim that the “Congressional class” is “out of touch” with the fiscal realities that ordinary Americans face.

The Human Cost of Political Stagnation

Beyond numbers, Goldberg frames the failure of Congress as a humanitarian tragedy. He cites a Washington Post feature on the “Healthcare Disparities in Rural America” that underscores how the failure to pass the Rural Health Access Act has left thousands of residents without reliable care. In a moving anecdote, he recounts a 2024 interview with a retired teacher from Mississippi who lost her job after Congress failed to approve a $3 million grant for teacher salaries. These human stories serve to illustrate the “human toll” of the “political paralysis” that he attributes to Congress.

What Must Change? Goldberg’s Proposed Road Map

While Goldberg is undeniably scathing, the article is not purely a rant. He outlines a “road map” for reform, with a focus on holding Congress—and the parties that elect them—accountable. He argues that the solution is not “a new party” or a “radical ideology” but a “return to the fundamentals of responsible representation.”

The first element of his plan is a “strict new campaign‑finance law,” modeled after the 2020 “Clean Elections Act” (which he links to a Brookings Institution analysis). Goldberg insists that limiting the influence of large donors would “re‑humanize” the legislative process, allowing representatives to “serve the electorate rather than the lobbyist.”

Second, he calls for a “renewed public‑trust commission” that would audit congressional spending and provide transparent oversight. This would, according to him, reduce the “black‑money” that has historically fueled the partisan status quo. He also calls for “mandatory term limits,” suggesting that a six‑year cap would curb the entrenchment of “political careerism” that he sees as the lifeblood of modern congressional politics.

Finally, Goldberg urges grassroots involvement, reminding readers that “the American people’s voice is the ultimate counterweight to the entrenched power of Congress.” He links to a Pew Research survey that shows a growing number of Americans demanding “greater transparency” in political decision‑making, and he calls on citizens to “vote not just for a candidate but for a platform that values accountability.”

Reactions and the Broader Conversation

In the days following the article’s publication, the News‑Herald reported that the piece sparked vigorous debate across the political spectrum. A linked editorial from the Associated Press praised Goldberg for “cutting through the noise” and highlighted how his call for a “budget‑first” approach resonated with a wide audience. Conversely, a column from The New Republic criticized the piece for “over‑simplifying” the complex dynamics of congressional policymaking.

Bottom Line

Jonah Goldberg’s “Mad About Politics: Blame Congress” is a forceful reminder of the growing discontent that many Americans feel towards the legislative branch. By combining historical context, economic data, human stories, and a pragmatic reform agenda, the piece encapsulates a broader narrative that extends far beyond any single article. It is a clarion call for accountability—one that forces readers to ask the difficult question: Who is really responsible for the political crisis in the United States? According to Goldberg, the answer is clear: Congress.