The phrase “history repeats itself” is widely known and often used for various reasons.
It highlights recurring patterns in human behavior, social trends and historical or political events.
That’s where “Hamilton: An American Musical” comes in. The comparison for this analysis: Is history really repeating itself?
By examining a quote from the musical alongside a contemporary political story, we can explore whether the ideals, conflicts and ambitions that influenced the early republic are echoing in current events, or if what appears familiar is simply history’s rhyming, not its repetition.
To wrap up the column for the year, it is important to reflect on the institutions that govern us. So this week’s parallel comes from Congress facing growing instability due to a combination of resignations, scandals and institutional exhaustion, raising larger questions about whether the House of Representatives can still function as intended.
Over the past several weeks, lawmakers have been leaving Congress for very different reasons, yet together they point toward the same institutional problem. Representative Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick(FL-20) abruptly resigned just before a House Ethics Committee hearing tied to allegations that she misused millions in federal funds. Representative Cory Mills(FL-07) has said he will not step down, despite facing ethics investigations tied to misconduct allegations. Meanwhile, a broader wave of retirements continues as lawmakers increasingly share frustration with dysfunction, gridlock and the inability to govern effectively. Brookings recently described the trend as a sign of “deep institutional frustration,” as more members openly question whether Congress remains a place where meaningful work can happen.
That growing dysfunction reflects one of the most politically relevant lines in “Hamilton”: “Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.”
In the musical, the lyric appears during “Cabinet Battle #1,” where Hamilton and Jefferson weaponize policy disagreements in a fight over the country’s future. The line captures the reality that political decisions rarely exist in isolation. Every move creates consequences, sometimes immediate, sometimes delayed. That dynamic feels increasingly visible in Congress today.
For years, lawmakers have operated in an environment that rewards outrage over policymaking. Viral moments often carry more political value than bipartisan compromise. Fundraising incentives encourage confrontation, while party loyalty frequently outweighs institutional responsibility. Ethics investigations drag on for months or years, often becoming political spectacles. The reaction to those choices is now unfolding in real time.
Scandals have fueled resignations. Frustration has fueled retirements. Public trust in Congress remains deeply fragile. Experienced lawmakers are leaving, while institutional instability continues to grow. The very behaviors that helped some politicians survive politically may now be weakening the institution itself.
Congress spent years normalizing dysfunction, and now it is dealing with the consequences. That is where another “Hamilton” line quietly looms over this moment: “History has its eyes on you.”
The lyric serves as a warning in the musical that leadership decisions outlive political careers. The choices made in moments of instability shape how institutions are remembered long after the individuals involved are gone.
That warning feels particularly relevant now. Lawmakers are not simply navigating short-term political scandals. They are shaping the long-term credibility of one of America’s most important democratic institutions. When members resign before accountability fully plays out, public trust lowers. When lawmakers leave because they believe governing is no longer possible, the institution loses experience and stability.
The early republic faced the challenge of building institutions strong enough to survive political conflict. Modern Congress faces the opposite challenge, proving that those institutions are still strong enough to survive the people currently operating within them.
And that may be the lasting takeaway from both “Hamilton” and this column as a whole. History is not valuable because it predicts the future with perfect accuracy; it matters because it reveals patterns of human behavior, ambition and failure that remain deeply familiar.
The names change. The headlines change. The battles change.
However, the responsibility to learn from them remains the same.
History may not repeat itself exactly. But if we ignore its lessons long enough, it can become far easier to mistake warning signs for surprises.
