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.”

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

Veterans’ Care at Risk Under Trump As Hundreds of Doctors and Nurses Reject Working at VA Hospitals
Photo illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker/ProPublica

Veterans’ Care at Risk Under Trump As Hundreds of Doctors and Nurses Reject Working at VA Hospitals

Veterans hospitals are struggling to replace hundreds of doctors and nurses who have left the health care system this year as the Trump administration pursues its pledge to simultaneously slash Department of Veterans Affairs staff and improve care.

Many job applicants are turning down offers, worried that the positions are not stable and uneasy with the overall direction of the agency, according to internal documents examined by ProPublica. The records show nearly 4 in 10 of the roughly 2,000 doctors offered jobs from January through March of this year turned them down. That is quadruple the rate of doctors rejecting offers during the same time period last year.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The Protect Reporters from Excessive State Suppression (PRESS) Act aims to fill the national shield law gap by providing two protections for journalists.

Getty Images, Manu Vega

Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The First Amendment protects journalists during the news-gathering and publication processes. For example, under the First Amendment, reporters cannot be forced to report on an issue. However, the press is not entitled to different legal protections compared to a general member of the public under the First Amendment.

In the United States, there are protections for journalists beyond the First Amendment, including shield laws that protect journalists from pressure to reveal sources or information during news-gathering. 48 states and the District of Columbia have shield laws, but protections vary widely. There is currently no federal shield law. As of 2019, at least 22 journalists have been jailed in the U.S. for refusing to comply with requests to reveal sources of information. Seven other journalists have been jailed and fined for the same reason.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrat Donkey is winning arm wrestling match against Republican elephant

AI generated image

Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrats are quietly building momentum in the 2025 election cycle, notching two key legislative flips in special elections and gaining ground in early polling ahead of the 2026 midterms. While the victories are modest in number, they signal a potential shift in voter sentiment — and a brewing backlash against Republican-led redistricting efforts.

Out of 40 special elections held across the United States so far in 2025, only two seats have changed party control — both flipping from Republican to Democrat.

Keep ReadingShow less
Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

A DC Metropolitan Police Department car is parked near a rally against the Trump Administration's federal takeover of the District of Columbia, outside of the AFL-CIO on August 11, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

President Trump announced the activation of hundreds of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., along with the deployment of federal agents—including more than 100 from the FBI. This comes despite Justice Department data showing that violent crime in D.C. fell 35% from 2023 to 2024, reaching its lowest point in over three decades. These aren’t abstract numbers—they paint a picture of a city safer than it has been in a generation, with fewer homicides, assaults, and robberies than at any point since the early 1990s.

The contradiction could not be more glaring: the same president who, on January 6, 2021, stalled for hours as a violent uprising engulfed the Capitol is now rushing to “liberate” a city that—based on federal data—hasn’t been this safe in more than thirty years. Then, when democracy itself was under siege, urgency gave way to dithering; today, with no comparable emergency—only vague claims of lawlessness—he mobilizes troops for a mission that looks less like public safety and more like political theater. The disparity between those two moments is more than irony; it is a blueprint for how power can be selectively applied, depending on whose power is threatened.

Keep ReadingShow less