Nancy Mace: Why Pelosi Was "More Effective" Than Any GOP Speaker This Century

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) offered unexpected praise for former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in a New York Times op-ed, arguing that Pelosi was more effective than any Republican speaker this century. Mace — who is leaving Congress to run in a crowded Republican primary for South Carolina governor — used the essay to critique how House rules concentrate power, stifle rank-and-file input and make meaningful legislation difficult to pass.

Both lawmakers are departing the chamber: Pelosi announced she will not seek re-election, and Mace is running for governor. In an essay headlined "What’s the Point of Congress?" Mace reflected on her five years in Washington and described a legislative system that often rewards consolidation of power over accountability and achievement.

She wrote that a small group of lawmakers frequently craft major bills behind closed doors and present lengthy, multi-thousand-page measures with little time for review or amendment. Mace criticized tightly restricted amendments, the insertion of unrelated policy provisions, and leadership practices that silence rank-and-file members from both parties.

"Here’s a hard truth Republicans don’t want to hear: Nancy Pelosi was a more effective House speaker than any Republican this century," Mace wrote. "I agree with her on essentially nothing. But she understood something we don’t: No majority is permanent."

Mace contrasted Pelosi’s willingness to use a majority to advance a clear agenda with what she called Republican timidity when in power — passing only the most moderate measures to avoid losing the majority. She described Pelosi as "ruthless" but effective, and warned that Republican leaders risk replicating her centralization of power without matching her ability to deliver policy wins.

Mace also sounded a warning ahead of the 2026 midterms: despite holding a governing trifecta — the House, the Senate and the White House — Republicans could still lose their advantage if they fail to enact lasting solutions on key issues. She singled out border security, affordability, health care and public safety as areas where failing to act would imperil the majority.

Highlighting the procedural barriers to passing legislation, Mace pointed to the difficulty of securing the 218 votes required for a discharge petition — a tactic used, she noted, for the vote on the Epstein files — as evidence that even broadly supported measures can stall in today’s House.

Her essay is both a critique of institutional norms and an admonition to Republican leaders to translate control into tangible policy achievements rather than merely guarding power.