Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

A corps of future public servants, just waiting to be treated right on the Hill

Opinion

 Rep. Gwen Graham and interns

Congressional interns meet with then-Rep. Gwen Graham.

Courtesy James Liska

Liska is a government affairs consultant and former head of the congressional engagement program at The Washington Center for Internships and Academic Seminars.


Washington is once again playing its quadrennial game of political musical chairs. And, although the makeup of Congress is not as different as some projected, the House and Senate membership includes plenty of new faces — and, with them, a host of new staff.

With this new Congress comes ample opportunity for the institution to improve and become more efficient. A significant amount of thought leadership has been done on this topic, most notably by the perennial efforts of the Congressional Management Foundation, but it's seemed to pick up steam the last few years. The genuinely bipartisan House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress, for example, has been given two more years to build on the 97 ways to modernize the place that it has already recommended.

These proposals seek to allay a wide array of concerns — about financial inefficiencies, antiquated internal processes, delayed efforts at diversity and inclusion, decades-old procedures and the paucity of opportunities for members to interact with one another informally.

But so far one element key to a functional Congress has gone unaddressed: internships.

Like so many D.C. organizations, Congress cannot function effectively without interns. Answering the phones, running bills and other papers to the floor, gathering co-signers on letters, leading Capitol tours — the members and their committees rely on interns for mission-critical functions every day.

Not all these duties are savory, either. They include getting screamed at by constituents, remaining on Capitol Hill at all hours and enduring repetitive tasks like slicing open envelopes or collating and stapling reports.

And sadly, as the events of Jan. 6 made clear, interns are no less shielded than members and paid staff from real and potentially life-threatening danger.

Yet in the work of the Modernization Committee over the past two years, internships have been mentioned only once. And it was in passing, not in reference to any reform or analysis of self-improvement. So as the panel gets back to work — with Republican William Timmons of South Carolina newly taking the top Republican seat next to Chairman Derek Kilmer, a Washington Democrat — the role and treatment of interns must be addressed.

"It's not 100, but 97 is still an A," Kilmer said last fall about the committee's roster of recommendations so far. So here are three more that would make it a perfect score:

Pay all Hill interns. Provide them with additional resources before and after their internship. And create a standardized framework for internships.

All interns must be paid. Full stop. Entry-level experience in Congress should not solely be for the wealthy and privileged. And as anyone who has interned on the Hill knows, it's real work with real responsibility. While living in one of the most expensive cities in the country, unpaid interns are forced to watch every cent they spend. Aside from living in cramped group houses, student dorms or a relative's basement, some walk miles a day to get to work — or else endure commutes from suburbs almost two hours away. And believe it or not, some interns who support our nation's policymakers may face food insecurity.

By paying all interns, Congress can ensure these crucial parts of a member's office are treated as such and are able to focus 100 percent on the work at hand.

Paying interns is not a new concept, and there have been some major victories in recent years. Momentum is building to change the way internships are viewed on an institutional level thanks to the great work done by Pay Our Interns and College to Congress. Although some internships are now funded many still are not — including those at committees. The ball remains in Congress' court to widen the pool of funds so all interns can receive a fair salary for their often Herculean efforts.

Internships aren't just boxes to be checked; they should be launchpads for careers in public service and so they should be designed as such. So the Chief Administrative Officer's office and House Administration Committee should create a set of internship standards for the House including a set of baseline duties (constituent correspondence, answering phones and drafting policy memos, for example), a required orientation to Capitol Hill logistics and etiquette, the option of a confidential post-internship exit interview with the CAO — and mandatory training for intern coordinators.

This is not intended to standardize all internship experiences, because each office has its own rhythm and needs. It could provide a benchmark for interns to use in measuring their experience, however, while guiding offices on how to properly treat and empower interns. By emphasizing training and education, Congress can help make the internship experience more fulfilling for many more young people.

Finally, as an additional investment in those seeking a career in public service, any college student spending a whole semester in the Capitol should get expanded benefits during and after their internships These could include special access to the Congressional Research Service, limited access to the Hill's primary care services, commuting subsidies, a special speakers' series and access to learning programs like the Congressional Staff Academy.

One goal of the so-called Mod Com, also known as the Fix Congress Committee, has been to fight brain drain and staff turnover. Enhancing the intern experience with fair wages, expanded resources and standardized training for both the students and the aides who supervise them will do plenty to bolster congressional staff capacity — which will strengthen the institution.

If we commit to a diverse intern corps that's empowered, paid, supported and respected, we can continue to improve Congress and make it more efficient, effective and truly reflective of the people it serves.


Read More

US Capitol building
The United States Capitol building with its white dome against a blue sky

Would Congressional Term Limits Make Congress Better—or Worse?

Starting in the 1990’s, the idea of putting term limits on members of Congress became a recurring idea to reform the institution and improve democracy. The idea was born out of the theory that replacing the current crop of legislators with a new batch would produce a better Congress. More than 30 years later we now have quantitative and qualitative data showing the impact of term limits.

Twenty-one state legislatures have enacted some kind of term limit on legislators since 1990. Since then, dozens of academic studies have examined the impact on such factors as: complexity of legislation, influence of lobbyists and staff on legislative outcomes, and interactions with constituent. Here are some key findings.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand points to the word tax on a screen

Data calculations

Getty Images

Inconvenient Numbers Are a Sign the System Works

Earlier in October, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that consumer prices rose 3.7 percent over the past year, a little higher than the month before, with gasoline accounting for more than half of September's increase. Rising prices are the kind of news no incumbent politician wants weeks before an election. The report was published anyway, on schedule. That is the quiet discipline of a trustworthy statistical system. It tells us what is true even when the number is unwelcome to whoever holds power.

So, do Americans trust government data? We do. But that trust is incomplete, and it has room to grow.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less