THE FIRST TWO WEEKS OF HOUSE INVESTIGATIONS
By Lisa Desjardins
@LisaDNews
The newly Republican-led House of Representatives is taking its first two-week break from Washington following its first weeks of full-fledged action in the chamber and on committees. You may recall that House Republicans pledged last year to launch investigations into the Biden administration immediately upon taking power.
Just a few House committees are leading the Republicans’ efforts so far, out of the 20-plus standing committees with oversight functions. We thought it a good time to take quick stock of who’s leading these probes.
Which committees?
Four committees have held investigatory hearings about specific policies or actions connected to President Joe Biden or his administration.
- The House Judiciary Committee launched a subcommittee on the “Weaponization of the Federal Government,” which plans to look into any government overreach into individual lives by the Department of Justice, FBI or any agency. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, chairs the Judiciary Committee and is also overseeing this subcommittee. He is known for his sharp and often combative questioning.
- The House Oversight Committee has the ability to look into a wide range of issues across the Cabinet agencies. Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., is the chair and has a contrasting approach from Jordan. He also can be confrontational but is less likely to be combative.
- The House Ways & Means Committee can look into any activities by the Internal Revenue Service as well as most financial agencies. Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., is the new chairman of the committee after leading Republican tax voice Kevin Brady retired.
- The House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee is not expected to be a major investigatory force but does have a role in scrutinizing infrastructure money, as well as some environmental policy. Rep. Sam Graves, R-Mo., chairs this committee.
What have the committees done so far?
Let’s start with the ones outside the headlines.
- The House Transportation Committee makes this list due to a hearing last week on the “Waters of the United States,” or WOTUS, environmental policy that is part of the Clean Waters Act, put in place during the Obama administration and now championed by the Biden administration. Conservatives have long said WOTUS extends government power too far, to tiny bits of water, and, according to North Carolina Rep. David Rouzer, has placed “unnecessary burdens” on farmers and businesses. Democrats counter that it’s critical for keeping America’s water clean.
- The House Ways and Means Committee held a hearing on unemployment fraud, specifically any that occurred with benefits temporarily extended at the start of the pandemic. This timing includes both the Biden and Trump administrations. Witnesses focused on the lack of guardrails and checks on beneficiaries.
Then there are the two committees leading the more high-profile investigations.
- House Oversight Committee
- Its first hearing was Feb. 1, on pandemic spending fraud. Again, this topic is not limited to the Biden administration, but does largely include Biden’s term.
- Its second hearing was Feb. 7, on the crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border. The hearing focused on the current state of the border and Biden’s policies. The witnesses were two U.S. Customs and Border Patrol chiefs who work in border sectors.
- Its third hearing was Feb. 8. This was still not directly an investigation of Biden, but did tee up one that is coming. In this hearing, House Oversight grilled Twitter executives about decisions to initially block stories about the discovery of a laptop owned by Biden’s son Hunter.
- House Judiciary Committee
- The committee opened with a Feb. 1 hearing also focused on the border crisis. Witnesses here included local officials near the border.
- Not a hearing, but on Feb. 3, the House Judiciary took a significant step, issuing subpoenas to Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray and Education Secretary Miguel Cardona for documents related to school board meetings and any law enforcement action against parents.
- On Feb. 9, the Weaponization Subcommittee held its first hearing, focused largely on testimony of former FBI agents about the practices at the Justice Department.
Are they coordinating with each other?
Overall, we learned that the two key committees — Judiciary and Oversight — are communicating, but will proceed in different manners.
Jordan’s Judiciary Committee wasted no time in issuing subpoenas during one of their first weeks of formal meetings. In a sign of some coordination, Jordan did appear at an oversight hearing. But in general the two chairmen have different approaches, with Comer appearing to anticipate a longer and slower series of investigations, with more focus on top officials involved in policymaking.
What’s come out of the hearings specifically?
These are just the first weeks. But so far, the hearings have not produced any eye-popping news about the Biden administration. At times they have raised more questions about their subjects. At other times, they have countered what seemed to have been Republicans’ purpose.
- The Weaponization Subcommittee’s hearing largely was a chance for lawmakers, including former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, to echo their concerns about FBI and DOJ behavior, which Republicans claim has included politically motivated targeting of conservatives. Standout testimony came from former FBI special agent Nicole Parker, who resigned from the agency because she felt it was becoming too political. She testified, for example, that she had seen agents kneel with Black Lives Matter protesters – something she saw as crossing a line into politics that would be inappropriate for an impartial FBI.
- The two border panels — one from Judiciary and one from Oversight — highlighted a glaring fact: The surge of migrants at the U.S. border has soared in recent months, and officials of all stripes have struggled to keep up. At the Judiciary panel, witnesses offered different opinions on the role of the Biden administration’s policy, with a border-region sheriff testifying that no border agents he knows feel the current system is working. But the top official in El Paso County, Texas, disagreed, saying that there is not an open border there and that, along with security, U.S. policy must consider the needs of asylum seekers and migrants.
- Finally, the hearing on how Twitter handled the Hunter Biden story took some surprising turns, with three Twitter executives acknowledging the initial mistakes in how Twitter blocked the story but consistently defending the company’s policies overall.
Any other investigations of note?
Yes!
Perhaps the most eye-opening hearing of the past two weeks was not related to the Biden administration but rather the architect of the Capitol.
The importance of the role is hard to overstate. That office is responsible for a litany of policies inside the U.S. Capitol that affect the movements and operations of members of Congress, the press and visitors. It is a bit like a mini-fiefdom.
In a Feb. 9 hearing, members of the usually outside-the-zeitgeist House Administration Committee blasted then-architect J. Brett Blanton, particularly regarding an inspector general report that Blanton abused his office, including by misuse of a vehicle and of government funds.
The architect is appointed by the president. And within a week, following recommendations by a host of lawmakers, including House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, Biden fired Blanton. One hearing, and one quick decision.
|
