The phrase, “don’t let perfect be the enemy of the good,” is often traced back to the great French philosopher Voltaire.
But I first heard this wisdom from the great New Jersey philosopher, Wilma Stein Tisch.
Wilma – known to her friends as Billie – is my mom, who was raised in Asbury Park. She constantly reminded me and my brothers that making something a little better, even if it wasn’t perfect, was preferable to doing nothing at all.
If only America’s 535 members of the U.S. House and Senate would heed my mother’s advice.
Like petulant playground children, too many members are willing to take their ball and go home if they don’t get 100% of what they want in a negotiation. It’s an attitude Billie would never tolerate, and neither would the greatest leaders in American history, who understood that compromise is a prerequisite for a working democracy.
If you remember your Civics, America was founded thanks to “The Great Compromise” in 1787. Delegates to the Constitutional Convention agreed that one legislative body (the House) would award representatives based on population, pleasing the large states. Another (the Senate) would award two senators to each state, pleasing the small ones. Were any of America’s founders totally satisfied with this arrangement? No. But they set aside their differences in the service of the larger goal of creating a workable Congress and a country.
If we want our leaders to follow Billie’s wisdom and that of our Founders, it helps to understand what’s standing in the way.
It starts with a primary election system that rewards the most radical and intransigent candidates in both parties. Only about 20% of eligible voters votein primaries, and in many districts, turnout is under 10%. Even worse, these primaries are the only elections that matter for most members of Congress. Two decades ago, well over 100 House districts were considered swing seats, where both Democratic and Republican candidates had a chance to win the general election. Now, thanks to both parties’ increasingly blatant gerrymandering and Americans’ self-sorting into more politically homogeneous communities, and only 27 of 435 House races were considered swing seats before the 2024 election. It’s one reason why over 90% of incumbent House members regularly win their reelections. The general election is now just a “constitutional formality” for most members, according to former Virginia Rep. Tom Davis. Spending on House and Senate races has more than doubled since 2016. Is anyone in America happy with the return on investment?
Within both major parties, there are now two distinct – but dominant – forces that punish any members who do not adhere to the party line.
In the Republican Party, President Trump’s Truth Social account serves as the primary enforcement mechanism. A case in point:
On June 28, North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis announced he would not vote for the president’s One Big Beautiful Bill. Hours later, Trump announced he would start meeting candidates to run against Tillis in his 2026 Senate primary. On June 29, Tillis announced he would not seek reelection.
Over a few short days, we saw a respected senator’s career end for the sin of crossing the president.
On the Democratic side, enforcement in primaries is more diffuse but no less powerful. Discipline is meted out by a lavishly funded network of activist groups, which in recent years increasingly forced Democratic candidates and officeholders to embrace radical policies – such as defunding the police and decriminalizing border crossings – that are anathema to most voters. Many of these groups get their funding from a shadowy consulting outfit called Arabella Advisors, which accepts massive anonymous donations and distributed $1.5 billion in 2023 alone. Talk to Democratic members of Congress, and they’ll often speak in hushed tones about how “the groups” enforce conformity across the party.
There is no single silver bullet for this primary election problem, but a few fixes are no-brainers. For example, today, 16 states – featuring 117 congressional districts – do not allow independent or unaffiliated voters to participate in party primaries. 16.5 million registered people live in these states, and they are almost totally disenfranchised and given no say in choosing their congressional representatives. The Let America Vote Act – cosponsored by Representatives Brian Fitzpatrick and Jared Golden – would prohibit states from shutting independents out of primaries. Congress should pass it tomorrow, at a moment when more Americans identify as independents than those who identify as Democrats or Republicans.
Voter turnout in primaries is also diminished by the often random primary election days that states hold, which can occur anywhere between March and September of an election year. Even well-informed voters might not know the day of their state’s primary. That’s why Congress should institute a National Primary Day for all House and Senate elections.
Another easy fix: Historically, states have only redrawn their congressional districts once every ten years after the Census. Now, of course, the Texas state legislature is attempting a rare mid-decade “gerrymander,” in the hope of redrawing district lines in a way likely to net Republicans five House seats in the 2026 midterm elections. It’s a blatant political power play. Both parties are guilty of gerrymandering, with Illinois being a particularly egregious example of a Democratic-controlled state that does it. At a minimum, Congress could and should pass a law that would allow states to redraw district lines only once every 10 years.
Of course, regardless of when or whether these reforms happen, America also needs more of our current leaders to have the courage to focus on the needs of most voters rather than the wants of their political bases. If it costs them their job, they can leave the office holding their head high. But they may also find that even primary voters will respond favorably to a leader who actually leads the way in helping to solve America’s defining challenges.
In this deeply polarized political moment, it’s easy to forget that the most consequential legislation – such as creating Medicare and passing the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s, securing Social Security in the 1980s, the Balanced Budget Act in the 1990s, and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security after 9/11 – was the byproduct of bipartisan cooperation. Washington needs to rediscover that spirit today before it’s too late. We could have immigration reform that secures our borders and creates a more rational and humane system for letting in immigrants and providing a path to legal status for those already here. We could have an “all of the above” energy strategy that maximizes traditional energy sources to power the AI revolution while incorporating more renewables to improve our environment. These two reform approaches would be supported by most American voters, according to poll after poll.
They would not give each party everything they want. They would not be perfect, but as Billie Tisch would no doubt say, “they would be good.” And “good” is a lot better than what we have now.