New Year, New Congress? Not so much.

Image from CNN's Political Ticker

This week, with all the expected pomp and tradition, the newly-elected 114^th Congress convened for the first time. Not only were 13 new Senators and 58 new Representatives sworn in, but both houses of Congress are also in Republican control for the first time since 2006. With a fresh crop of legislators, the Republican Party has the potential to really change things up, set the political agenda for the next two years—and make a case for a Republican president in 2016.

Things started to get interesting prior to January 6^th, and the upcoming vote for House leadership, when a small, but significant group of representatives announced they would not be voting for John Boehner for Speaker of the House. Boehner has held the position of Speaker since 2011, and successfully held off a dozen party defectors in 2013. The list of Republicans joining the “dump Boehner” wagon grew to 25, with representatives taking to Facebook to announce their petition for a new Speaker. Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) wrote on Facebook: “A fresh start often requires change, and I believe that change should start with the election of a new Speaker.” Ultimately, however, the conservative scheme failed, with a majority of House Republicans confirming Boehner.

And here we get to the crux of the matter—can a Congress really be “new” if all the leaders are the same? Sure, we have 71 new legislators, but they are all beginners—inexperienced and unlikely to have a lot of influence. Congress’ organization is all about hierarchy. Representatives with the most experience—and time in office—get spots on the most powerful committees and the committee leadership positions. First-time congressmen and women won’t be given the plumb positions because they don’t have the connections and they haven’t proved themselves capable legislators yet.

A fiery member of Congress will probably get amplified by the media and become a maverick favorite, but at the end of the day, leadership positions really do matter. Congressional leaders have a tremendous amount of influence. In the House, Committee heads determine which bills actually make it past the committee to the Rules Committee for a vote. The Rules Committee is the most powerful committee in the House by far. It controls many aspects of how the House runs—from how long representatives have to discuss a bill on the floor, to how many bills can come up for vote each day—and even which bills get voted on at all. The Speaker essentially controls this committee by supporting favorable representatives to fill its slots. Boehner’s power was in full display when he confirmed that the Rules Committee had agreed to vote out two of its members who acted against Boehner—Rep. Daniel Webster (R-Fla.) and Rep. Richard Nugent (R-Fla.).

Although Boehner’s retributive action hasn’t been finalized, things don’t look good for his enemies in the House. And it doesn’t look like we’re going to have a fresh perspective in either house of Congress. Not only was Boehner reconfirmed, but Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who served as Senate Minority Leader from 2007-2015, was also voted in as Senate Majority Leader. On the Democratic side, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) retained their powerful positions as well.

We should feel more than a little worried about leadership stagnation in Congress. Not only has this Congress passed fewer bills than any other Congress in recent history, but friction between members of Congress and President Obama has also led to Congress’ embarrassing approval ratings. Only 14% of Americans approve of Congress—and in August, for the first time, 51% of Americans revealed that they don’t approve of their own members of Congress. Yikes. The only way to reverse these trends is to welcome change and buck the status quo—starting with congressional leadership. Although Congress missed its opportunity to select new leaders, we can only hope that our representatives will commit to some New Years’ Resolutions: tackling the tough issues like Social Security and immigration, and compromising when it will lead to a better outcome for Americans.