“Congress is broken.” This common refrain inside and outside of Washington embodies a sentiment shared by the political right and left alike—that Congress is failing to meet its obligations to the American people. Recent public opinion surveys have borne out Americans’ lack of faith in our legislative branch: According to Gallup, Americans trust Congress less than all other government institutions and leaders, at a level of just 32 percent. This comes as little surprise to anyone who has observed the depths of the dysfunction that so frequently dominates the halls of Congress and the daily headlines.

The founders designed the legislative branch to be the people’s representative body. But with tighter budgets, high staff turnover, and an increasingly hyperpartisan environment leading to legislative gridlock, Congress is widely perceived by the public as unresponsive, out of touch, and unable to perform its crucial Article I responsibilities effectively.

In recent years, though, some important and exciting bipartisan work has been happening behind the scenes on Capitol Hill to strengthen Congress and alleviate the dysfunction.

Bipartisan Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress

In 2019, at the beginning of the 116th Congress, the House of Representatives established the bipartisan Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress. This was the first committee since the early 1990s to investigate the question of how Congress can fix itself. The creation of the select committee was a vital step in addressing how Congress can better function, and how both parties can work together to revitalize Congress into a more modern and productive policymaking institution.

Over the next four years, the committee made quiet but steady progress that will improve operations and interactions with constituents, including updating antiquated scheduling systems that routinely double-booked members; launching a new system that allows the public to easily track how amendments change legislation and the impact proposed legislation would have on current law; and creating opportunities for constituents to better communicate with their elected representatives. Even more promising, the committee established bipartisan committee staff briefings and agenda-setting retreats to encourage better policymaking and collaboration among members. It also worked to improve new member orientation, with a greater focus on civility, teamwork, and leadership skills.

These successes may seem like small feats, but against the backdrop of a bitterly divided Congress and electorate, the committee—made up of six Democrats and six Republicans—demonstrated a rare level of bipartisanship that some described as a “parallel congressional universe.” As vice chairman Representative William Timmons, a South Carolina Republican, noted, members “actually spent time together, and we talked about things.”

The committee, which was always intended to be temporary, closed up shop at the conclusion of the 117th Congress. But just a few months later, the House Administration Committee announced the establishment of a permanent modernization subcommittee—fulfilling a vital recommendation from the previous body. Under the leadership of Chairwoman Stephanie Bice, a Republican from Oklahoma, and Ranking Member Derek Kilmer of Washington, the nascent Subcommittee on Modernization has been tasked with implementing the committee’s 202 bipartisan recommendations aimed at improving the “first branch” and building a Congress worthy of the twenty-first century.

The subcommittee has made progress on many important issues, including the attraction and retention of quality staff and the fostering of greater bipartisan collaboration. These achievements might not solve everything, but they have proven to be steps toward making Congress a more effective, efficient, and transparent institution and restoring confidence in the legislative branch.

Attracting and Retaining Staff

Going way back in time, congressional staffs were small and, with some exceptions, geared toward constituent service. Starting in the 1970s, staffing and expertise grew, and today, a typical House member has around 20 employees, while an average senator has more than 50 staffers. But pay—for people who often work very long hours—typically ranges from inadequate to abysmal.

What’s more, high staff turnover coupled with minimal diversity has made it harder to deliver a more capable and adept institution for the American people. The House Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI), created in March 2020 as a result of a bipartisan recommendation by the former select committee, was regrettably disbanded in March. While some ODI staff have shifted over to the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer, the development still underscores the unfortunate politicization of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives across the country.

The good news is that bipartisan efforts to attract and retain staffers from all socioeconomic backgrounds continue to gain traction. Recent research by Issue One reveals that the salaries of the lowest-paid staffers on Capitol Hill have improved since 2020, when roughly 13 percent of congressional staffers made less than a living wage, including 70 percent of staff assistants. Thanks to the creation of a pay floor in the House in September 2022, the share of Washington-based staff assistants (as opposed to those working in district offices back home) earning less than a living wage was cut in half between 2021 and 2023, and just 4.6 percent of congressional staffers made less than a living wage by 2023.

As encouraging as the improvements are, this wage growth has been uneven due to the lack of a pay floor in the Senate. By following the House’s lead and instituting a similar salary reform, the Senate can make it easier for people from all social and economic backgrounds to work for Congress and make the nation’s capital their home.

Another reform that would aid cash-strapped House staffers is altering how paychecks are issued. House staff are currently paid once a month. This is not in accordance with how Senate staffers are compensated, and, indeed, with how most Americans are paid. If the House issued paychecks either every other week or twice a month, staffers would have quicker access to their wages and increased financial flexibility. The idea of issuing paychecks on a semimonthly basis was endorsed by the select committee, and Representatives Kilmer and Timmons have introduced bipartisan legislation to enact this pragmatic change.

Additional proposals could include paying all congressional interns and offering career development opportunities for staffers. As you might anticipate, life as a congressional intern has its challenges. Similar to full-time staff, interns tend to be overworked and under-resourced. The work can also be tedious: Representative Kilmer has said publicly that his own time as a Hill intern was not “the most robust experience” and largely involved going through mail. But Congress can improve these conditions, beginning with paying interns fairly. Another important step is to ensure that anyone who is interested has the opportunity to apply for a congressional internship. On that front, Congress is already making some progress: A House Intern Resource Office was established earlier this year that will unify intern-related practices under a single system to publicize internship opportunities and ensure they are accessible to individuals of diverse backgrounds. As for staffers, the current scarcity of professional development opportunities hurts aspiring public servants’ ability to grow and acquire knowledge. By offering them more resources, Congress could better prepare them to ascend on or off the Hill.

Furthermore, another potential area for modernization has emerged in the aftermath of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, a landmark Supreme Court decision earlier this year that reversed the 40-year-old “Chevron doctrine” under which courts deferred to agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous federal laws. Loper has inspired a debate about the need for Congress to produce more precise legislative text that doesn’t rely on agency interpretations. Both liberal and conservative scholars agree that there is an opportunity post-Chevron to build additional congressional capacity to support the legislative process.

Bipartisan Collaboration

Over the years, increasingly partisan and divisive rhetoric has dominated American politics inside and outside the halls of Congress. While there’s no error in fighting for one’s preferred policies, Congress must maintain a level of healthy governance in order to fulfill its constitutional duties. Our elected representatives’ discourse, language, and behavior have an impact in our society, so it isn’t a tall ask to expect a certain decorum from them. Yet, what many Americans see today is a broken legislative process where the parties struggle to work together to accomplish even the most basic functions, like passing annual appropriations bills that keep the government and critical programs running.

Fostering greater civility and cooperation between members was a key aspect of the select committee’s work, with a goal of promoting better and healthier dialogue among federal lawmakers and in the broader congressional community. Despite the creation of co-working spaces for congressional staff to encourage bipartisan collaboration, progress in this area has largely fallen short, and many of the committee’s recommendations have yet to be implemented. These include revitalized new member orientations that emphasize cross-aisle collaboration, new systems to acknowledge member involvement in and contributions to legislation, bipartisan committee websites, and new feedback tools for rank-and-file members serving on committees. These proposals reflect a fundamental philosophy of the select committee: Elected officials can’t be expected to fix the problems in our country if they don’t start with themselves.

Members of Congress are elected by the American people and sent to Washington to represent their constituents’ interests, legislate for the common good, and uphold the Constitution. They also have a duty to create the type of institution that the people both deserve and need. The work required to build a more responsive legislative branch that works for everyone will be a never-ending undertaking—one that Republicans, Democrats, and independents alike must prioritize together.

While much can be said about the current state of Congress and its lack of governing, the bipartisan modernization movement within its halls is a poorly noted success story that is worthy of our attention and support. As Congressman Emanuel Cleaver II of Missouri once stated, “If all of Congress could operate the way that the modernization committee has, the nation would be in a much better place.” We believe Cleaver is on to something.