Believe it or not, some legislators are hard at work 

Last week, a bipartisan delegation of legislators went to California to meet with big tech companies. The visit was led by Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wisc.) who chairs the House of Representatives Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. Their meetings with Apple, Microsoft and other industry heavies focused on trade, intellectual property, technology and related issues. 

Some of my more cynical readers might scoff that legislators should not be hanging out in Hollywood. Others might cheer their absence from the Capitol, which leaves them unable to pass any more meddlesome laws.

But based on my 20 years of Congress-watching, I would suggest these legislators were wise to go West. There they met in person with the people who lead the industries that are affected by federal policy. Held far from congressional hearing rooms and the television cameras, these meetings were better suited to frank discussion of the issues. The committee should do more of these meetings with Americans affected by the Chinese government’s machinations. 

Too often, legislators give into the temptation to offer hot takes on topics they have little studied or considered. Sometimes they flap their gums because they imagine it will help their reelection chances. One needs only look at the various inane takes legislators make on Twitter to see how elected officials regularly succumb to the anxiety to flatter their base voters and campaign contributors.  

In other instances, legislators are following their party, which has staked out a position on an issue, or responding to media who demand to know what they think. Unsurprisingly, popping off elicits derisive retorts from other legislators and the punditry. The aggregate effect is a dumbed-down democratic discourse that stunts Congress’ capacity to make smart policy.

Politics would be less gratuitously conflictual and stupid if more elected officials felt comfortable saying, “Good question. Let me get back to you after I have studied the subject and spoken with my constituents to get their views.” But that is not where the incentives lie. In fact, politicians often are rewarded for being loud and stupid with beaucoup media coverage and campaign donations. 

To date, the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party thus far has resisted the temptations to slide into partisan gas-baggery. It has held two serious hearings on important matters: the Chinese government’s “techno-totalitarianism” and its atrocities against Uyghurs. The committee also has been engaged in outreach to the media and the public about the issues it is studying. 

In great part, the committee’s diligent functioning appears to be the product of its leadership. Gallagher is a relentlessly serious legislator who previously co-chaired a government commission on cybersecurity. His Democratic counterpart, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, is similarly serious. He serves on the chamber’s committee on intelligence with Gallagher and has spent much of the past 20 years in public service. Helpfully, both men appear committed to behaving in accordance with the committee’s professed commitment to bipartisanship. They have released joint statements on issues and appeared on television together.

Keeping the Select Committee’s proceedings serious will not be easy. The issue of what to do about China has been highly salient in recent years, and buzzy issues — like guns and immigration — often invite polarized partisanship. Moreover, the committee’s subject matter is a confluence of diplomacy, defense, technology, intellectual property and economics. Each of these fields is highly complex and comes with its own set of values and assumptions. It would be far easier for legislators to skip studying the issues and instead use their committee perches to bloviate and bluster.

Moreover, Congress as a whole tends to struggle with issues involving foreign policy or technology, which is particularly difficult. Legislators tend to presume that most voters do not care about overseas, and so devote little of their time to studying its nuances. They feel a strong incentive to leave foreign policy decisions to the president and his team. As for technology, few elected officials or staff have professional backgrounds in the area. Congress also diminished its capacity to engage in technology issues when it abolished the Office of Technology Assessment in 1994, which had scientists and technologists who could advise legislators.

Regardless, the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party is off to an admirable start. Legislators on other committees should take notice; it is possible to work collaboratively and soberly on critical issues. Media and pundits also should give more ink to the Select Committee; too much of their coverage is devoted to inconsequential bickering. 

Lastly, the many Americans who are down on our national legislature should take heart; there really are serious people in Washington doing good work. 

Kevin R. Kosar (@kevinrkosar) is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. He is the co-editor of “Congress Overwhelmed: Congressional Capacity and Prospects for Reform” (University of Chicago Press, 2020). He hosts the Understanding Congress podcast.