Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Modernization Committee ends its work with a call for the House to keep up the effort

House Modernization Committee

Rep. Derek Kilmer cited the collaborative nature of the committee's work as a key to its success.

YouTube

Four years ago, the House of Representatives established a committee to recommend changes to how the chamber operates, covering everything from technology to bipartisan resources to constituent services. On Thursday, the committee announced its final set of recommendations, bringing the panel’s total number of proposals to more than 200.

The new recommendations focus on additional steps to improve congressional operations, but also call on the House to begin the work begun by the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress.

“The 105 recommendations this committee has passed will make a difference well beyond the 117th Congress and that’s the goal of modernization – to put processes and practices in place that will ensure ongoing improvement of the institution,” said the committee’s chairman, Rep. Derek Kilmer. “And I think we made great progress toward that goal.”


Of the 195 recommendations passed by the panel prior to the final set, 88 have been partially implemented and 42 have been fully implemented, according to the committee’s own tracking.

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

The new recommendations call on the House to:

  • Require committee meeting times to be entered into a shared scheduling tool.
  • Regularly publish a report on lawmakers voting after House votes are supposed to conclude.
  • Direct the House Administration and House Rules committees to send bipartisan congressional delegations to visit other nations’ legislatures to learn as well as facilitate collaboration among lawmakers.
  • Direct the House Administration Committee to hold voluntary seminars for new lawmakers during their first terms, going beyond post-election orientation.
  • Change the management of lawmaker’s travel-related expenses to align better with the policies used by federal agencies and the private sector.

But the committee wants to see modernization continue even after it is disbanded. The members recommended the House Administration Committee include a subcommittee on modernization to allow for continuing, ongoing work, as well as the reappointment of a select committee at least once every eight years.

The committee, which includes an equal number of Democrats and Republicans, was established in January 2019 with a one-year mandate to study Congress and make recommendations on how to make the legislative branch more efficient, effective and transparent. It was renewed for an additional year in February 2020 and then granted two more years in 2021.

Kilmer, a Democrat from Washington, spoke of the productive partnerships he has had with the panel's two Republican vice chairs, first Rep. Tom Graves of Georgia and now Rep. William Timmons of South Carolina.

“I’m a big believer in the notion that the boat moves best when all the oars are in the water, rowing in the same direction. In this place not only is that often not the case but even worse sometimes the oars are out of the water with people actively beating each other over the heads,” Kilmer said. “That has not been the case with William Timmons.”

See all the preceding recommendations from the 116th and 117th Congresses.

“Our work is not done,” Timmons said. “One of our recommendations is to continue this as a subcommittee on House Admin and I’m hopeful that will happen. I believe that will happen.”


Read More

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate
the letters are made up of different colors

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key takeaways

  • The U.S. has no national AI liability law. Instead, a patchwork of state laws has emerged which has resulted in legal protections being dependent on where an individual resides.
  • It’s often unclear who is legally responsible when AI causes harm. This gap leaves many people with no clear path to seek help.
  • In March 2026, the White House and Congress introduced major proposals to establish a federal standard, but there is significant disagreement about whether that standard should prioritize protecting innovation or protecting people harmed by AI systems.

Background: A Patchwork of State Laws

Without a national AI law, states have been filling in the gaps on their own. The result is an uneven landscape where a person’s legal protections depend entirely on which state they live in.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stethoscope, pile of hundred dollar bills and a calculator

A deep dive into America’s healthcare cost crisis, comparing reform to a modern “moonshot.” Explores payment models, rising costs, and lessons from John F. Kennedy’s space race vision to drive systemic change.

IronHeart/Getty Images

The Moonshot America Needs to Solve Its Healthcare Crisis

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy told the nation, “We choose to go to the moon.” It’s often remembered as a moment of national ambition. In reality, the United States was locked in a Cold War with the Soviet Union, and the fear of falling behind in technological dominance made the mission unavoidable.

Today’s space race is driven by a different force. Governments and private companies are investing billions to capture economic advantages, from satellite infrastructure to advanced computing to the next frontier of resource extraction.

Keep ReadingShow less
After the Court's Voting Rights Decision - How to Protect Black-Majority Districts
a large white building with columns with United States Supreme Court Building in the background

After the Court's Voting Rights Decision - How to Protect Black-Majority Districts

The Supreme Court recently ruled that Louisiana violated the Constitution in creating a new Black-majority voting district. This was after a Federal court had ruled that the previous map, by packing Blacks all in one district, diluted their votes, which violated the Voting Rights Act.

The question is what impact the decision in Louisiana v Callais will have on §2 of the Voting Rights Act ... and on the current gerrymander contest to gain safe seats in the House. The conservative majority said that the decision left the Act intact. The liberal minority, in a strong dissent by Justice Kagan, said that the practical impact was to "render §2 all but a dead letter," making it likely that existing Black-majority districts will not remain for long.

Keep ReadingShow less