The Washington Post had an article this weekend that discusses the paucity of oversight hearings in the current Congress, noting that “administration officials testified more often before many committees during the first year of President Joe Biden’s term than they have this year.” The article mentions several areas where Democrats contend that more oversight is needed, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s vaccine policies, the administration’s boat strike campaign and saber rattling toward Venezuela, the failure of DHS secretary Noem to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee to answer questions about immigration raids and other matters, and the absence of appearances by various financial regulators, including acting director of the CFPB Russell Vought and director of the FHFA Bill Pulte, before the Senate Banking Committee.
The efforts of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee to get Kennedy to testify is a particularly interesting case. In September the committee held a hearing where former CDC director Susan Monarez, who was fired less than a month after being confirmed by the Senate, testified that she was terminated because she refused to comply with Kennedy’s demands that she commit to approving changes to the vaccine schedule regardless of scientific evidence. Her testimony and that of another former HHS staffer contradicted Kennedy’s prior testimony before the committee about the circumstances of her termination and the changes to vaccine policy. Chairman Cassidy, who clearly had serious concerns both about Monarez’s termination and the vaccine policy, noted that the committee had sent a request to HHS for records relating to the subject of Monarez’s testimony, and he invited Kennedy to come before the committee to provide his side of the story. Kennedy has yet to appear before the committee, nor to my knowledge has HHS produced the required records.
On December 9, the committee minority sent a letter to Cassidy demanding that Kennedy be called to testify, and pointing out that, despite his promise to appear before the committee on a quarterly basis if needed, Kennedy had not been before the committee in seven months. However, it appears that Cassidy, who is up for reelection and facing a primary challenge in 2026, is unwilling to press the issue at this time.
The combination of an extraordinarily aggressive and norm-breaking executive and a Congress so passive that Steve Bannon calls it “the Duma” should be a concern to all Americans. Fortunately, our system of separated powers provides other means to scrutinize and check the activities of the federal government.
Among these mechanisms are the oversight and investigatory authorities of the fifty state legislatures. The power of state legislatures to conduct oversight and investigations has long been recognized. See, e.g., Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U.S. 367, 377 (1951) (“Investigations, whether by standing or special committees, are an established part of representative government.”). As I note in this explainerposted on the Levin Center’s website, state legislatures may gather information and hold hearings regarding federal government activities that affect their states. The exercise of compulsory process, particularly that directed to federal officers and agencies, presents more delicate issues, but legislatures that approach these matters in a thoughtful and deliberate way can successfully navigate them.
As Woodrow Wilson observed 140 years ago, “the only really self-governing people is that people which discusses and interrogates its administration.” If Congress is unwilling or unable to perform that duty, it creates an enormous vacuum that enterprising state legislators should be ready to fill.