Democrats Won Congress. Now They Have to Deliver Accountability.

Democrats have won control of both the House and Senate. Some races are still being counted, but voters have ended Republican control of Congress and given the incoming Democratic majorities a chance to check Donald Trump’s power. I think that’s a huge win for democracy. What makes it matter is what they do when they take office in January.¹

The morning after an election like this, it’s tempting to close the laptop and feel that we’ve done our part. I understand the relief. But voting a party into power is also the beginning of a job for the people who elected it. We need to know what our representatives will investigate, what records they’ll demand, and what they’ll do when an official refuses to cooperate.

My first demand is a serious accounting of the Trump administration’s conduct. Preserve the records, subpoena the documents, put officials under oath, and follow the evidence through the people who gave the orders and the people who carried them out. Investigations should have public schedules and produce findings people can read. When lawmakers uncover evidence of crimes, they should make criminal referrals and pursue every lawful way to get that evidence before prosecutors.

Where the evidence supports impeachment, Democrats should impeach. Where prosecutors can prove crimes, they should bring charges. Officials convicted of offenses that warrant imprisonment should go to prison. Having held high office should make the public interest in accountability greater, and it should never be a reason to avoid a case.

Those steps require sustained work. The House can impeach, but conviction and removal require two-thirds of the senators present. Criminal prosecution runs through prosecutors and courts. The Supreme Court’s 2024 immunity ruling also created substantial barriers to prosecuting presidential conduct classified as official, while leaving unofficial conduct outside that immunity. A congressional majority gives Democrats tools they can use immediately. It also gives them a responsibility to explain where they encounter a legal obstacle and what they’re doing about it.²

I don’t want a promise to let the country “heal” by abandoning that work. If an official used public power to commit a crime, the people harmed deserve to see the evidence examined and the case pursued. An election changes who holds office. It doesn’t settle what happened to them.

We should ask Democratic officials for commitments we can check. Which inquiry will they open? When will the first hearing happen? What records have they requested? If a committee finds evidence of wrongdoing, when will it publish its findings? A fundraising email about defending democracy should be followed by work we can point to. And when our own representatives stall, we should be willing to challenge them in a primary.

The same accountability should apply to the rules that got them elected.

I want us to abolish the Electoral College and choose the president through a national popular vote. A voter should have an equal say whether they live in Oregon, Pennsylvania, or Texas. Getting there through an amendment proposed by Congress requires two-thirds of both chambers and ratification by three-fourths of the states. That’s a long campaign, which is a reason to start building it now. Democratic officials can introduce the amendment, put their names behind it, and organize support in state legislatures.³

I also want ranked-choice voting, so voters can rank candidates in order of preference. In the usual version used to elect one person, if nobody wins an initial majority, the lowest candidate is eliminated and their ballots move to each voter’s next remaining choice. That gives someone more room to support a candidate outside the two major parties while still expressing a preference among the candidates who remain.⁴

To give additional parties a stronger chance of winning seats in Congress, I’d pair ranked ballots with districts that elect several representatives proportionally. Voters with different views could then help elect different representatives from the same district. Versions of this approach have already been proposed in the Fair Representation Act. Adopting it would require changing the federal requirement for single-member House districts.⁵

Democrats would have to accept more competition themselves. I want them to. If they believe their policies will improve people’s lives, they should be willing to win votes for those policies in a system that gives people more choices.

For now, the next call to a representative’s office can be specific. Ask what they will do first to investigate the administration, where they stand on impeachment, and whether they’ll back electoral reform that could loosen the 2 parties hold on power. Write down the answer and follow up after they take office. Yesterday’s vote gave them the authority to act. We need to make sure they use it.

Notes

1. Associated Press, “Democratic Sweep of Congress Ushers in a New Era as Trump Acknowledges Impact of the Iran War,” November 4, 2026. National Archives, Twentieth Amendment, sec. 1.

2. U.S. Senate, “About Impeachment.” National Archives, U.S. Constitution, art. I, sec. 3. Supreme Court of the United States, Trump v. United States, July 1, 2024.

3. National Archives, U.S. Constitution, art. V, and “Electoral College History.”

4. Congressional Research Service, Ranked-Choice Voting: Legal Challenges and Considerations for Congress, October 12, 2022.

5. U.S. Congress, House, Fair Representation Act, H.R. 3863, 117th Cong., introduced June 14, 2021. Congressional Research Service, Election Policy Fundamentals: Single-Member House Districts, January 12, 2024.