Power Grab - Jason Chaffetz Page 0,52

testimony. Nevertheless, the weaponization of the Department of Justice in the first two years of the Trump administration proves why oversight from outside the executive branch is such an important function of Congress.

To the extent congressional investigations can expose what happens in darkness, they serve as one of the few disincentives to abuse power in the executive branch. As I’ve often said, absent market forces to constrain behavior, the federal bureaucracy needs the threat of public exposure to keep it in line. The fact that the exposure may be motivated by political considerations makes the tool no less potent.

Legitimate oversight is nothing to be feared. If someone inside the Trump administration has legitimately broken the law, compromised national security, or abused their power, they should be held accountable like anybody else. I think President Trump would agree. It was my experience that President Obama did not. Nevertheless, rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse should be a priority in any administration. Oversight is not overreach simply because the target of an investigation shares our political views.

I had the opportunity to work with Chairman Elijah Cummings while he served as the House Oversight Committee’s ranking member. Despite some of our public disputes during hearings, we made a serious effort to work collaboratively on many investigations. We developed a mutual respect and a friendship that would probably surprise people. Together we pursued dozens of bipartisan investigations that often drew little media coverage, but ultimately helped hold people accountable.

I’m proud of the work we did on prescription drugs, Freedom of Information Act reforms, legislation to empower inspector generals, uncovering misconduct and improving security with the Secret Service, exposure of wrongdoing at the Drug Enforcement Administration, and efforts to uncover the truth of the Flint, Michigan, water crisis. We were able to work together to root out some of the incompetence that can inevitably be found in large bureaucracies and to be a catalyst for effective reforms. This is oversight as it is meant to be conducted. Now that Cummings holds the chairmanship, I would like nothing better than to see him continue that bipartisan tradition of working together to root out the problems within the federal bureaucracy.

Policy Replaced with Politics

Unfortunately, I think Speaker Pelosi believes the tools Chairman Cummings now controls are far too valuable politically to waste on government accountability or problem solving. These are not her priorities. They don’t excite the base to donate to political campaigns and nonprofits. They do not generate invitations to Sunday news shows or get members featured in viral media clips. Instead, she wants the oversight tools for her war on Donald Trump.

Make no mistake. The transformation taking place right now is not merely a change of partisan control. What is coming is a fundamental transformation of the oversight role. The Oversight, Judiciary, and Intelligence committees’ investigative powers are becoming primarily a political weapon. Pelosi sees them as a tool to build narratives. She has little care whether those narratives are true or false, only that they move the needle in the next election.

Don’t expect to see much energy being devoted to bipartisan efforts to clean up government in the run-up to a high-stakes presidential race. Those types of efforts may well become another casualty in this political war for dominance. While Cummings is very capable of providing substantive and effective oversight, he is also a loyal soldier for Speaker Pelosi and unfortunately seems to concur with her inclination to convert oversight resources to weapons on the political battlefield.

The renaming of the committee to remove the word government was the first signal that the 116th Congress will have little interest in traditional investigations of waste, fraud, and abuse in executive branch agencies. The decision also signals a metamorphosis of congressional committees to extend their oversight jurisdiction beyond mere government entities and into the furthest reaches of the American economy. Targeting individuals and private sector entities is an abuse of the committee’s power. But it’s already happening.

In fact, when Chairman Cummings was interviewed by 60 Minutes just after taking the chairmanship, he indicated a belief that his committee could investigate anything, without limit and without regard to whether the subject of the investigation is government related at all.

Coincidentally, this threat to dramatically expand the committee’s scope brings some financial perks to the campaigns of committee members.

The House Oversight Committee is considered a “C” committee, meaning seats on the committee are not as difficult to get as the more choice “A” and “B” committees. “A” committees are designated as