Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Five things the congressional class of 2022 should do differently

New members of Congress

Newly elected members of Congress, including Delia Ramirez of Illinois, attended their Capitol Hill orientation Monday. The Congressional Management Foundation has some suggestion for these new lawmakers.

Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Fitch is the president and CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation and a former congressional staffer.

A few years ago, I was interviewing a young legislative correspondent for a second-term House member. She told me this: “My boss’s predecessor got elected 40 years ago and before he left office, he advised my boss to individually answer every single letter he got from a constituent.” And I thought about replying: “So you’re basing your constituent engagement strategy on a system designed for the 1980s?”

One of the most common flaws the Congressional Management Foundation has observed in the past decade is that new members of Congress simply inherit the bad habits of their predecessors. The operational demands of remote work, the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress, and the outstanding progress initiated by the House Chief Administrative Officer in recent years have certainly infused more creativity in congressional operations. Yet the first-term members of the 118th Congress have an opportunity to make additional innovations.

Here are five ideas that new lawmakers in both chambers should consider before finalizing their office plans.


1. Don’t use the term “caseworker.” Congress is saddled with systems and terms invented when the last big push to enlarge congressional office staff came in the 1970s. “Caseworker” comes from the social work community, and often confuses constituents the first time they encounter a congressional staffer with that title. Some offices are getting creative with this title – and our personal favorite is to change the title to “constituent advocate.” With that title, there is absolutely no mystery who is prioritized and what the job is.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

2. Shift the constituent mail operation from the legislative director to the communications director. Mail operations and workflows were largely designed in the late 1970s before most offices even had a person with the title “press secretary.” It is more efficient and logical to house all the “public relations” work, including responding to constituent mail, with the communications director. This shift should be part of the job-vetting and initial hiring process. Trying to do this after someone has been hired, and your organizational chart has been established with a legislative correspondent reporting to the legislative director, would be disruptive. This doesn’t mean the communications shop crafts all the messages – articulating policy positions should reside with the LD and legislative assistants. Yet having the CD oversee all the communications in the office allows for greater uniformity and consistency in messaging.

3. Open as few district offices as possible. Remote work during the pandemic demonstrated that most congressional work can be done remotely. You don’t need three or four district offices (and the security and rent that come with them). Unless the district is unusually large, geographically, most House members can suffice their constituents with one or two offices. Creative arrangements with municipal governments and federal buildings can be established to set up “mobile office hours.” Offices that previously have cut back on district offices report they have more of a footprint in the district because their staff conduct significantly more proactive outreach.

4. Establish modern work-flex policies for your office. Prior to the pandemic and remote work in Congress, CMF was counseling congressional offices to consider a range of work-flex options: tele-work, shared jobs, sabbaticals for employees, etc. Post-pandemic CMF’s advice has changed: You don’t have any choice – congressional offices must adopt work-flex policies or you will lose valuable staff. We talked with one freshman chief of staff in early 2021 who had already lost their LD to another office because the member refused to offer her some telework options while another office did. You won’t lose staff to K Street lobby shops and trade associations but your employees will go down the hall and work for another member with modern telework options. CMF has created a very useful Workflex Toolkit for Congress in partnership with the Society for Human Resource Management that should guide you through the questions and steps for adopting work-flex policies

5. Don’t just “respond” to the mail – build trust with constituents. Most aspects of constituent mail operations have not changed in 50 years. The workflow, the language, the review processes – all vestiges of the last century. But a 21st century constituency has Amazon-like expectations. And research is very clear – the current response type and turnaround rate of constituent mail is getting failing grades from your constituents. CMF just published a report, “Building Trust by Modernizing Constituent Engagement,” intended to help the freshman class do it differently. It’s a how-to guide based on the last five years of CMF research both with Congress and through constituent surveys. Every office should create a Strategic Constituent Engagement Plan to guide your work in a way that does more than just “respond” to inquiries, but that builds genuine trust in our system of government and in the member of Congress.

An innovative trade association leader a few years ago would tell new employees: “Doing things this year the same way we did them last year is just an excuse for not thinking.” In 2020, when the pandemic required offices to immediately move to remote work, CMF was very impressed with the creativity and ingenuity of both leaders and managers to be responsive to the crisis and to constituents. The Class of 2022 has an opportunity to make a similar imprint on Congress, altering their mentality and operations in a way that both adheres to the lofty goals of our nation’s founders to create a more perfect union, and interact with constituents using methods expected from a 21st century constituency.

Read More

Project 2025: The Department of Labor

Hill was policy director for the Center for Humane Technology, co-founder of FairVote and political reform director at New America. You can reach him on X @StevenHill1776.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a right-wing blueprint for Donald Trump’s return to the White House, is an ambitious manifesto to redesign the federal government and its many administrative agencies to support and sustain neo-conservative dominance for the next decade. One of the agencies in its crosshairs is the Department of Labor, as well as its affiliated agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

Project 2025 proposes a remake of the Department of Labor in order to roll back decades of labor laws and rights amidst a nostalgic “back to the future” framing based on race, gender, religion and anti-abortion sentiment. But oddly, tucked into the corners of the document are some real nuggets of innovative and progressive thinking that propose certain labor rights which even many liberals have never dared to propose.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less
Preamble to the U.S. Constitution
mscornelius/Getty Images

We can’t amend 'We the People' but 'we' do need a constitutional reboot

LaRue writes at Structure Matters. He is former deputy director of the Eisenhower Institute and of the American Society of International Law.

The following article was accepted for publication prior to the attempted assassination attempt of Donald Trump. Both the author and the editors determined no changes were necessary.

Keep ReadingShow less
Beau Breslin on C-SPAN
C-CSPAN screenshot

Project 2025: A C-SPAN interview

Beau Breslin, a regular contributor to The Fulcrum, was recently interviewed on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal” about Project 2025.

Breslin is the Joseph C. Palamountain Jr. Chair of Political Science at Skidmore College and author of “A Constitution for the Living: Imagining How Five Generations of Americans Would Rewrite the Nation’s Fundamental Law.” He writes “A Republic, if we can keep it,” a Fulcrum series to assist American citizens on the bumpy road ahead this election year. By highlighting components, principles and stories of the Constitution, Breslin hopes to remind us that the American political experiment remains, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, the “most interesting in the world.”

Keep ReadingShow less
People protesting laws against homelessness

People protest outside the Supreme Court as the justices prepared to hear Grants Pass v. Johnson on April 22.

Matt McClain/The Washington Post via Getty Images

High court upholds law criminalizing homelessness, making things worse

Herring is an assistant professor of sociology at UCLA, co-author of an amicus brief in Johnson v. Grants Pass and a member of the Scholars Strategy Network.

In late June, the Supreme Court decided in the case of Johnson v. Grants Pass that the government can criminalize homelessness. In the court’s 6-3 decision, split along ideological lines, the conservative justices ruled that bans on sleeping in public when there are no shelter beds available do not violate the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

This ruling will only make homelessness worse. It may also propel U.S. localities into a “race to the bottom” in passing increasingly punitive policies aimed at locking up or banishing the unhoused.

Keep ReadingShow less
Project 2025: A federal Parents' Bill of Rights

Republican House members hold a press event to highlight the introduction in 2023.

Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Project 2025: A federal Parents' Bill of Rights

Biffle is a podcast host and contributor at BillTrack50.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for a second Trump administration, includes an outline for a Parents' Bill of Rights, cementing parental considerations as a “top tier” right.

The proposal calls for passing legislation to ensure families have a "fair hearing in court when the federal government enforces policies that undermine their rights to raise, educate, and care for their children." Further, “the law would require the government to satisfy ‘strict scrutiny’ — the highest standard of judicial review — when the government infringes parental rights.”

Keep ReadingShow less