Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Proposed changes to House rules could boost constituent services

U.S. Capitol, House rules
Samuel Corum/Getty Images

As lawmakers begin laying the groundwork for management of the House of Representatives under Republican control, a pair of left- and right-leaning advocacy groups issued a set of recommendations for improving transparency, efficiency and power-sharing when Congress convenes in January.

The House Rules Committee will convene Tuesday afternoon to consider potential changes to chamber management, and Demand Progress and the Lincoln Network hope the panel will consider their suggestions.

The recommendations, in some cases, echo the work of the Select Committee on the Modernization of the Congress, which recently issued its final report before being disbanded.


“There’s too much concentrated power in congressional leadership, which distorts the legislative process and stifles collaboration by members who share common interests,” said Daniel Schuman, policy director at the liberal-leaning Demand Progress. “These common-sense recommendations restore balance in the House so that all members can meaningfully engage in policymaking.”

While most of the recommendations might be considered “inside baseball,” they could have a significant impact on how lawmakers serve their constituents.

For example:

  • Creating a subpanel of the House Administration Committee to continue modernization efforts would establish a pathway for developing better ways to manage constituent requests through improved technology and staffing.
  • Changing the House calendar to create a more regular schedule for district work and make travel more efficient.
  • Establishing a chief data officer for the House would increase transparency of the legislative process.

The more than 50 recommendations cover a range of areas, including transparency and accountability, internal operations, oversight, security, staffing, and ethics.

“The Rules the House enacts will shape how Congress will function and who will have power,” said Lincoln Network Executive Director Zach Graves, whose center-right organization works to incorporate technology into governing. “It’s important to democratize the House so more rank-and-file members have a say in the legislation that gets considered and so that committees don’t have their roles usurped by leadership. All members are elected to Congress and each one has a duty and obligation to represent their constituents.”

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The House Rules Committee is meeting Tuesday afternoon to consider rules changes proposed by individual members of Congress.

Over the past four years the Modernization Committee, as the select panel is commonly known, issued more than 200, 42 of which have been fully implemented, according to the committee’s own tracking. Another 88 have been partially implemented.

“I feel that we have made a huge impact in healing this institution and I know that our work is not done,” Vice Chair William Timmons said at the committee’s final meeting on Nov. 17. “But I think the work that we have done thus far is going to pay dividends for years to come.”

Read the full set of recommendations from Demand Progress and the Lincoln Network.

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