BY MICHAEL S. JOHNSON  |  JAN 10, 2026

The year was 1981. Several of us were with our dear friends Ralph and Mary Vinovich at a dinner in Cheverly, MD, a small hamlet in Prince George’s County where we lived. The dinner sponsor had invited candidates campaigning for their party’s primary nomination to replace Congresswoman Gladys Noon Spellman, the victim of a tragic car accident, to mingle with the audience for a brief period.

One of the candidates approached our table and bluntly but politely asked if there were any Democrats at the table.

“No,” came our reply.

“Do you mind if I move on then?” the candidate asked. We all said, no, not at all. We understood the politics of party primaries and the time wasted in seeking the support of those who couldn’t vote for you.

We didn’t recognize the candidate, at least I didn’t, and it was pretty clear he didn’t know us.

That candidate was Steny Hoyer and he went on to win that solidly Democratic seat in Congress.

Hoyer, who announced his retirement last week, would claim that seat for 45 years. In all he can boast a 60-year career in politics.

At the time of that dinner Vinovich was the Chief of Staff to the newly elected Republican Leader of the House, Bob Michel from Illinois. I was Michel’s press secretary. Those were different times.

Hoyer and Michel served on opposite sides of the political aisle for the next 14 years. I came to admire Hoyer as he rose in stature in the Democratic caucus.

Thirty-six years later Hoyer had become a Great Dane, one of the gentle giants of the House, having served as chairman of the Democratic Caucus, Democratic Whip, and Majority Leader. Watching him up close I saw what he had in common with Michel. They may have been on opposite sides, but they were similar in character and understood the value of compromise and civility.

Hoyer wasn’t a bomb thrower, an extremist, a revolutionary or bitterly partisan. He was approachable and willing to work on both sides of the aisle. He knew his way around the legislative process and was grateful for his time in the House. He was and remains a man of the institution.

It was no surprise then when he took to the House Floor in February 2017 to honor Michel who had just passed away at the age of 93.

“I rise to honor one of the most decent, patriotic Americans with whom I have ever served,” he said. “…. what Bob Michel represented…was the best of us… “When we lost the majority in 1994 I lamented the fact that Bob Michel did not become the Speaker of the House,” Hoyer said “…America would be a more civil place today and this body would be a more collegial body…the House would be a better House if we followed the example of Bob Michel.”

Michel would have said much the same about Hoyer on the announcement of his retirement, praising him for his integrity, legislative skill, leadership, loyalty to the House, and dedication to the ideals of honorable public service.

Hoyer’s retirement announcement to his colleagues in the House reflected all of that and it bears repeating, respecting, and emulating.

“Shakespeare advised us all,” Hoyer said: “’This above all else: to thine own self be true, and it must follow as night the day, thou canst not then be false to any man, or to any woman.’ In that vein, Mr. Speaker, I have decided not to seek another term in the People’s House. I make this decision with sadness, for I love this House – an institution the Founders designed to reflect the will of the American people and to serve as the guardian of their liberty and their democracy.”

“Through the past 45 years,” Hoyer recalled, “I have come to know many good, decent, patriotic Members chosen by their neighbors to represent them. They come from both parties and all parts of the ideological spectrum. The Congress I entered in 1981 was somewhat different. Most Republicans and Democrats worked together in a collegial, productive way. The leaders of the House, Tip O’Neill, and Bob Michel, fostered that environment. It was, of course, not a Congress without conflict…At the outset, I said that I spoke with reluctant conviction. That reluctance is because I am deeply concerned that this House is not living up to the Founders’ goals. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to examine their conscience, renew their courage, and carry out the responsibilities that the first article of the Constitution demands.

“Only in that way can we ensure that our 250 years will be a preface to a stronger, brighter beacon in a free and principled democracy. A nation of laws, not of men. A nation respected around the world – for its strength, certainly. But, even more, for the ideals it represents, and the justice with which it acts. That effort must extend beyond this House.

“I fear that America is heading not toward greatness, but toward smallness, pettiness, divisiveness, lawlessness, and disdainfulness. We must respect and love one another. We must remember that we are not great or unique because we say we’re great, but because we are just and generous and fair. I hope that spirit can guide us the rest of this Congress…”

Glittering prose reflecting the wisdom of age and experience.

Hoyer’s career gifted him a front-row seat to a half-century of history. Through it all he sought consensus when it was possible and he wasn’t hesitant to strike a partisan posture when it was not. Whatever the case, he was civil and deeply committed to his principles, occasionally at the expense to his career. Although some of his detractors may have thought him Democrat-lite, I didn’t think he was. He kept partisanship in its place, when others allowed it to suffocate consensus and collaboration.

I was a constituent of Congressman Hoyer for 10 years and a member of Michel’s staff for longer than that. I recall him working with Michel’s legislative guru Billy Pitts, who knew the House and its legislative nuances from a Republican perspective as well or more so than Hoyer from his. Their cooperation never made Hoyer any less a tenacious Democrat, but it did make him more of a pragmatic and solution-driven legislator.

Hoyer’s retirement may truly be the twilight of an era. Hoyer came to Congress in a time when members who were divided by partisan, geographic, social and cultural interests somehow managed to keep things civil while they either agreed to disagree and call it a day or burned the midnight oil looking for a resolution of their differences.

The disintegration today of that comity has crippled our governing process, which includes campaign politics. The decline has been occurring gradually but persistently. And at each juncture of change, bad behavior begot worse behavior.

Two decades ago, what was considered abominable is now pusillanimous namby-pamby politics. Pick a subject — lies, exaggeration, political and social violence, brutish behavior, expletives, abuses of rules, laws, protocols, and constitutional principles have all increased in volume and severity.

A Roger Ailes campaign ad that Mitch McConnell ran against incumbent Senator Walter Huddleston in 1984 featured bloodhounds sniffing the ground in search of Huddleston, who McConnel accused of spending too much time in Washington. It was considered scandalous in its negativity. Today, not so much. Partisan campaign negativity has reached a breaking point in its divisiveness and its dependency on character assassination and the emotional agitation and then exploitation of its audience.

President Trump’s entry into politics has put that disintegration on steroids with wanton behavior well outside the bounds of a civil society and unwelcome to large segments of the population that have a sense of morality, religiosity, ethics, decency, and humility. Those Americans generally align themselves with a system of government that only works if its component parts are checked and balanced and guided by the values that remain at the core of a democratic Republic now 250 years old and still a grand experiment in self-rule.

Trump has squandered any attraction he had to large swaths of the citizenry, despite successes in addressing in his way issues such as border security and crime on which he rode to the White House in 2024.

He has also paralyzed Congress.

Congress is the first branch of government and the first line of defense the people have against despotism. Trump has been able to bend Congress into a partisan pretzel by demanding and getting blind loyalty from those in Congress who believe in what he is doing or owe their election to the far right Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement. He has been able to do that in good measure because the Democratic minority in Congress are still wandering aimlessly in the fog of their own failures. Congress behaves like it has been confined to a state of suspended animation, and that helps explain why so many people are either walking away from politics or actually fearing it.

The numbers just aren’t there in Congress for anything but gridlock. The institution is locked in place by partisan division, for sure, but it is also paralyzed by extreme ideological division, which is underestimated and misconstrued as being the same as partisanship.

The numbers for majority rule by consensus can only be collected in the political center where partisans fear to tread. It’s like a no-fly zone, a minefield strewn with hazardous materials surrounded by a barbed-wire fence and a rusty placard at the gate that warns: ‘proceed-at-your-own-risk.’

Voters hold the key to the future, of course. They can change the dynamics that have disabled representative democracy and restore the balance of power among the branches of government. But voters today lack the civic knowledge and access to the system to be effective. Unfortunately, many also lack the will or the realization that they must change their own behavior, before they can change others.

Changing the behavior of both citizens and politicians is critical but it is also an imposing mountain to climb. My friend Jerry Climer (a fitting last name) and I wrote a book, Fixing Congress: Restoring Power to the People to help reverse those conditions. We believe with the right tools, civic education, a resurgence in civic engagement and a resolve to repudiate bad behavior and strident attitudes voters can make a difference.

I can’t speak for Hoyer, of course, but I would think he would agree. He holds out hope that the future need not be dark: “I fear that America is heading not toward greatness, but toward smallness, pettiness, divisiveness, lawlessness, and disdainfulness. We must respect and love one another. We must remember that we are not great or unique because we say we’re great, but because we are just and generous and fair. I hope that spirit can guide us the rest of this Congress…”

Hoyer indicated he would have more to say. We should all listen, learn and act in that spirit.