Zac Schultz:
From Wisconsin to Washington, we’re looking ahead to the impact of a new Democratic majority in the House of Representative. And we’re joined by author and Washington Post associate editor. David Maraniss. Thanks for your time today.

David Maraniss:
Absolutely Zac.

Zac Schultz:
Now right after the election you wrote this on Facebook about the Democrats returning to power in the House. “The infusion of women and young diverse representatives brings new energy to the capitol that will transform it in ways we can’t fully appreciate yet. We’ve seen the house change hands twice in the last decade. What makes this time different in your opinion?

David Maraniss:
I think it was magnitude of the change which reminded me of 1994 from the opposite end of the spectrum. You know, history might not repeat itself but it rhymes and I think people underestimated then 22, 24 years ago what a vast difference it would be when Gingrich and the Republicans took control of the House. I think this one will be comparable. A lot of people on election night — a lot of Democratic supporters were depressed that Andrew Gillum lost in Florida and Stacy Abrams lost in Georgia and Beta O’Rourke lost in Texas. But I was trying to point out that what was going on in the House was really the key in so many ways. As not just a check on the Trump administration and its foibles but also in terms of where the energy would be in Washington from then on, starting in January.

Zac Schultz:
We’ve already heard some of these young Democrats, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from New York. Some of these have already become household names and we’ve never even heard of them before some of these primaries.

David Maraniss:
Well that’s true but the biggest household name is the one that some people were hoping would go away. Others knew would stay for valid reasons, and that was Nancy Pelosi. I think she exerted herself in a way in a last three weeks that showed how you can accommodate both the new voices and the people that know how to get things done in Washington at the same time. So it’ll be an interesting to watch that transition. So far she’s handled it very successfully. Not only with her own Democratic colleagues, but in her visit to the White House the other day.

Zac Schultz:
We definitely saw her putting on a show in the White House with Trump and with Chuck Schumer. Now, most people are thinking about the Democrats in the House focused solely on their ability to provide a check on Donald Trump. But what should we be looking for beyond that that won’t maybe be the banner headline in the newspaper?

David Maraniss:
Well I think there will be not just — on the whole Trump administration. You have to remember that the Russia scandal and all of the things surrounding that are just really one sort of grievous part of what’s been going on in this administration. And so you will find for the first time, actual checks on a wide range of environmental and regulatory policy that the Trump administration has tried to roll back. You will find investigations in all those other areas and ways to push back on the deregulation of the environment essentially. So I think that’ll be very important. They will also, of course, pass their own bills on things related to campaign finance and things like that. Those won’t go anywhere for at least two years but it will be more of an initiative at least to talk about those issues again.

Zac Schultz:
And that’s what’s interesting. I think we’re going to hear a lot about scandal over the next couple of years and that will dominate headlines but laying the ground work of what they actually want to do if they came to complete power again is almost just as important in the long run.

David Maraniss:
It is. I think the House will be the voice of that. At least for this first session of this new Congress. Then as the 2020 campaign unfolds, it will be the candidates who want to be the Democratic nominee who will sort of takeover that voice. But below the surface or at the surface of actual policy, I think you can’t underestimate what this Democratic-controlled House will be able to do to push back on what’s been going on in Washington.

Zac Schultz:
Now you’ve talked about the importance of the Republican wave of 1994 but that was preceded by 1992’s “year of the woman” and Bill Clinton. And 2018 has also been called the “year of the women.” So what’s to say there isn’t another Republican wave coming in two or four years that could wipe out this class?

David Maraniss:
It could happen. Probably not in two years but possibly in four years, if a Democrat becomes president. But as the — I think this is the century of the women, not just the year of the women. So — and the century of a very diverse population in America take — finally grabbing some more power. And so I think as the years progress, the retrograde actions of conservative Republicans have really boxed themselves into a corner by refusing to allow diversity of any sort and pushing on issues that sort of confine them to this one group of aging white people. The possibilities for a real retrograde or backlash to that diminish year by year, decade by decade over this century, I think.

Zac Schultz:
All right. David Maraniss in Washington, thanks for your time.

David Maraniss:
Thank you, Zac.