Jim Jordan: The Perfect Speaker for a Policy-Free GOP

As long as the Republican Party is a policy-free zone, Jordan might as well be the guy in charge.

Sometime this afternoon, Rep. Jim Jordan (R–Ohio) might be elected the next Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Or he might not. Honestly, it's impossible to tell right now.

If he does—and, actually, even if he doesn't—it will be a fitting culmination for the current era of conservative politics in Washington: An era defined not by lawmakers with big ideas and impressive policy accomplishments, but much of the opposite. As long as the Republican Party is a policy-free zone, Jordan might as well be the guy in charge.

For someone on the brink of being speaker, Jordan has a remarkably shallow track record. He's been in Congress since 2007 but has passed exactly zero bills into law, as House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has become fond of pointing out. The Washington Post's Aaron Blake writes that other, more comprehensive, metrics of legislative effectiveness point to similar conclusions. According to the Center for Effective Lawmaking, a joint project of the University of Virginia and Vanderbilt University, Jordan has been one of the five least effective Republicans over the past four Congresses, Blake notes.

There is, of course, plenty of merit in stopping bad ideas from becoming law—something that doesn't show up in these sorts of rating systems—and it is in that area where Jordan has arguably excelled as a lawmaker. This is, after all, the same man who was once described as a "legislative terrorist" by former Speaker John Boehner—a fellow Republican.

Jordan's tenure in Congress has been defined by his ability to navigate the choppy and chaotic waters of contemporary Republican politics. That's no small feat considering how topsy-turvy the party has gone over the nine terms that Jordan has served. And he's now got the thing that likely matters more than any legislative accomplishment could: the endorsement of former President Donald Trump.

Jordan has been an unabashed supporter of Trump for years. He played a key role in defending Trump during his first impeachment, then was one of the dozens of Republican lawmakers who went along with Trump's plot to overturn the results of the 2020 election. When Trump was impeached a second time for that incident, Jordan again delivered a fiery criticism of the effort.

One might conclude that it is not legislative accomplishments, but fealty to Trump that has elevated Jordan within Republican politics. But, no, that's not quite right, either, because it overstates the distinction between those two things. Lacking a substantial policy agenda for much of the past decade, the strongest organizing principle within the GOP has become Trump himself—and Jordan has hewed closely to that principle.

To be clear, this is a problem that goes well beyond Jordan and today's speakership election. But you can't understand Jordan's potential ascendancy without that dynamic. When the GOP voted in 2020 to abolish its party platform in favor of going along with whatever Trump wanted, it was treated as a bit of a joke. In retrospect, it remains deeply telling.

For a normal political party in more normal times, Jordan's would be regarded as an obviously unorthodox path to the speakership. Historically, lawmakers elected to leadership positions are expected to lead, but it's not clear what direction Jordan is aiming to go.

Perhaps the best way to understand how the Republican Party has evolved over the past decade is to contrast this moment with another fractious speakership fight that broke out when the GOP controlled the House in 2015.

With John Boehner resigning from the top post and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R–Calif.) unable to secure enough votes from the party's right flank—it wouldn't be the last time that happened to him—the Republican caucus turned then-Rep. Paul Ryan (R–Wis.) as a compromise candidate. Ryan did not want the job at first but was eventually persuaded to lift the gavel.

They turned to Ryan in that moment of uncertainty because he was a guy with ideas. Most famously, he'd drawn up plans to balance the budget and overhaul the welfare system, something that even Ryan's critics admitted showed serious policy chops.

Yes, much of Ryan's tenure as speaker was a failure—especially with regard to the budget and deficit issues that he cared so much about as a backbencher. And there is the chance, no matter how slim it may look right now, that Jordan turns out to be exactly the right man for this job. As with most things about Congress, it's best to have an open mind and a sense of humor regarding whatever happens next.

Still, it's telling when Republicans needed a leader nine years ago, they turned to someone like Ryan: a politician with big, yet undeniably conservative ideas. Today, under similar circumstances, they may select a new leader who is known for being in some ways the opposite of that.

Jordan may turn out to be a fine speaker, but his election will be another telling signal that Republicans have abandoned any pretense about pursuing policy.