Ep. 3: How Committees in the House Work and How to be an Effective Committee Member
A Member’s committee assignments can define their career in Congress. As a freshman, what expectations should you have regarding vying for a seat on the committees of your choice and how can you ensure to make an impact starting with that first hearing? In this episode, Aubrey Wilson and Taylor J. Swift talk to a mix of former and current Members of Congress, as well as three Congressional experts, about the ins and outs of the committee process, how to best prepare for hearings, and how to foster a productive relationship with committee staff.
Available on Apple, Spotify, Pocket Casts, and More | Episode Transcript | Return to Gavel In Homepage
Featured Guests
Congresswoman Stephanie Bice [R, OK] serves as a Member of the House of Representatives where she represents Oklahoma’s fifth Congressional district. Before her election to Congress, Bice spent six years in the Oklahoma State Senate, where she held leadership positions including Assistant Majority Floor Leader and Chair of the Senate Finance Committee. In the 118th Congress, Bice serves on several key committees, including the House Appropriations Committee, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and the Committee on House Administration, where she chairs the Subcommittee on Modernization. She also serves as Deputy Whip under Speaker Johnson.
Former Congressman Rodney Davis [R, IL] served as a Representative for Illinois' thirteenth district for five terms. Known for his willingness to work across party lines, Davis held key positions including Ranking Member of the Committee on House Administration and Deputy Whip. He also served on the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress, Committee on Transportation, and Committee on Agriculture. Before his election to the House in 2012, Davis spent 16 years as projects director for Congressman John Shimkus, where he focused on helping Illinois residents navigate government processes and supporting local economic development.
Former Congressman Ed Perlmutter [D, CO], a seasoned politician from Colorado, served two terms in the Colorado State Senate and eight terms in the House of Representatives for Colorado's seventh district. During his tenure in Congress, Perlmutter held positions on several key committees, including Rules, the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress, Financial Services, as well as Science, Space, and Technology.
Jen Daulby is CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation and is an accomplished government affairs and communications strategist with extensive experience in both the public and private sectors. Her career spans roles as Chief of Staff to Rep. Rodney Davis [R, IL], Minority Staff Director for the House Administration Committee, and counsel to various Congressional committees. Jen's expertise covers a wide range of policy areas, including election law, House operations, agriculture, and technology. With a law degree from Southern Illinois University and a background in both government and Fortune 500 companies, Jen brings a unique blend of legal acumen and political savvy to her work. Her contributions to public service were recently recognized with the Stennis Center's Cresswell Award for the 117th Congress.
Nicole Tisdale is a national security expert with 14 years of experience at the White House National Security Council and House Committee on Homeland Security. She played a key role in creating the $1 billion cybersecurity grant program in the bipartisan infrastructure law and passing significant cybersecurity legislation. In 2019, Nicole founded Advocacy Blueprints, LLC, and authored Right To Petition to help others exercise their First Amendment right to advocate. A barred attorney, Nicole continues to volunteer with advocacy and education groups, and serves as Senior Fellow at the POPVOX Foundation.
Dr. Maya Kornberg, a leading expert in democratic governance and civic engagement, is the author of Inside Congressional Committees: Function and Dysfunction in the Legislative Process. As the Research Lead for the elections and government program at NYU's Brennan Center for Justice, she focuses on legislative reform, political information dynamics, and civic participation. Maya has held positions at various nonprofits and international organizations, including the UN Development Program, and was the lead author of the 2022 Global Parliamentary Report. With a Ph.D. from Oxford University, she has taught at prestigious institutions including New York University, Georgetown, and American University. Her insights frequently appear in major media outlets, contributing to public discourse on democratic processes and reforms
Key Tips
Looking past the “A”
Some committees on the Hill are known as A-level and B-level committees, and often seats on A-level committees are highly sought after. However, incredible work is also accomplished on the B-committee level. New Members should consider what committee assignments best align with the needs of their district and their personal policy interests, not just which ones have the reputation of being headliner committees.
Make a list
When committee assignments are made, take the time to make a list of what your policy priorities, interests, or goals are as a committee member and share that list with the committee’s staff. Committee staff are incredible resources who are there to support and help you succeed. Do not be shy in approaching them as strategic partners in helping you establish yourself on the committee and accomplishing your policy goals.
Make friends
Committees are an incredible place to foster relationships with more senior Members and those across party lines. Take the opportunity to look at fellow committee members as mentors and possible allies for progressing your legislative agenda.
The nitty gritty
For committee policy work that is initially beyond your scope of background knowledge, reach out to committee staff or to nonpartisan support entities such as the Congressional Research Service (CRS) for personalized briefings. Additionally, look to hire personal office staff who have a policy background that aligns with your committee assignments. This can help your entire team hit the ground running.
Operating standards
Reputations easily become formed based on committee engagement. Decide what kind of committee engagement you want to pursue and engage your staff in that strategy. There are Members with reputations as good faith negotiators, those known to ask the gotcha questions, and those who chase headlines. All strategies can have a role to play.
Make it work
Be clear with your staff about what you need to succeed and feel prepared for committee business. Know what kind of memo structure you prefer, how far in advance you want information, and how much detail you want your staff to provide. For example, do you want suggested talking points or a fully drafted question script? Recognize, too, how technology can help, including shared drives, tablets, and more.
Notable Quotes
“One of the key things, I think, for being an effective Member… is you have to find a staff that can cover those issue areas in a way that you’re not having to micromanage them. And you can’t – you don’t – have the time as a Member to micromanage anyone. You need to hire people that you implicitly trust to go get the information that you need to prep you accordingly and to be ready to roll.”
“What you need to do is identify the committees that you truly want, that you truly believe are most important to accomplish the goals that you’ve set as a candidate, for your constituents.”
“One, what are you good at? Two what’s going to be good for your district? And three, what lights your fire? And so those are sort of three things. And then you got to work.”
“It’s like a student – a bad – student council election and everybody’s trying to run to the “A” committees. In the meantime, there is such important work to be done on the other committees… And so what I tell the staff: if your boss likes the committees they are on, they’re going to do great things on those committees. So just pick the issues that you like.”
“Committees, it’s worth noting, are one of the only bipartisan spaces in an increasingly partisan Congress. And they’re a space where Members from both parties come together on a regular basis for hearings and other committee business. And so, beyond deeper relationship building, it’s a place where Members can find allies by identifying who cares about a certain issue in questioning.”
“What’s really important is not just meeting the Chair and the Ranking Member, but the staff that they have who have been there and have the institutional knowledge…I always tell Members, you don’t have to show up with a committee platform. You can show up with priorities if you have priorities. But even if you don’t have priorities, the staff will help you build those out and make sure that they’re reflective of what your constituents and you really need.”
Highlighted and Additional Resources
Tool Highlight: Utilizing Microsoft OneNote on a Member’s House-issued iPIpad to allow staff to upload committee preparation materials that a Member can access anytime.
Inside Congressional Committees: Function and Dysfunction in the Legislative Process: a book by Dr. Maya Kornberg.
Mastering the Room: a podcast of George Washington University hosted by Dr. Casey Burgat.
Congressional Management Foundation: a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to promoting a more effective Congress. One of their keystone resources is Setting Course, “a comprehensive management guide to setting up and managing a congressional office.”.
Further Listening
For more insights into how to navigate committee assignments, excel at Executive branch oversight, and communicate committee work back to constituents, check out episode 6 on “How to Work With and Oversee Federal Agencies” and episode 7 on “Reaching Your Constituents and Translating Your Impact to the District.”
About the Hosts
Aubrey Wilson is POPVOX Foundation’s Director of Government Innovation. Aubrey served as former Deputy Staff Director for the Committee on House Administration (CHA) in the 118th Congress. In this role, she coordinated efforts to make the House work more effectively, including overseeing the inaugural session of CHA’s bipartisan Subcommittee on Modernization. Prior, Aubrey served as Director of Oversight and Modernization for CHA during the 117th Congress. She is a former House legislative assistant and member of the R Street Institute Governance Policy and federal affairs team.
Taylor J. Swift is POPVOX Foundation’s Director of Government Capacity. Prior to joining POPVOX Foundation, Taylor was a senior policy advisor at Demand Progress, focusing on Congressional transparency, efficiency, capacity, and modernization. Taylor also worked at the House of Representatives Democratic Caucus where he focused on congressional modernization, budget, appropriations, education, labor, environmental, and tax policy. Taylor graduated with his master’s degree from The University of Akron, working as a teaching assistant for the Bliss Institute of Applied Politics.
About the Podcast
“Gavel In” is a nonpartisan explainer podcast series designed especially to mentor new Members Elect of the incoming 119th Congress, their staff, and families to help them successfully set up their new office, team, and Washington home base with ease and navigate the professional and personal challenges of life as a Representative. Gavel In guides Members-Elect about House Floor operations, office structure and hiring, budgeting, technology, security, ethics, and also the intricacies of parliamentary procedure, rules, and how a bill becomes a law.
Created by former Congressional staff from both sides of the aisle by the nonpartisan POPVOX Foundation, “Gavel In” features expert advice from former Members of Congress and their spouses and is a great complement to the House’s official New Member Orientation to ensure Members Elect get all the support they need to succeed as they embark on their new careers in Congress.
About POPVOX Foundation
With a mission to inform and empower people and make government work better for everyone, POPVOX Foundation is focused on ensuring that democratic institutions are equipped to address the “pacing problem” — the gap between emerging technologies and governance. Co-founded in 2021 and led by proud former Congressional staffers from both sides of the aisle, the team at POPVOX Foundation brings empathy, a deep respect for the Legislative branch, and diverse expertise to its efforts to modernize Congress and other governing institutions.
Transcript
Ep. 3: How Committees in the House Work and How to be an Effective Committee Member
Introduction
Taylor J. Swift: Welcome to episode three of Gavel In, a podcast series by former Congressional staffers, focused on demystifying how the House of Representatives works. We've created this show for incoming freshmen for the 119th Congress, their spouses, and their staff as an off-the-Hill resource to supplement your official New Member Orientation onboarding so that you're set up for success in the new Congress.
Aubrey Wilson: We’re your hosts, Aubrey Wilson and Taylor J. Swift, two recovering House staffers from both sides of the aisle who share a love for the institution and are dedicated in supporting its ongoing evolution through our work at POPVOX Foundation. We're a nonpartisan nonprofit that works to inform and empower people and make government work better for everyone.
Taylor J. Swift: And in making Congress work better, we know that that starts with empowered Congresspeople and staff. That's why we spent the last couple of months gathering the perspectives of prominent Members of Congress, think tank experts, staffers, and Congressional veterans who shared their vast Capitol Hill knowledge and pull back the curtain on what life is really like in Congress.
Aubrey Wilson: We also want to be transparent. This is not official guidance.
Taylor J. Swift: This episode's topic is ‘How Committees in the House Work and How to be an Effective Committee Member.’
Aubrey Wilson: In this episode, we dive into the power dynamics of Congressional committees and how they've evolved over the last 30 years.
From the historical role of committees to today's party driven influence, we explore the legislative muscles that committees once held and the current landscape. Our guests include academic experts, current Members, and former staffers who share their insights on how to navigate scheduling challenges, build relationships, and advance legislative priorities.
Taylor J. Swift: Plus, learn what to consider when vying for a committee position and how to make the most of hearings to impact policy. Don't miss the insider's guide to mastering committee work.
Aubrey Wilson: And with that, let's gavel in.
Taylor J. Swift: So, committees are one of the most important things in Congress. And they are really, really effective. Members can use them for marking up legislation, using them for various types of oversight, whether it's private sector witnesses or public sector officials. And they also can use them for really, really in-depth investigations, whether it's into a private company or a public entity or even one of the other branches of government.
The public, you know, they'll pay attention to some of the more high profile big hearings with the big witnesses. But a lot of the hearings in Congress, especially those day-to-day ones, don't get a whole lot of coverage. But, to be honest, it's one of the most effective ways that Members can have their voice and their work be done.
Aubrey Wilson: Yeah, I completely agree with you. And also, as prior Congressional staffers, I think that, you know, we have an appreciation for the role that committee hearings play in a way that you really only get that perspective after working for the institution. Committee prep and actually being in the hearing takes a lot of work. And until you're actually in the room prepping the Member and getting ready for those interactions with witnesses, you really don't understand what that workflow is like, so I'm really excited to have the guests on today to kind of get into what that workflow looks like, and also tips for how to do it most effectively, especially right out of the gate.
A couple things that I wanted to kind of prep the audience for today, particularly before we start hearing from some of the prior Congressional staffers that we're going to listen to, is just the idea that committee hearings are kind of a beast in themselves.
They're something that, it's a muscle to be practiced. From how you choose the staff who are going to support you, depending on your committee assignments, to how the committee prep binders are made, to how you like to be scripted to participate in committee hearings. These are all things that can be personalized to meet the Member. And some of it's going to be some practice, and some kind of touch and go at the beginning.
But I really do think that, hopefully, our guests today will kind of emphasize what has worked for them and maybe be able to help you get some ideas of how to creatively approach committee hearings to be extra effective, starting with day one.
Taylor J. Swift: Plus one to all of that, Aubrey, and you're the expert on this. You worked on the Committee on House Administration for years, so you would know how much time and effort really goes into making these hearings, what they should be. And I think that if you're going to want to rely on your staff, you have to do the reading, you have to do the background, you have to come into these conversations prepared.
And so we hope that the guests we have on in the next couple of minutes can kind of give you some of that background on why these committees are so valuable and why it's worth your time, so we hope you enjoy it.
Interview with Rep. Stephanie Bice [R, OK]
Aubrey Wilson: Republican Congresswoman Stephanie Bice represents Oklahoma's fifth Congressional district, and she currently sits on four committees and seven subcommittees.
One of those is House Administration's Subcommittee on Modernization, on which she serves as Chair. As if that's not enough to fill her plate, she also serves as Deputy Whip under Speaker Johnson.
Taylor J. Swift: Representative Bice gives great advice on how to hire staff so that you're prepared for your committee responsibilities. Take it from her: Members don't have time to micromanage everyone. She also swears by using an iPad to stay organized.
Aubrey Wilson: Representative Bice, you are one of the Members of Congress who, for the 118th Congress, actually has the biggest committee assignment portfolio. And you were recently on a podcast with AEI’s Dr. Kevin Kosar, where you talked about how your staff at the beginning of this Congress kind of had a panic moment because they saw all of your assignments, which obviously is an incredible honor and opportunity, but also a lot of work.
Can you talk about how you manage that workload to be effective?
Rep. Stephanie Bice: Sure. You know, it was a bit of a transition for me, because when I got to Congress, I didn't know how Congress functioned. In my prior legislative experience, I had a sort of committee staff that would help with, formulating, or giving me a lot of information. Well, when you are here, in Congress, it's a different dynamic.
You really rely on your staff and they're the ones that are going out and trying to find all the information for you. You know, talking about the committee assignments, I actually found out shortly after I was sworn in this last year that I was one of seven Members of Congress that was given four committees, and I think I counted, and I'm on four full committees, and I think it was seven subcommittees.
And I'm a subcommittee Chair on one of them. And that doesn't include the fact that I am on the leadership team, I'm a Deputy Whip, you know, all the other things. Right. So, prioritizing your time is really important. I think for my staff, they had to sort of understand where are their priorities? Where do your priorities lie? What do you want to focus on? What do you want to spend the most time on? And that was really important. And and so to sort of circle back to the question that you had originally, one of the key things, I think, and being an effective Member, particularly with someone like me that has so many things happening, is you have to find a staff that can, you know, cover those issue areas in a way that you're not having to micromanage them.
And you can't, you don't have the time as a Member to micromanage anyone. You need to hire people that you implicitly trust to go get the information that you need to prep you accordingly and to be ready to roll. And, you know, everyone has a little bit of a different technique on how they do that. I like to use digital platforms, so I have a, an iPad mini that I utilize. Through Microsoft Office, we have a OneNote platform that is set up with all of our committees and our subcommittees and our, my team will upload all of the information to that OneNote. And so whether I am in the office or I am on the road on a plane, whether I am headed to a different committee, I can still pull up that OneNote and see exactly what's happening either later that day or in a committee that I need to be prepping for.
I think those little things are, can make a huge impact. So find somebody that has, you know, sort of that organizational skill set that can help you and set you up for success.
One of the things that was most surprising to me as a new Member was the first probably, I don't know, week or two of committee work.
My Deputy Chief of Staff said, “Here is your opening remarks and here are your questions,” and I said, “How do you know these are my questions?” I want to hear what the debate is before I have my questions, because in my time in the state Senate, it was a, you know, ten- or twelve-person committee.
The Chair opened it up, there was a presentation from the witnesses, and then it was sort of open to ask questions. Well, that is not how Congress works, as, you know, it's very formal. It's very structured. There is a priority if you are a freshman on House Armed Services Committee, as I was, you are probably three hours into the committee hearing before you have a chance to ask your question.
Oftentimes, your question has already been asked. So it was a, that was a big pivot for me and I actually use that to change the structure of my subcommittee because I feel like, that formal atmosphere lends itself to sound bites that you can use on social media, but doesn't actually give you the information that you really need to make good decisions.
And so for me, on my subcommittee, I decided that every committee would not be, you know, Members at the dais and the witnesses at a table that yet we would all be at the table and it would be much more free flowing conversation. And that lends itself to better outcomes, in my opinion.
Taylor J. Swift: Yeah. You have a plus one from both of us on that. We are big proponents of the format that the subcommittee used and the previous Modernization Select Committee of not only having more of an informal, open conversation and an open dialog, but just the seating as well. Right. Just having that bipartisan seating.
Rep. Stephanie Bice: Yeah. And I certainly, it's easier to do that when you only have a small subcommittee of four, you know, when you have a committee of 65 that doesn't really set yourself up for, you know, being able to do that. But I just think that, the way, the formality of committee structures on these larger committees, oftentimes you don't really get the deep dive for the information that you're looking for.
Discussion and Interview with Former Reps. Rodney Davis [R, IL] and Ed Perlmutter [D, CO]
Aubrey Wilson: I think that the differences that Representative Bice just highlighted about committee activities that she experienced on the state level versus in Congress is really helpful. Congressional hearings do follow a very formal structure and cadence, and that can definitely take some time to get used to.
And oftentimes it does lead Member support staff to have to think really quickly on your feet to come up with new and relevant questions to ask, especially when she mentioned, as a Member, you're so far down that questioning line as a freshman.
Taylor J. Swift: That's a really good point, Aubrey. There's also a good thing to remember that there's always committee staff to help you. So for some of those larger committees, the staff supporting the Chair or the Ranking Members, they're probably going to have a list of questions that still need to be asked. Or at least, you know, we could say an idea of what could be followed up upon.
So there are a lot of ways that Members can navigate these formal hearing structures to still be effective and dynamic.
Aubrey Wilson: 100%! Tapping into that existing institutional knowledge of those committee staff who have spent all that time prepping for the hearing can definitely be key. And actually, that leads us to our next guests, who are two former Members of Congress that were guests on Gavel In episode two on staffing. We're excited to continue the conversation with them to talk about committee assignments.
Former Democratic Congressman Ed Perlmutter represented Colorado's seventh district for eight terms in the House of Reps. and served on the House Rules Committee, the Committee on Financial Services, and the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress. We spoke with him with former Congressman Rodney Davis as well, who represented Illinois’ 13th district for five terms and served as Ranking Member on the Committee on House Administration, as well as on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Select Committee on Modernization of Congress.
During Taylor’s and my conversation with them, they ask that we use their first names.
Taylor J. Swift: So, a notable stressor for some freshman Members right out of the gate is navigating and trying to vie for committee assignments that really align with the work that they want to do to best represent their constituents. So, Rodney, I want to start with you. Do you have any advice for our Members Elect that are listening to the podcasts that are preparing for this committee assignment process? How does it all work? How does it take place?
Former Rep. Rodney Davis: Well, number one, when you hire somebody, is your Chief, your LD or somebody who's been engaged in Washington, DC in the legislative side of your new job, listen to them when they give you advice that you're probably not going to be a member of the Ways and Means Committee or the Energy and Commerce Committee, maybe even Appropriations or Financial Services, or frankly, maybe even T&I, Ed and Workforce.
You might not be a member of those committees as your freshman year, during your freshman year. So what you need to do is identify the committees that you truly want, that you truly believe are most important to accomplish the goals that you've set as a candidate, for your constituents. Like for me, I was able to go in and pick the two committees, two of the three that I ended up serving on my entire career in Congress, and that was Transportation and Infrastructure and Agriculture.
Now, there is a science to this. I knew full well I wasn't going to be a member of Ways and Means. My freshman year. I knew I wasn't going to be a member of Energy and Commerce. I certainly didn't want to join that goofy Financial Services committee, because I knew some of the Members on that one. And ironically, I say that in jest because Ed was a member of the committee, but here's how I strategically got the two committees I really wanted, T and I and Ag, is because I knew another Member of my delegation wanted to move from those two committees to Financial Services.
He had a financial services background. Randy Hultgren, love the guy. He runs the Illinois Bankers Association right now post-Congress. He’s a still a good friend of mine, but I knew he wanted that slot. So coming in as a freshman who was a real priority politically for our party, because I won such a close race, I made financial services my top choice.
And guess what happened? I got a “walk up” at our leadership elections from the Speaker of the House John Boehner and the Speaker came walking up to me as we were on a break. They were counting some votes that were done by secret ballot. And he said, “Hey, Davis, what would you need if you didn't get your first committee choice?”
I said, “Well, Mr. Speaker, that's really not a good way to start a conversation now is it?” He had a few choice words, and he said, “Just tell me what you blankin’ blankin’ want.” What I said, “Well, Mr. Speaker, I'd be very nice if I could get my second and third choice, because I think that would be a great thing to happen if I don't get my first choice.”
And I walked out of that room and went back to my team, and I said. “He didn't make any promises, but I know we're getting on T&I and Ag.” And guess what, we did! And then, you know, being a good Member of the conference, somebody that is not going to put up a fight when asked a question like that, because you did some pre-planning and pre-strategizing.
When I wanted to join the House Administration Committee my second term, I walked up to him on the House floor. Instead of waiting for him to come to me again, I proactively went after him and I said, “Mr. Speaker, if you have any openings on your leadership appointed House Administration Committee, I really would like to join.” And he turned and looked at me, and he said, “That's a great idea.”
I got on the committee and in my second term there, because it too popular of a committee at that time, I was second in seniority and ended up being the ranking Member of House Admin for two terms. So, and it became my favorite committee, because you could do so much as a Member of Congress, and especially as a former staffer, to reform the institution.
Former Rep. Ed Perlmutter: So for me, you know, one, what are you good at? Two, what's going to be good for your district? And three, what lights your fire? And so those are sort of three things. And then you got to work. And it depends whether you're in the majority or the minority as to, you know, how you get these things. And so for me, I'd been, you know, a lawyer, commercial lawyer, banking, insurance, all like real estate, you know, for my entire career before being elected to Congress.
So financial services made the most sense, and we were in the majority that year, so we got some extra slots. So I joined financial services and stayed on it for the entirety of my Congressional career. I had an opportunity to get on another one, and I felt my district would like to see some sort of law enforcement related kind of service.
And I got on to Homeland Security, and,it was a great committee. But as time went on, my second term, kind of like Rodney, I looked at the Rules Committee, which was, you know, kind of very, arcane committee from, you know, most people's, standpoint. And, but I had to give up Homeland Security to go to that committee.
But for a lawyer, and who wanted to be in the mix on any bill of any size or any controversy and know generally what's going on across the entire Congressional campus, whether it's foreign affairs, or agriculture, or education, or whatever, because we had all those bills come in front of us. And so for me, it was a committee that allowed me to use some of my legal skills and procedural knowledge, but also to be familiar with the, all of the things that Congress works on.
And, you know, hadn't had the kind of work, similar to Rodney's experience with the Speaker, with others, to be able to get these various positions that I ended up getting. The light my fire one was, I worked and I worked to get myself on science and technology science, space and technology because even though, you know, it's not my background professionally, it was something I've always been a Star Wars, Star Trek, Men in Black, you know, science fiction kind of a guy.
And I would, I think it's the committee over the course of time that is the most bipartisan committee. And for me, was just so much fun. And so, you know, again, what's good for your constituents? What are you good at, to be really helpful from day one? And, what lights you up?
Taylor J. Swift: Oh, man, there really is never a dull moment between those two. Honestly, they should start their own podcast.
Aubrey Wilson: Even as former Members, they're definitely staying busy. But gosh, I really do wish that they could make that happen.
Interview with Jen Daulby
Aubrey Wilson: And now we're going to hear advice straight from the perspective of two longtime former committee staffers. We're first going to drop into our conversation with Jen Daulby. She was Chief of Staff for Republican Congressman Rodney Davis from 2013 to 2018, later becoming the Minority Staff Director for the House Committee on Administration, where I actually had the pleasure of being part of her team. Currently, she is CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation.
So you obviously you started actually as a Congressional staffer, then your career took you to becoming a Chief of Staff for a Member of Congress, which you served in that role for multiple years, and then you actually became Staff Director of the Committee on House Administration. So you've really seen kind of Congressional operations from all of these different perspectives.
I really want to dig into you about kind of that committee lifestyle and how Members can be super effective with their kind of first initial committee assignments. So first off, for our listeners who aren't quite familiar with how House committees work, can you kind of walk us through the lay of the land with the House committees and what makes some of them different?
What should Members really know as they kind of get their committee assignments at the beginning of this new Congress?
Jen Daulby: A few things to know about committees. There are 20 standing committees in the House, and that's a lot fewer than there was several decades ago. There's also a distinction between the different types of committees. There's authorizing that, those are the committees that actually passed the bill. So I'll use transportation as an example, because in the last two years we've had some large transportation bills.
So the Transportation Committee is who would pass the bill and say, “This is what kind of rules and regulations are going to go and govern bridges,” and then the Appropriations Committee would actually pass legislation that decides how much money the bridges are going to get for that year and the level at which we are going to fund them.
And so authorizing versus appropriating is an important distinction. Some committees you can only be on one. That's the quote unquote “A committees.” Other committees, the “B and C committees,” you can be on two or three. We have had a lot of stand or select committees or joint committees lately, and I find those very interesting because it really brings out Members’ expertise.
So, for example, there's a committee that's reviewing the Secret Service right now. Right. And so we've had a lot of issues with security of Presidents and presidential candidates. And so there's a group of Members that are solely dedicated to looking at the Secret Service, and they're not distracted by anything else. And that committee has one job right now after COVID, there were committees to look at that.
There's committees that have talked about climate change. My favorite, select committee was Modernization, which really sparked a lot of debate about how Congress should work. And then sometimes after those committees’ work is done, that will roll back in, back into a standing committee, because jurisdiction is split up between all of the committees. And so when you do a special committee or select committee, that is in theory, taking jurisdiction from another committee, but it's really allowing Members and staff to be very focused on a specific issue.
There's also Speaker-appointed committees and there's several [of] those. And that's roles committee that decides the rules of the road for legislation and how the floor is going to work in the time allotted and what amendments are accepted. There's committees that people view are in service to the House, that would be Ethics Committee and House Administration Committee.
And then Intel Committee is also appointed by the Speaker, as well as the select or joint committees that I mentioned earlier. I really try to demystify though, this idea that everyone should try to be on, in a committee. And I remember at one point with my former boss, we were looking at different committees, and a spot had opened up on Ways and Means Committee, and this was a period of time that we weren't doing trade and we weren't doing tax, two issues that are part of the jurisdiction of Ways and Means Committee.
And I pulled it and I said, “Boss, I've only done two or three markups and just a handful of hearings in the last year. I don't know if that would keep you busy enough.” And so we had to take that into consideration. In the meantime, the district really lended itself to someone being on the Agriculture Committee and the Transportation Committee.
And then my former boss was a former staffer, so House Administration Committee was a good fit because he understood the institution and how it worked. And six years, he was the head of a committee. And I think about Members who have waited decades to have a shot to be head of a committee. I think that's something you have to think about.
And I think about former Speaker Boehner, who was chairman of the Education and Workforce Committee, and was there when No Child Left Behind passed. And so there has been significant pieces of legislation that have occurred on, quote unquote, not “a” committees. And sometimes we've been stacking committees. And it's like it's a student, a bad student council election, and everybody's trying to run to the “a” committees.
In the meantime, there is such important work to be done on the other committees. And so, I'm a huge fan of thinking about what you like and what works for the districts. And, right. We're not into naming names on the podcast, but I have observed over the years where I saw Members feel that pull to go to an “a” committee and I saw them love issues from other committees. And you would see that on interviews they would do, and comments they would make on the floor. And so, what I tell the staff, if your boss likes the committees they are on, they're going to do great things on those committees. So, just pick the issues that you like.
Aubrey Wilson: I think that's such an important perspective, because I do feel like the “a” committees are some of the ones that you hear about that work very often in the news cycle. And like you said, there's kind of that pull to be part of those committees. And I think that there's a lot of even staff that struggle with trying to figure out how to support their boss and prioritize what committees they spend their time in.
Because it seems like the committee calendars all overlap pretty often, and they kind of have to pick and choose where they want to be. So the advice to, like you said, to kind of follow actually the Members passion on the issues, even if it's on a B level committee versus an A level committee, that's so helpful because I think that a lot of like you said, Members of staff get caught up.
And in that dynamic of just that pressure of, oh, this is on “a” committee like this is where we should be spending our time. But maybe in reality that's actually not, like you said, where their kind of legacy items may actually come to pass. With kind of navigating those committee assignments at the beginning of a Congress, what do you see as like kind of some of the most effective ways that a Member and their staff, particularly a freshman member of staff, can really get to know the committees that they're assigned to, whether that's be getting to know the staff or getting to know kind of the ebb and flow of that legislative work that that committee does, like what's, as like a prior staff director, what are kind of your tips for those Members to really kind of, you know, jump in and hit the ground running once they get their committee assignments?
Jen Daulby: Yeah, I think sometimes folks overthink it. And what I tell new Members and staff is just do the basics and show up, just show up, because this is a real learning process. And if we think about Congressional staff, almost all of them were former interns because it's a real apprentice type, atmosphere. And until you are immersed in it, you don't understand it.
There's such institutional knowledge that comes. And I would even tell folks, if they have the opportunity before they get to their first hearing or before they're even sworn in, is to watch C-SPAN hearings. You could do it in the middle of the night if you can't sleep. But I was watching a really interesting hearing about energy and commerce a few months, and I had not for a while.
Lord knows, because I had listened and been at so many hearings throughout my tenure, but I just sat down for probably two or three hours and listened to this hearing, and I forgot how much you can learn if you watch a hearing from the beginning to the end and really pay attention to that cadence, and you forget, because we have such a, I believe the last number I saw was, over half of Members in Congress have been here for less than three terms.
And you can see that in a committee hearing, and you see those Members who have been here, and it is a learned skill to be able to answer questions at hearings. So I think that, you know, don't overthink it. And the most important thing is just go and sit in that hearing. And it doesn't matter if it's you and the Chairperson or the Ranking Member, just sit there and observe it all. Listen, write thoughtful questions, solve problems with your bills. That seems kind of basic, but if you look at a lot of the bills that are being introduced, are we making noise or are we making progress? And I'm always on the side of making progress. Meet with agency officials within your jurisdiction, write letters to them when necessary and appropriate, but get to know it first. Get to know the committee staff and get to know the subject matter, through representatives of organizations. For example, if you're on the Ag Committee and corn is really big in your district, go meet with the head of the corn growers, proactively ask for meetings with groups, and reach out to the Library of Congress and the Congressional Research Service.
It is literally an entire building dedicated to Congress. It is, I think of it as the whole university filled with professors sitting over there waiting, to come brief and write memos and educate Members and staff and then talk and ask constituents questions in your district. Some of the best tactics I've seen is when there's really important agency officials coming before hearing, shoot it out on your social media.
“Hey, so-and-so, Secretary of this agency's coming next week. What questions would you like me to ask?” Run a poll — how many people agreed with this, or didn't agree with this, or what have you? I think that's really powerful. When you can go to a hearing and say, “I had a, you know, I had this person in my district say, did this regulation you did affected them in this way.
And I would like to know more about that and how we can prevent these unintended consequences and what have you.” So that's just some of the advice I say, and being really thoughtful and listening is where I would begin and end.
Aubrey Wilson: You made the comment that, you know, one of your top pieces of advice is to actually be in the committee room and be part of a hearing from start to finish. And for people who have never been to a Congressional hearing before, that might sound like common sense, but in reality, very few Members actually are able to participate in a hearing from start to finish.
It's really rare. Can you talk a little bit about why that is and kind of how, from a Members perspective, balancing committee calendars can be a challenge. And then also kind of as a secondary question to that, when you are a Member who is balancing a very demanding schedule and you can only potentially be part of a hearing for a short amount of time, what do you think should be the part of the hearing that they're there for?
Jen Daulby: Yeah. It's interesting. I believe last year there was a talking point that was released. It was like we had more hearings on this Wednesday than in the history of Congress. And I thought to myself, I don't know if that's a talking point I like or not, because what that tells me is that when we really jam Members and some of those hearings might not have received the attention that they deserve or wanted.
So have some thoughts on how to address stack committee hearings, is have a legislative assistant for each committee, because someone needs to physically be in that room. And my pet peeve is when Members come in and ask a question that has already been asked to a witness, because that's preventable, that's bad staff work. And I can see that on my list.
That's not right. I mean, it always starts and ends with the Member, but what that tells me is that an unprepared staff. And so I think setting up, setting expectations for the staff as a Member and as a Chief, and also making sure that you have standard operating procedures of how a busy session day is going to go, knowing the different roles of different committees.
Sometimes you can pop in a committee, you get your name in the queue, and then you go to the other committee and you sit there and you listen, I think you have to ruthlessly prioritize too. Sometimes I think when committees don't have good attendance, what that tells me is that either they are not properly staffing the Members, or it's not a topic the Members want to hear about.
And so I think Members vote with their schedules and they vote with their budget. And so, if it is a hearing that is not worthy of your time, go to the hearing it is, pick winners and losers. And again, ruthlessly prioritize based on your district and your agenda. The staff in the room should be going through all the questions.
It's much harder your freshman year, because you go at the end of the line of questioning, and sometimes all the good questions are [taken], which is why you really have to have good staff and think about what you want to ask and listen, because sometimes issues will come up during the hearing and because no one's listening, sometimes I don't see Members and staff being as nimble.
I love the staffer that is really paying attention to a hearing and said, “Wait a minute, I just caught what that witness said, and that is deserving of a follow up question.” And you're writing that question on the fly, and you're getting it up to the dais to your Member. That's great staffing. That's good work there. And I encourage people to do that too.
I also encourage folks to demand excellence of their committee staff, too. And I think committee staff respond if they think Members are reading their memos and reading their questions, they will meet the moment. And so I tell, when I have worked for Members, and I've worked for four doing committee work, I've encouraged, “Read that memo.” Read the memo, the committee desks.
If the committee doesn't do a memo, the staff needs to do a memo. Look through the committee questions. If you don't understand why they're asking it, go back and email or have the staff follow up with the committee staff and say, “Hey, why did you want us to ask that question? There seems like there's more there I should know.” Sometimes if it's a hearing you really like, or you just don't have a lot of background or expertise in the subject matter, ask if the committee staff will come brief you the day before. But, as much as you can, stay on top of it and prepare for the hearing, the better, especially on a busy day, and have a deadline of when staff need to have those questions in. Different offices have different roles, figure out what works best for that Member, but have some structure so that you can be prepared as a Member when you walk in that committee room.
Discussion and Interview with Nicole Tisdale
Taylor J. Swift: Aubrey, that seemed like a really great discussion that you had with Jen. I really liked when she brought up the importance of leaning on committee staff and having one of your staffers be physically present in the room. I know we mentioned this at the top of the podcast, but it's really great hearing it from a former Staff Director.
Jen also mentioned that, you know, it can be a pet peeve when a Member asks a question that has already been asked by someone else, indicating that, honestly, that's kind of a communication breakdown between the staff and the Members. So, definitely something you want to look out for. Preparing for committee work takes a lot of time and effort, but it can really, really pay off. And a little bit of prep can go a long way.
Our next guest is Nicole Tisdale, who is no stranger to Congress and the Executive branch. Nicole served as staff director for the Committee on Homeland Security in the House for ten years before holding a leadership role for the National Security Council under President Joe Biden.
During her tenure in the House, Nicole managed over 90 Congressional hearings and contributed to the passage of over 350 bills in the House with 80 becoming law.
She is also the founder of Advocacy Blueprints, which is an organization that provides consulting and advocacy training focused on national security and cyber policy issues.
She's also published the book Right to Petition, which helps outline how individuals can exercise their First Amendment rights.
So, Nicole, you've had a wealth of experience on the Hill supporting Members as a staffer on the Homeland Security Committee. From your decade in that role, what do you believe are some of the key skills that differentiate an effective committee member from an average one?
Nicole Tisdale: The thing that I always try to get Members to stay away from is, don't come on and assume you know everything. There's so much institutional knowledge that the other Members have because they've already gone through an authorization process. They've already gone through an appropriation process. And so what's really important is not just meeting the Chair and the Ranking Member, but the staff that they have who have been there and have the institutional knowledge, too.
From there, I think Members have to be open to committees helping them to structure their policy platform based on the things that they are working on. So I always tell people, people are shocked, but like committee staff have, like we get excited about Members coming onto our committee, and so by the time a Member met us, we'd already, like fanned out over them.
We actually have dossiers where we'll, like, go through, and we have interns help us to try to identify the issues that our committee works on. We try to match up what has the Member already said about these topics and these issues, because we're trying to understand what is going to be a good policy platform for them that is already aligned with their priorities.
And so I always tell Members, you don't have to show up with a committee platform. You can show up with priorities if you have priorities. But even if you don't have priorities, the staff will help you build those out and make sure that they're reflective to what your constituents want, and you really need to be open to that.
If you come in and you're immediately shutting down everything that they say they think might be a good idea, or you're not open to really these suggestions, it's going to make for an awkward first relationship. Now, that doesn't mean you have to say yes to everything, but at least be open and think about it.
So I always tell people, give a lot of slow “maybes” instead of a lot of fast “no's,” right? Which is just like, let me think about this. Let me talk with my staff about this. Let us go back, because the things that they are offering to you, they've already thought about for a really long time, and they're really just trying to help you build a platform because you don't want to be on a committee and have the name of being on a committee, but then not have the policies that you can shape so that you can actually get things done on the committee.
Aubrey Wilson: With outside of working with the staff on the committee to build out policy portfolios and priorities, obviously when a committee assignment happens, usually a Member's office starts getting a lot of outreach from special interest in that issue area. What advice do you have for staffers, to help their boss kind of manage the outside pressures of priorities from stakeholders, and from special interests with kind of also managing, the help that is coming from the committee with building out a policy portfolio.
Nicole Tisdale: Yes. I think it can be very overwhelming for Member offices once their committees are announced. The advocacy groups and the industry groups that have been in front of the committee every day, all day, immediately kind of ascend onto the personal offices. The main thing to do at first, especially if it is a freshman Member, is to recognize that you don't have to know all of these groups.
You don't have to know all of these corporations. I really encourage Members, especially for the first three to six months, when you're taking those meetings, especially at the Member level, it's okay to ask a committee staffer to join you.
So I think what's important, as these groups are reaching out, you should, the first three to six months, ask a committee staffer, if it is a Member level meeting, will someone come to the meeting and staff with you? If it's just a staff level meeting and it's an advocacy group or an industry group, you should ask them for a background.
You don't have to go to the meeting and expect to know things that you haven't been privy to, because your Member wasn't on that committee or your Member wasn't in Congress, or you haven't been in Congress. You can always ask people to give you the historical context and what their relationship is like with the committee. So that's what staff can do for staff to staff interactions.
But if your Member is there, I think it's really important, especially those first couple of months, to ask if a committee staffer will join the meetings.
Taylor J. Swift: So that's super helpful context. You know, you spent ten years, especially at the management level on the committee. Can you talk to us about ways that you were able to keep yourself organized and then, by extension, keep your Members organized? Because, like you mentioned, there are a lot of moving parts, a lot of relationships, both internal and external, a lot of groups, you know, working across the aisle.
There's just a lot of factors. So for our listeners who are just becoming staffers, talk to us about how you were able to stay organized.
Nicole Tisdale: Yeah. So the way I organized my subcommittee, but also my Members and their staff, we always, at the beginning of the Congress, I have their wish list. Their wish lists are: these are the things that I want to get done, these are the things I want to make movement on, and Members will say, “These are the topics that I want to focus on. Maybe I want legislation, maybe I want a hearing, maybe I want a community event, back in my district.”
But I would tell them I'm like, send me a wish list, put five things on your wish list, and that gave me context and framing of what the Member wanted. And then I would give them a wish. I would give them a to-do list.
The to-do list is like, these are the things I have to get done because I am managing this whole committee. So those are some of the things that are like, you know, I have to have a cyber workforce bill this Congress. And so if a cyber workforce bill is not on your wish list, just know it's on my have to do list.
And I would always explain why those things are on my list. Like, do we have to have a hearing at an airport? Like we do, because that is something at the airports track and like, the Transportation Security Administration keeps up with it too. And you can't take for granted that Members know what your to-do list is.
So there's the wish list, the to-do list, and then the “now we are focused on” this list. Those are the things you cannot plan for. Right. So the subcommittee that I worked on, we were in charge of cybersecurity, counter-terrorism and counterintelligence, which is espionage policy. I did not know the Edward Snowden leak would happen, but that required us to do a lot of oversight on the counterintelligence part of my portfolio.
I didn't know when terrorist attacks would happen, but if a terrorist attack happens, then we have to focus on counterterrorism policy and counter-terrorism oversight. That list is just a, it's almost like a current events list of things that are going to happen. And they always come up no matter what committee you're on, there are things that are just going to pop up.
And so in terms of staying organized, and my team used to help me with this a lot, I know that I have those three lists running concurrently. And so when I'm building out the calendar, when I'm building out the official activities we want to do and the unofficial activities we do, I'm just keeping all those things in mind.
And the truth is I did five and five. So there were eight at the beginning of any two-year Congress. I only had ten things to do. And so I always tell people, that doesn't sound like a lot, but the truth is the “now we got to focus on this list,” that emergency list was always growing. It was always booming.
And so I needed those ten things because, I mean, I didn't want to look up at the end of the Congress and everything we did was in response to an emergency. I didn't actually get to do what I call proactive or offensive public policy.
Aubrey Wilson: So I when I kind of dig it in a little bit more on this idea of like this wish list and the ideas that you kind of highlighted early on when you were saying that, you know, Homeland Security as an example of a committee that gets a lot of freshmen this last Congress that had over 30 Members that sat on it because, there's topics underneath that committee’s jurisdiction that affect every single district.
As a freshman coming on to serve on that committee, there's, you know, undoubtedly Members who have been serving on that committee longer that have become known as champions in issues that's on that committee’s jurisdiction. So to be a freshman to come on and then set a priority that you want to have there be movement in an area that's maybe kind of owned by an existing Member, can you talk about how maybe that mentorship relationship works, or just kind of how those inner-committee member relationships work not only on the Member level, but also on the staffer level?
Nicole Tisdale: Yeah, I mean, that's a good question. The thing that I tell Members, especially if you're trying to work on an issue where there is already a champion, is you got to do the relationship building. And so, so many people do it backwards. They like, they lay a marker and I'm using air quotes around that. They're like, all right, I'm going to just introduce this bill because I need to lay a marker.
It is like, okay, that's not the best way to do this because you just laid a known marker on an area that was already marked, and it creates a level of tension that could really be dissuaded. If you just have a conversation with a Member, Member to Member conversation first and just talk through, why do you want to lay a marker?
Why do you want to work on this issue? Why is it important to you? And I think a lot of new Members see that as like, I don't have to ask for permission. It's not about asking for permission, but you can take advantage of the mistakes, the barriers, the roadblocks, the bumps in the road that that Member has already gone through because they've already been working on this issue.
And sometimes I think if a Member is trying to circumvent another, like a more senior Member that's been working on an issue, you really end up starting at zero when you could have started at five and you lose really, really valuable time because again, you're going to look up and two years goes really, really quickly because you're you're on a Congressional calendar and you're on a Congressional circle.
So I really advise Members, it's totally fine if you're a new Member and you want to become a champion on an issue as well, or if you have a counter position, either way, you need to talk to that Member because no piece of legislation, no policy that you're going to do at the committee level can be done with just you.
You are going to need other advocates. And if you are talking to someone who has already been a champion, they're going to bring their coalition of supporters on the committee, but also in the chamber, which is really important.
Taylor J. Swift: So great advice, fantastic advice. Does this also apply for staff if a new staffer is brought on to the committee and they have a background in a certain kind of policy or advocacy, but they know that there are other staffers and Members that have been working on this issue internally inside Congress for a long time. Does this also apply to the staff?
Nicole Tisdale: It does. It's the same advice to the staff. I would say, in the order to do this, try to have the Member to Member conversation first. That may not be possible. And so then have the staffer to staffer conversation. What I always try to remind new staffers especially, is if your Member is coming to a committee or if you have outside subject matter expertise beyond Congress, your expertise is important, but it's also not the only thing that is important in this instance.
I worked with many offices where someone had outside information or outside expertise on human trafficking, and they would write these like super comprehensive bills as like their Member’s key legislation on human trafficking. And this is like a very specific example. They didn't talk to us first, and they wrote this really comprehensive bill, and the Member was on the Homeland Security Committee and that bill went to the Judiciary Committee because while they had a lot of expertise on human trafficking and what they wanted done, they did not have expertise on jurisdictional issues.
And so a lot of the things that they wanted in that bill, they were triggering the Department of Justice, which is the House Judiciary Committee, and they didn't write it focused on the Department of Homeland Security. What I would have advised them, or what we ended up doing, is you got gotta, you can't do all the things at a time.
At one time, we can get your boss landmark human trafficking legislation, but let's get him landmark legislation that goes to the committee that he is on so that we can mark up the bill at the subcommittee level so that then we can advocate for it to be marked up at the full committee level. And then we make sure that it gets to the floor when you write legislation, and then it goes to another committee, you just don't have those levers of influence and control.
And so I think it's always important for staffers to have that conversation with the committee staff ahead of time. And it's not always a jurisdictional issue. There have been instances where people write a piece of legislation and it gets referred to us. So committees will learn every day, they get a digest that tells them every piece of legislation that was referred to their committee.
What you don't want is, if it is a really important bill to your Member of Congress and you actually want it to move, I'll put an asterisk by that. Because if you just want to do a messaging bill, you can write those bills all day, every day. You can introduce them and then you don't care where they go or what happens to them.
Fine. But if you are really working on a piece of legislation and you want it to move. the first time a staffer knows that you're interested in it, or that you're writing, it should not be when they get the Daily Digest along with all 20 other bills they get referred to them from the previous day. It's not a good way to build a relationship that is going to actually get legislation moved.
And in fact, because we get so many referrals every day, and this is not just my subcommittee or the Homeland Security Committee, it is all the committees, the ton of bills being introduced every day, when I would see a bill on the Daily Digest, and no one had reached out to me about it, I assumed it was a messaging bill.
And when, by the time they reach out again, remember I have my wish list, my to do list, and my emergency list, if you have a piece of legislation that I had not talked to you about, I don't necessarily have that on any three of those lists, and so I'm not going to prioritize that in the same way that if you reach out to me before. I could say, “Hey, right now I'm working on our emergency list. This is a really good idea. I actually have a Member who has a similar topic on his wish list. Maybe we can work together so that they can both introduce this and we can get it moved, but not this week or not this month. Because I'm dealing with this emergency list.” I think you really have to, a good staffer has to think and be strategic about these things on behalf of your Member.
But sometimes Members will just say, “Well, I want to introduce now, I want it done now.” So you're not going to have time to send an email in draft language, but you can always pick up the phone. You can always, even if the bill is on its way to the hopper, you can pick up the phone. You can ask, “Who handles human trafficking, who handles counterterrorism? I would like to speak with them.”
And honestly, y'all, sometimes it really just is picking up the phone and someone saying, “My boss wanted to get this bill dropped,” which is the language we use for introduce, “my boss wanted to get this bill dropped today, so we are introducing it, but I really want to work with you on the language, because it is something that she wants moved.”
And so understanding sometimes your boss may not be quite as patient for you to go through the process, but you need to give some type of notice to these committee staffers that your legislation is coming if you want it to move.
Aubrey Wilson: So following up on those, like truly like, lived and walked in the shoes of lessons learned of working with the committee. And, being a longtime committee staffer, I know that during your time on the Hill, you manage over 90 Congressional hearings. There's no way that you can walk away from that and not have opinions on what is kind of the ideal Member who prepares for hearings and also the like, what not to do Member behavior or staff behavior that just makes it really challenging to have very productive oversight hearings.
Can you like, share, maybe like what comes first to mind with kind of those do's and don'ts of committee engagement and hearings?
Nicole Tisdale: Yeah. So yes, I managed over 90 hearings. I also put an asterisk by that, because that just means that I was in charge of those. I think I worked on 200 or 300 hearings, right, because we have so many of them. And I remember when I was a junior staffer and you start like you kind of do all the hearings, but those are the, that the 80 to 90 number is the number that I was in charge of setting up the theme, the vision, the goals, picking the witnesses.
And so I always tell staff and the way we did it on our committee, all committees won't provide you a hearing background and questions, but if you do luck up on a committee that provides you the background and the questions, you really need to use it. And so what I would do is all of our hearing materials, I try, I would try my best to get it to Members 48 hours in advance.
But honestly, it's really difficult to do that because the witness testimony is not due until 48 hours before the hearing. And so the idea that you can write questions before you know what the witnesses are going to say is really tough. It's also tough to write the background memo until you know exactly what the Members are or what the witnesses are going to say.
When I say use the materials, I would send a PDF copy, but I also sent a Word version. Just know committee staff knows that you all need to customize that, personal office staff needs to customize materials to the Member. It's totally fine. Well, when I say use their materials, I mean use it as a guide. If you're going to be using statistics, try to use the statistics that they have provided because they are giving you semi-vetted stats.
Right? And you want to make sure that you're using things that have been approved and documented by the committee, because you also don't want to show up with a whole bunch of stats that they haven't heard about, because if one of the witnesses starts to challenge your stats, which can happen, the staffers don't know where they came from.
They don't know where the numbers are, like the staffers included footnotes and they have like, there's their information in source. So I'm not saying you don't have to, I'm not saying you can't customize the materials, but the background memo and all of the materials are really there to guide you on what they're trying to accomplish for this hearing.
And that is something you really have to pay attention to, because sometimes if your Member is not clear on — what are the goals, what are the themes, what are we actually, what are we trying to message, what are we trying to pull out based off your committee party — you can really do what we call “hijacking” a hearing.
And when you hijack a committee's hearing, especially when people have worked weeks, months on these things, and there are questions that they need to get on the record. It stays with you, and you get a reputation of being a Member who doesn't actually pay attention, play by the rules, or is a serious legislator. Because what happens a lot with some of the hearings, and it's a mix, you do need to get the sound bites, because you do want people to pay attention to what you are doing, but you also have to be a serious legislator and you have to do serious oversight. And so you, there are, some of those questions that those staffers are giving you is because we are trying to build a Congressional record, a Congressional record that is going to be used so that we can advance this issue to have a public law, a Congressional record that is going to be used by the Executive branch because they're going to issue regulations, a Congressional record that is going to be used by the Judicial branch because they're going to interpret the law based off of what was said at this hearing. And so I think having that context in mind of you can do the things that are going to be newsworthy, but remember, these hearings are official Congressional activities, and they really serve an important purpose in our three branches of government.
Aubrey Wilson: Those are pro tips from Nicole, especially on how to stay organized and manage the relationships that you build with other committee staffers, agencies, and even with the White House.
Interview with Dr. Maya Kornberg
Aubrey Wilson: Our next guest is Dr. Maya Kornberg, a leading expert in democratic governance and civic engagement at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. She's also the author of a recently released book titled Inside Congressional Committees: The Function and Dysfunction in the Legislative Process.
Taylor J. Swift: So, Maya, you've literally written a book on Congressional committees, their operations, and their effectiveness. So let's talk a little bit about regular order on committees regarding marking up legislation and trends over the years. So, what should freshmen Members and staff expect regarding their involvement in crafting legislation and through their committee assignments?
Dr. Maya Kornberg: Thank you for the question. So I think it's important to look at that. In a historical perspective, one of the things that we've seen in Congress over the past several decades, is really the disempowering of committees, relative to party leadership. So as someone who studies legislatures, what we see in legislatures, really across the board is that often parties and committees are kind of competing organizing structures in legislatures, including in Congress.
And so their power relative to each other, is inversely correlated. The more powerful one is, the less powerful the other is. And, in Congress, if you look at it over kind of decades or even centuries, there's an ebb and flow in terms of the power of committees and the power of the party. But what we've seen over the past several decades is really a centralization of power in party leadership. This is as a result of some of the changes instituted in the 1970s, in Congress, and more recently, some changes, instituted under Newt Gingrich's leadership in the mid-90s, that cut committee staff, that doubled the power of the lead, party leaders, and steering committees and other decisions about who would be assigned to committees.
And I could continue, but there's a lot of different ways in which that's just the overall trend. So taking that into account, right now, and many freshmen coming in probably already have heard this, there's really kind of a breakdown of regular order. The school of House or Schoolhouse Rock kind of way that a bill is passed through where it's supposed to be introduced, and then sent to a committee that deliberates and marks up the bill and holds hearings, and then it goes back to the floor for a vote, that doesn't always happen in the same way.
Instead, what's happening is that frequently bills are pushed down very quickly. They're written by a few leaders in many instances with the help sometimes of lobbyists, and a lot of Members don't have time to, sometimes even read the bill fully before they have to vote on it.
So with this in mind, as kind of, a background dynamic, and what I said now about bills being pushed down is obviously not true for every bill. But that is something that we're seeing increasingly. I think for freshmen, coming on to a committee, there are a lot of other ways to, to make change. Though the legislative power of committees has to some degree diminished, there's still a really, really powerful space for new Members to form relationships with more senior Members, for new Members to learn about different topics. One of the stories I tell a lot is the story of the famous friendship between Barack Obama and Senator Dick Lugar. That friendship originated on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
They were both Members, Dick Lugar was a much more senior Member, and, Obama was, at the time, a junior Senator. And the fact that they formed this friendship allowed them to have a fruitful working relationship across party lines, I might add, for many years. And there's just so many stories like this, a freshman coming onto a committee and finding a mentor, finding allies, forming relationships that ultimately really help them push their legislative agenda forward.
So there's a lot of ways in which committees still really, really matter. And I think relationship building is one of them.
Aubrey Wilson: So Maya, you definitely highlighted the challenges that are kind of at play regarding just kind of the power dynamics of committees in the modern Congress. In addition, another challenge that we hear of Members having to really navigate is just their schedule with attending committees. We hear about a lot of committee action in the House and that sounds like the House is actually being really productive, but in reality, it's actually really challenging for Members to actively participate on committees in a meaningful way because of that. In your research, have you found kind of additional effects of those like challenges with coordinating schedules and the kind of effects that's having on the committee structure as a whole?
Dr. Maya Kornberg: Definitely. So there is now what's called the, some people refer to it at least, as the Tuesday to Thursday club, where Members are really flying in Tuesday, flying out Thursday. Most Members, since the 90s or so, no longer live in Washington. They spend the majority of the week back home in the district. There's a lot of reasons for this, including the pressure to fundraise, which I think needs to be acknowledged.
But for that reason, hearings are often scheduled at the exact same time. You know, Wednesdays are a popular time, morning or afternoon, Thursdays sometimes. And Members are, in some instances, if you look at their schedule, scheduled to be, you know, not just two, but like five places at once on the Hill.
And so this has a huge effect in terms of, in terms of committees, because Members will frequently come in and just ask their questions because they don't have time, their five minutes of questions or remarks and then leave. And this is something that I think needs to be addressed, by thinking creatively as, as many have been trying to do, I think for quite some time now about the Congressional schedule.
And really making sure that it is better, more aligned with the expectations of Members today. But in terms of, making best use of committee time, what I might say is, in the context of what's happening right now, when when I spoke to, as I did, in my research, many, many different staff on different committees, it's important to note that the personal staff of Members, they're the ones that are frequently there in the hearing, when the Member is stepping in and out.
So even if the Members aren't there, the fact that their staff are there learning, taking notes, understanding who the different players are and what their perspectives are, that's still very, very important. And so that should not be undervalued. The staff are really the backbone, I think, of the committee process and of Congress in general.
And so I would say that, I would say that encouraging staff to take notes and make as much use as possible of committees, with the understanding that Members can only be there for part of the time is really important.
Aubrey Wilson: Outside of really utilizing that staff expertise and investing in that staff, kind of getting this professional development just by being in the committee room, do you have other tips for how Members can be effective, given kind of all of the various challenges with navigating committee assignments in the modern Congress?
Dr. Maya Kornberg: So I mentioned relationship building, which I think matters. The other thing that I found is that hearings can often be a place, I mean, committees, it's worth noting, are one of the only bipartisan spaces in an increasingly partisan Congress. And they're a space where Members from both parties come together on a regular basis for hearings and other committee business.
And so, beyond, deeper relationship building, it's a place where Members can find allies by identifying who cares about a certain issue in questioning. I heard this a lot in my research from the book. I could give, you know, just two examples. One staffer for a Democratic Senator on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee told me that there was a bipartisan bill that they were trying to spearhead to create a Senate Select Committee on Cybersecurity.
And during the hearings, his boss noticed his boss was a Democrat, he noticed that a Republican Senator was vocal on cyber, and asked a lot of questions. And so later, they were able to work together with the Senator on this bill. And that really came from listening intently in the hearings and identifying who else might care.
Another staffer on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee told me a similar story. Her boss was at a hearing on creating a position on women's issues in the State Department and identified Members from both parties. that cared about the issue, they were asking inquisitive questions, so this is another way to identify allies and to kind of map out where different people might be sitting on a different issue.
And the other thing that I'll note is that hearings are also, you know, committees in general are, by design, a place for sharing technical research and educating Members. And so though they may not always form that space and we can discuss this later in greater detail maybe, but though they may not always form that space in Congress today, as I'm sure anyone who watches TV, sees it in different hearings, they can still be that space.
And so beyond learning where different Members kind of sit on an issue, there also is still a space to learn from the witnesses themselves, to really understand from the witnesses themselves, about the issues and educate yourself as a Member, as a staffer, as anyone watching the hearing, really.
Taylor J. Swift: You bring up some really good points about relationship building, education, and even sometimes, like shifting the Overton Window to kind of reorient what, you know, a problem or even solutions can be by using fact finding through committee hearings. But there are oftentimes different types of committee hearings with very different outcomes, and in your book, you actually have a chapter on different hearing types that Congress hosts.
So can you, for our listeners, can you walk through what some of those hearing types that you identified and maybe give some advice for how a Member can prep for them and be effective?
Dr. Maya Kornberg: Definitely. So this is really grounded in what legislative scholarship tells us are the purpose, and the purposes really, of committee hearings, because committees are really kind of a ubiquitous institution in legislatures. So we know that committees can be a deliberative space. They are designed to be a deliberative space in legislatures. And what I mean by deliberation is really weighing the different aspects of a question.
So that's one space that they fill. As I mentioned, they are also an educational space. They are designed to be a space for learning and specialization and sharing of research, in legislative bodies. They are also what Woodrow Wilson referred to as the “theater of debate upon legislation.” They are a public forum, they are a public face, and a way for Members to signal to the public that is watching, what their stands are on different issues and mobilize support or opposition for certain issues. And lastly, they are a space for personal connections. They are a bipartisan space right now in an increasingly partisan Congress, in a space where Members from both parties come together to engage in committee work.
They are also a space for Members to get to know each other through Congressional delegation trips, which are trips outside of Washington or, trips across the country like the Agriculture Committee did ahead of the 2018 farm bill, where they went across the country listening to farmers together as a committee. So they are a space to kind of get out of Congress together also, and be learning about different things and forming personal relationships outside the echo chambers of DC.
So they have all of these different potential purposes. And what I explain in the book is that, in different instances, you might see a hearing that is more of a deliberative hearing, or more of an educational hearing, or more of a theatrical hearing, or more of a hearing that can form a space for personal connection.
I would say that regardless of the type of hearing that you think is coming up next week or tomorrow, it is always important to educate yourself about the witnesses — who they are, what is their background — and that can help, particularly Members, perhaps in the minority, who sometimes are less involved in shaping the agenda, and choosing the witnesses to understand what's awaiting you in this hearing.
The best, “best” is a normative word, the most effective Members, I think over the years, are the Members who have staff that are doing their homework, that are preparing. I've also heard from committee staff how important it can be to go to the CRS and ask them for some background research on the topic of the hearing.
So that cannot be understated. Members have five minutes of time and that time can be used to either ask questions, or make a statement. In many instances, particularly if it's a more theatrical hearing where, you know, a lot of people are watching, Members can, and this is understandable, decide that maybe a better use of that time is to make a statement, and in many instances, they use that time to ask questions that are either inquisitive or they're more of “gotcha” questions of the witness, depending on the situation.
So that's really a key part of preparation, and lobbyists will frequently send suggested questions to Members. Personal staff will spend a lot of time crafting these questions, but that's really a key piece of crap that Members need to think about when it comes to hearings. It's educating yourself about the issue, the witnesses, and then understanding what's going to be the best use of your five minutes. Which is really not a lot of time of questioning and statement time.
Taylor J. Swift: So, you mentioned just now, how key it is for there to be proper preparation, quality staffing, and a good use of research time, like you mentioned, utilizing the Congressional Research Service, CRS, and playing this key part in the hearing process. And, you know, there was a recent Supreme Court decision on Chevron that could have a pretty significant implication for how Congress utilizes the legislative process and writes and interprets legislation.
You've written quite extensively recently about these potential impacts on Congress, and so could you just, for our audience who's unfamiliar, provide a little bit of a background of what this decision means and talk about how this will change the impact of committee work?
Dr. Maya Kornberg: Of course. So, in one of the last days of the term this summer, justices abandoned a real decades-old legal standard called Chevron deference. Under Chevron deference, courts were directed to defer to agency interpretations of statutes in cases where statutes’ text was vague or silent. And what that did was really place a lot of power with federal agencies.
And federal agencies are really a space that houses a lot of the technical expertise of government, especially over the past several decades. And this is really necessary when it comes to grappling with complex regulatory issues and other technical issues. The Executive branch has a lot of capacity to do this. According to one recent report, it has about 120 times the funding of the Legislative branch.
So it has a lot of capacity to do this. Now, the reversal of Chevron, which is what happened with the Loper Bright v. Raimondo case this summer, really disempowers agencies. And so up until now, Congress has relied on Executive agencies to sort out nuanced details of policies and actual implementation after it legislates. But now, with Chevron's reversal, it will no longer be able to do this.
Really, what it does is put the onus on Congress, which has said until now, okay, we're going to kind of punt it to the Executive to figure out the details because they have the expertise. It puts the onus on Congress to be legislating with a lot more specificity in a post-Chevron world. Now, what this means in terms of what Congress needs to think about, is that it now will need the technical expertise to be legislating with specificity. And so, I mentioned that staff are really important. It's all the more important now for Congress to be investing, within its own committees and personal offices, as well as within the Government Accountability Office, the Congressional Research Service, some of the other support agencies, and really getting more technical staff who can help, and explain some of these really complicated issues, like artificial intelligence, like climate change, all of these different scientific issues in an era where it's going to have to grapple with these policy topics.
Aubrey Wilson: So it's no doubt that with that change, that kind of incoming freshmen have a really interesting Congress in front of them. Like potentially as the committee is really trying to figure out, like you said, how to balance that expertise, or at least like get it on the committee, to then adjust to this change with, with that kind of in mind, and also with just kind of all of your expertise about the history of committees and their effectiveness and all the changes you've kind of seen leading to the modern Congress if you had one piece of advice for freshmen Members on how to be effective in committees, what would it be?
Dr. Maya Kornberg: So my advice for freshmen on committees, would be to spend the time getting to know both senior Members as well as junior Members. And speaking to, I'm actually doing new research now that looks at the experiences of freshmen over the past 50 years in Congress, and I've been speaking to a lot of current and former Members, and one of the things I'm hearing again and again from the Members who ended up being very effective in driving legislation forward, is that when they got to Congress, they set up as many meetings as they could, both with senior leadership in the committees, and with fellow freshmen and other Members, to really be taking the time to get to know them.
That could not be understated. There's not a lot of organic spaces for that in Congress today. Members don't always, or frequently actually, they don't live in DC and there are not a lot of spaces for them to get to know each other. And so these relationships can be crucial. To give an example of a relationship that helped someone get on a powerful committee, Henry Waxman, Member of the class of ‘74, he got on the Energy and Commerce Committee as a freshman. That's pretty rare. That's one of the committees that is harder to get on, and one of the reasons many people think that he got on to that committee is because of his relationship with Phil Burton, who was a senior leader.
That was a relationship that they had already formed in the California legislature together. But, it's reminiscent of kind of a larger theme. Getting to know some of these Members can help junior Members in getting better committee assignments, in navigating and moving forward legislation. We saw this also with Lauren Underwood, who partnered with more senior Member Adams to create the Black Maternal Health Caucus.
There's a lot of value in partnership, especially with senior Members, and I would say, especially given the Congressional dynamics today. So that's one I think, really, really important thing to keep in mind.
Discussion
Taylor J. Swift: Maya brought up a ton of really good points, but we just want to highlight something that's super crucial for this conversation. And that was the overturning of Chevron deference. This is a really consequential decision from the Supreme Court and will have massive implications on not only Congress, but the federal government as a whole.
To learn more, make sure you check out the published work from the American Enterprise Institute, the Foundation for American Innovation, and, of course, our work at popvox.org/chevron. Don't worry about writing this all down. We have them all listed in the episode notes.
So Aubrey, I know we mentioned off the top, but since you worked for the Committee on House Administration and at this point hearing advice from our expert guests, what are some things that stand out as some of your biggest takeaways thus far for being an effective committee member?
Aubrey Wilson: Oh my gosh, Taylor, after all that content, how can I pick just one? I think that two things that really stood out to me was we kept hearing the words relationship and time. You know, Maya, shared the example of how, you know, former President Obama, he was serving in Congress and he was extra effective even as a new Member because of the relationships that he was able to form with those more senior Members who served with him in the Senate with him.
And I think that,like relationship business side of committee activity that is, like where the effectiveness really comes from. I think a couple of our guests made the comment about how, you know, hearings can kind of come off as these one-off topics. They can come up really fast, almost kind of seemingly out of the blue.
You have the hearing, and then the committee moves on to the next thing. From a Member's perspective, investing in that topic long-term and doing the follow up, submitting questions for the record, working with the committee staff, pulling on a thread that is particularly impactful to your district and following up with that with oversight letters. Those are those tools that can make sure that every hearing that you start investing in as a Member and a staffer has kind of this long tail of influence, long past, when that, you know, particular hearing gavels out.
So their relationship emphasis, I think, was one of the top takeaways we heard. And the other thing, it's just the time, like I was saying, we kept hearing that come up. One of the biggest shocking parts to me of being a Congressional staffer was that oftentimes you only have a week's notice for hearings to prep for, which in a week, there's a lot that can happen in Congress and finding that time to really get to know the subject matter area that the topic is going to be on, to get to know the witnesses that are going to come before the Member to get the questioning, and understanding the direction that you want your questioning to go, that's a really short timeline to seemingly be effective. But it's doable.
And we see it happen in Congress every single week. And so, I think once again, like the, the advice that, that our guests gave about how to utilize that time, to be super effective, you know, whether it's by using, you know, tools to prep when you're in the district, making sure your staffers really understand the workflow that you like, I think all those are things that are required, like pieces of gold, that are going to make freshman really effective.
Taylor J. Swift: Yeah, I agree, you mentioned it a couple of minutes ago. Having strong relationships with your personal office staff and those on the committee will help you rely on the experts. You're not going to have time to juggle all of these. I know Maya mentioned that we have the Tuesday to Thursday club, where Members are hopping in and out of hearings because there are so many and often are double- or even triple-booked.
But if you have staff that can properly prep you with background expertise, questions, you can use that time effectively. Obviously, it's not as ideal as you would like, but having that bang for your buck, I think will create more legitimacy for you and make sure that you can do that proper follow up, like you mentioned, those QFRs, those letters, to make sure that this isn't just a one off topic that, quite frankly, staff, committee members, and the witnesses have spent so much time prepping for.
And for those listeners, I apologize. A QFR is a question for the record, that's the ability for Members to submit questions after a hearing is done to the witnesses so that they can follow up formally, and be put into the record.
Conclusion
Aubrey Wilson: Taylor, you've had years of experience of supporting Members, their staff and committee staff in preparing and hosting really valuable committee interactions, but from the seat of working for good governance organizations outside the Hill, what advice from your perspective stood out to you as the most valuable based on your own experience?
Taylor J. Swift: I know we talked about this a little while ago before our previous guests, but it's a time issue. Members and staff only have a certain amount of time to synthesize really complicated and complex topics into easily understandable narratives and questions for their witnesses. So if you're a staffer or a Member, you need to make sure that you're doing your reading, you're doing your research, you're doing your due diligence, because otherwise you're not going to properly be understanding what's going on.
And then on the flip side, if you're a personal office staffer trying to work with committees, setting up expectations with what your Member needs, the weeks, days, hours and minutes leading up to those hearings, collaborating with the committee office staff will be able to have you set up for success. And so again, time is such a valuable asset on the Hill, and if you can utilize your time wisely for your committees, that's going to be extremely effective for you.
Aubrey Wilson: Yeah. I also appreciate the emphasis on making the most of the committee, assignments that you have and the topics that do come before you. I think that a lot of the Members that we heard from talked a lot about really figuring out ways to drive home the relationship between was talked in the committee and the impact on the district.
And once again, talking about how it's a muscle, you know, you have to form those relationships, you have to figure out what your footing is going to be with your committee jurisdiction,you have to make sure that your staff understand your priorities, and so that will take time as you figure out your priorities, particularly during your freshman time or term.
And so, yeah, Taylor, I completely, completely agree with you on all those points.
Taylor J. Swift: I will add, I know we had Representative Bice just come on and kind of talk to us about how difficult it is to juggle being on so many committees and subcommittees, but you could tell during our interview with her that she does this because she cares: she cares about the work, she cares about policy, she cares about learning more and learning about the institution and serving her constituents.
And I know we touched on it a bit, but really, the work of the Select Committee on or excuse me, the Modernization Subcommittee on, they continue to look at creative ways that committees can interact and collaborate with themselves and each other, but also their witnesses. If anybody wants to nerd out on some previous work that the House Select Committee has done, they actually used to hold like nontraditional hearing formats.
So instead of having the daises where you would have Republican Members on the right and Democratic Members on the left, and everything was very political, they would actually sit on the same level in a circle in bipartisan seating. And those different approaches actually were more conducive to collaboration and friendship, and it actually helped create a better environment for witnesses to answer questions.
And so I know I'm nerding out a bit on like, some previous ideas, but it would be great in the 119th Congress if some of the standing committees were to adopt some of these practices, too.
Aubrey Wilson: While I'm talking about modernization, I know that representative Bice also emphasized her use of kind of modern technology with using that iPad, and how that's really helped her staff be able to communicate with her and send her documents and prep materials for hearings, instead of having her have to carry around a big paper binder everywhere that might get outdated, depending on what questions have already been asked in the hearing that she's popping into, or in case something changes with the kind of questions that her staff recommends that she pursued during the hearing depending on what kind of information and research they've been able to gather. And I, for my time working on the committee, I definitely remember that one of the big trends that Members are starting to pick up on is actually using digital notebooks, and doing file sharing.
And I think that that's an incredible thing to look into it, particularly because if you are a very busy Member that has a lot of committee assignments, carrying around multiple binders to all the different committee assignments, it gets heavy. And it also gets very confusing. It's very old school. And so any way that you're willing to like, you know, look at new technology, come up with new ideas, know that those are all available to you as a Member to to be more innovative with the kind of tools you are able to use to make your kind of workflows easier.
Taylor J. Swift: So, Aubrey, you're cooking, can you explain to our listeners kind of what goes in those binders and potentially what an iPad can be used to substitute for it?
Aubrey Wilson: Oh my gosh, absolutely. Taylor. Yeah. So committee binders. So for every single hearing it's usually a best practice done by the committee to provide every Member with a committee binder. And your committee binder will be different for every single unique hearing that you have. So usually committee staff will deliver the committee binder to your committee liaison, which is your personal office staff that's assigned to your committee the week of the committee hearing, and it has all of the prep material for that upcoming hearing that the committee has put together to support your Member to be successful at that hearing. So usually it has a memo on why the committee is assigned to do the hearing at this time, what they're hoping to get out of the hearing, it’ll include the bios of all of the witnesses that they’re hoping on having attend.
It'll usually have some suggested talking points or, once again, kind of the main themes that they're hoping the committee hearing will touch on, and sometimes it also has recommended questions that the committee hopes that the Members will ask. It's a really good opportunity for the staffers to understand, for your personal office staffers, to understand and work with committee staff, to know where the hearing purpose is supposed to kind of lead the committee's kind of overall agenda for whether it be oversight or policy or lawmaking for this Congress, but it's also a complete suggestion. As a Member of Congress, you can take your questions and your approach in any direction that you want. And so with that being the case, when they deliver that binder to you, your staff is able to then edit it, and mark it up and change it to take, like I said, the hearing, whatever direction that you want.
The binders are usually paper. Some committees have adopted sending out PDF versions of it as well, but they're usually paper. And so depending on what your personal preference is, you can always ask the committee, and that, tell them that your preference is to receive those documents digitally so that your staff can mark those up.
And if that binder is delivered to you, during a recess week in preparation for an early session week hearing the next week, then, that those documents can actually be sent to you when you're at your district. You can read them on the plane into DC and kind of prep for that committee hearing early before sitting down with your DC staff to then participate in that hearing, maybe on a fly-in day on a Tuesday night or first-thing Wednesday morning.
So that's what a committee binder is.
Taylor J. Swift: It's so, so, so helpful to have that background. Aubrey. I hope our listeners got a ton out of that. And again, I know we sound like broken records here, but please try your best to rely on your staff. You're not going to be able to do it all. You're not going to be able to do all of this alone.
So, if you have folks that you can bring in that you trust, that understand what your communication style is, how you want to utilize your five minutes or even a second round of questioning, doing all of that due diligence on the front end will save you so much headache on the back end, so hopefully you found that helpful.
Aubrey Wilson: Well, and I'll just point out, too, Taylor, nothing makes a committee staff or our personal office staffer happier than getting a thank you every now and then from a Member with recognition of how much work goes into hearings. It is really hard to understand, as a Congressional staffer that Members aren't able to attend every hearing, but staffers have to be prepped as if that Member is going to be in that hearing the entire time that hearing is gaveled in.
And so with that being the case, too, if I can put out a recommendation to please, like as you get used to, you know, running around the halls of Congress trying to make it to all your committee assignments on time, when you do miss that hearing, make sure you go to your staff and tell them, thank you for the prep work, even if it didn't come to fruition this time.
Taylor J. Swift: Hear, hear.
We want to extend an extra special thank you to our guests, Representative Stephanie Bice, former Representatives Rodney Davis and Ed Perlmutter, along with our experts Nicole Tisdale, Jen Daulby, and Dr. Maya Kornberg.
Aubrey Wilson: And thank you for listening, and be sure to join us next time on Gavel In for more insider knowledge and actionable tips for your journey through Congress. If you found today's episode helpful, please feel free to share it with your colleagues and be sure to go to our website popvox.org/gavel, where the episode pages have extra resources to make sure that you and your team are set up for success, both in DC and the district, from day one.
Speaking of which, you can also go to popvox.org/futureproofing to learn more about how you can make a difference in your new role to ensure that Congress is likewise set up for success in the long run. Follow us @popvoxfdn on X and Instagram, and we're POPVOX Foundation on LinkedIn. Thank you for your service and we'll see you in Congress.
