By James Jimenez
Congressional investigations in aid of legislation are almost the only news ever coming out of congress these days. Every time some possible wrong-doing by someone grabs the news headlines – from foreign nationals running for local elective office to ‘gentlemen’s agreements’ – you can be sure that a Congressional inquiry in aid of legislation will be called for. And at these hearings, citations for contempt – or at the least the threat thereof – have become so commonplace that people have begun to seriously question whether these investigations are being used properly or, as the joke goes, only in aid of self-promotion.
Function and Form
Congressional investigations in aid of legislation are a critical function of legislative bodies. They are intended to give the legislative body the ability to gather the information it needs to draft, revise, or repeal laws. The authority to conduct these investigations is rooted in Congress’ broader power to create laws and oversee the performance of government functions.
By inquiring into issues that impact the nation’s governance, Congress seeks to ensure that the existing laws are being properly implemented, and to identify the cracks where new laws may be needed or be useful to improve how things are being done. Admittedly controversial, this power to conduct inquiries must, nevertheless, be understood to be a crucial part of the system of checks and balances that is foundational to how our democracy works.
Because its function is to discover where and how laws fail to meet their stated objectives, congressional investigations are necessarily inquisitorial in form. And much as it sometimes appears otherwise, they are not punitive – they are not meant to punish wrong-doing.
Unlike judicial or criminal investigations – those focus on determining guilt or innocence – congressional probes only aim to uncover facts that can then be the basis for future legislation. In a sense, these investigations help lawmakers understand complex issues that aren’t always readily apparent or comprehensible to someone who isn’t deeply involved – such as the various modus operandi of government malfeasance, the intricacies of industry practices, or the nuances of societal trends that need legal responses. Through subpoenas, testimonies, and the collection of relevant documents, the legislators build up their knowledge and understanding of the subject matter so that they are able to craft better and more responsive laws.
A Good Example
Remember that time, earlier in the year, when social media posts called attention to the fact that a resort had been built on one of the Chocolate Hills of Bohol? It immediately sparked a controversy due to the environmental and legal concerns surrounding the resort’s location and construction: it was built on a protected UNESCO World Heritage Site, and it was constructed without an environmental compliance certificate.
Obviously, not all members of Congress have environmental credentials, nor would be expected to be experts on the various issues impacted by the resort in question. Thus, in this case, Congress properly initiated an investigation to gather evidence and testimony from affected communities, environmental experts, industry leaders, and government regulatory bodies.
Accountability
Another – and perhaps more commonly invoked – aspect of congressional investigations is their role in maintaining accountability. With these inquiries, Congress takes a more direct role in holding the executive branch or private persons accountable for actions that may run counter to the law or, in some way, work against the public interest. When there are allegations of corruption within government agencies, for example, Congress may launch an investigation to assess whether existing laws on transparency or oversight are sufficient. In the same way, Congress can respond to a national crisis, such as public health emergencies, by holding probes that uncover systemic failures and pave the way for reforms aimed at preventing future occurrences.
In this is way, Congress reinforces the system of checks and balances baked into our governmental set-up, and – when used properly – bolsters public confidence in the rule of law.
Out of the box
But to step out of the box for a while, we can also pragmatically view Congressional hearings as one of the ways in which we have fought against misinformation and disinformation campaigns.
With increasing frequency, social media platforms have been weaponized to distort facts, taking official acts, statements, or policies out of context and manipulating them for political purposes.
Congressional hearings play a critical role in addressing this by creating a public platform where facts can be clarified, and individuals responsible for spreading falsehoods can be held accountable. These hearings provide an opportunity for lawmakers to directly confront instances of misinformation, question officials, and bring experts to testify on the facts. One recent case comes to mind, where a political pundit was called to task for strongly implying wrong-doing on the part of a sitting member of Congress. The pundit eventually recanted, proving that – even though no new legislation emerges, Congressional inquiries can be used to ensure that policy discussions are based on truth rather than distortion.
To scrap or not to scrap
Many people have been loudly calling for Congress to be stripped of its power to conduct investigations in aid of legislation. Even if this were possible – which is more assuredly not – scrapping that power would be a terrible idea.
Eliminating congressional investigations entirely would fatally undermine the very essence of legislative oversight. Without this tool, Congress would be operating in a vacuum, unable to fully grasp the implications of its legislative decisions or assess the real-world impact of laws already in place.
Essentially, the legislative process is dependent on detailed, factual input, which these investigations provide. Even more damagingly, the scrapping of this power would tilt the balance of power towards the executive, allowing government agencies or private industries to act with far less scrutiny and more impunity. The result could be unchecked abuses of power, a lack of transparency, and weakened public trust in governance.
At the end of the day, while congressional investigations may sometimes appear politically motivated or confrontational to the point of pambabastos, they do serve the indispensable function of allowing lawmakers to legislate effectively and ensure that the laws they pass are based on a meaningful comprehension of the issues they are trying to address. This makes congressional investigations critical for preserving the integrity and functionality of the legislative process.
