Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

How to keep internships vital to a functioning Congress during Covid

Opinion

How to keep internships vital to a functioning Congress during Covid

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Jim Risch pose with interns after a July hearing. It is essential internships — even remote positions — remain available, according to Harris and Bhatia.

Pool/Getty Images
Harris, a former congressional intern and aide, is CEO of Popvox Inc., an information and resources platform for civic engagement and legislating. Bhatia is a legislative correspondent for Democratic Rep. Seth Moulton of Massachusetts and founder of the Modernization Staff Association.

Remote work is changing congressional internships, and that's not all bad news.

Remote internships are expanding opportunity and bridging the traditional gulf between Capitol Hill and members' offices in their districts, although they can be tough for offices — and interns — to navigate. Several organizations are stepping up to provide resources and support to ensure that offices are able to continue their internship programs in these exceptional times.

A recent webinar on managing successful remote internships in the era of Covid-19 — hosted by College to Congres s, the Congressional Management Foundation and the Modernization Staff Association — featured new research on the prevalence of remote internships, and a few surprising benefits. Remote work has "leveled the playing field" for staffers in D.C. and their colleagues in the field, a study by CMF revealed, and helped make interns and full time staff in the district feel more connected to the policy work occurring in Washington.

Today's interns are tomorrow's staffers. So it is essential these positions remain available, even remotely, both for the help they provide to offices and the important opportunity for young people to learn about Congress. Last year, the House took a significant step to expand the internship pipeline by authorizing $25,000 a year for every office to help pay interns. These stipends make it easier for students from a variety of backgrounds and economic situations to spend time on the Hill. And now the House has refined the rules to allow $10,000 annually in compensation for district office interns.

During the pandemic, though, most interns are limited to remote work, a development that may actually expand opportunities for students around the country to (virtually) experience Capitol Hill. In an example that may be applicable to Congress, NPR received 20,000+ applications for its internships this year — a tenfold increase over the year before that it attributed to the potential for remote interns to work from anywhere. As one producer tweeted, it's "almost like our industry's reliance on NYC- and DC-based jobs is reducing our potential talent pool."

The executive director of Pay Our Interns, Carlos Mark Vera, explains: "The vast majority of internship opportunities are concentrated in five cities across the country — Washington, New York City, San Francisco, Chicago and Los Angeles. That puts working class youth who cannot afford to relocate at a severe disadvantage and limits their opportunities. Capitol Hill internships are no different. Remote congressional internships can level the playing field by taking relocation and housing costs out of the equation, but it is still important for offices to pay interns. While those working remotely do not have the same expenses as an in-person internship, many still have to pay bills."

Hiring and managing remote interns can be challenging, however, and some offices chose to reduce or suspend their programs this summer. "The lack of interns has increased the workload of staff, particularly the constituent services team," CMF's Bradley Sinkhaus said. "One office mentioned that interns 'are invaluable in rural districts' and offices miss having interns to mentor and train."

A significant complication is the limitation on access to technology for unpaid House interns. Paid interns can be provided with official devices and remote access to the office network. But unpaid interns are not allowed to access personal constituent information, like correspondence or casework, if working from home.

Offices have been getting inventive in creating substantive remote programs that benefit both the interns and the office — having interns compile press clips, write responses to form letters (that are then sent through the office system by a staffer), draft speeches, suggest social media posts, and take notes at meetings, hearings and briefings.

Several organizations collaborated on a "virtual intern project" to provide intern-specific resources. College to Congress, which provides training, mentoring and financial support for Hill interns, recently announced its online curriculum C2C-U will be available for free to all congressional interns for the rest of the year. Its training modules span the gamut from the legislative process to writing constituent letters, and can help lighten the load for intern coordinators within congressional offices. "All of our online resources apply to both in-person and remote working positions," CEO Audrey Henson said of her curriculum. "One of my biggest hopes is for more offices to take advantage of this opportunity to hire from a wider range of backgrounds since remote working has eliminated some of the large, prohibitive expenses."

Also, the Modernization Staff Association has updated its Capitol Hill Work From Home Guide with tips for junior staffers and intern coordinators. CMF maintains guidance for a successful internship program. And Popvox is sharing a weekly newsletter to keep Hill interns connected and informed — even when operating remotely.

Not surprisingly, many of the people spearheading these efforts are former interns. We know Hill internships open doors and change lives, and that Capitol Hill is better for the energy and perspective these young (and sometimes not-so-young) people bring. As Congressional offices begin to make their plans for the fall, we strongly encourage them to offer internships and to tap into available resources to make these internships a success.


Read More

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
​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less
White marble exterior of the United States Capitol, often called the Capitol Building, is the home of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

Congress approval is at a record-low 10%. Moderation and consensus-building, not partisan theatrics, are how Washington gets problems solved.

Richard Sharrocks / Getty Images

Reclaiming the Politics of the Possible

Washington is stuck in a cycle of performative conflict. The incentives seem to reward outrage, not outcomes that last; purity tests, not problem‑solving. So it’s no surprise that after three shutdowns in less than a year, public approval of Congress collapsed to just 10 percent this spring. (Gallup, April 2026.) But the country we live in — where many middle-income families report persistent financial strain and businesses are navigating unprecedented technological upheaval — cannot be governed by theatrics. Breaking this cycle requires moderation, consensus‑building, and a cooperative approach to governance.

This is not a call for centrism as an ideology. Instead, this is a call for transformative leaders to embrace moderation as their governing strategy, recognizing that in a pluralistic country of nearly 350 million people durable solutions require broad and stable alliances. Ultimately, this is a call for the 240 million of us who are eligible to vote in November to elect consensus-builders instead of bomb-throwers, and healers instead of arsonists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult man holds a microphone while asking a question during a town hall meeting.

Congress ignored 90% of public support for background checks. Learn how citizen assemblies and sortition helped Ireland break gridlock and could work in the US.

SDI Productions/Getty Images

Consensus Without Power: How Sortition Could Break America's Legislative Gridlock

In April 2013, four months after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting killed twenty children, the US Senate voted on the Manchin-Toomey Act to expand background checks and to include gun-show and internet sales of firearms. Roughly nine in ten Americans, including a majority of gun owners, supported the bill—a figure that has held steady across more than a decade of polling. It fell short of the 60-vote threshold by six votes. This was not an outlier. On complex issues, representatives often fail to translate public consensus into reality. Research shows that legislators consistently vote in line with donor and interest group preferences over constituent opinion. Before the vote, the National Rifle Association (NRA) warned every senator it would “rate” their vote on its annual rating system, and a low NRA rating could cost senators their next primary. Consequently, the bill died 54-46, and the majority of Americans watched, powerless, as their consensus was overridden by self-interested representatives.

Liberal democracies need a method to bypass electoral incentives that run counter to public opinion. One already exists: Ireland faced the same stalemate on complex issues before it instituted a process called sortition. The beauty of sortition lies in its removal of the primary pressure that misaligns representatives’ interests from public interest: reelection. Much like jury duty, citizens are randomly drawn from the population. An independent body then stratifies the pool, so the final group mirrors the country by age, gender, geography, and income. The group meets over weeks or months, hearing from experts and the public, as well as debating frequently. At the end, it issues a recommendation that parliament may then put to a referendum or pass into law.

Keep ReadingShow less