Full Committee Business Meeting

Committee on Government Operations

2025-02-25

Loading video...

Source: Congress.gov

Summary

The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform convened to approve its Authorization and Oversight Plan for the 119th Congress, a process which quickly devolved into a contentious partisan debate. The meeting was marked by disagreements over the plan's scope, the legitimacy of executive actions, and procedural challenges.

Themes

Bipartisanship and Plan Development

The Chair, James Comer, stated that he attempted to foster bipartisanship by sharing a draft of the oversight plan with Democrats and offering to incorporate their suggestions, but these efforts were reportedly declined. [ 00:23:28-00:24:31 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 He accused Democrats of refusing to discuss their proposed amendments in advance and instead seeking to "stonewall and engage in theater." [ 00:24:45-00:25:56 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 Ranking Member Gerald E. Connolly, however, countered that the Republican majority had unilaterally crafted the plan, accusing them of lecturing about cooperation while pursuing a partisan agenda. He argued that the presented plan was not serious or comprehensive and represented a "unilateral retreat" from meaningful executive oversight.

Scope of Oversight: Republican Perspective

Republicans emphasized the importance of rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse in federal programs, highlighting areas such as federal workforce, regulations, and financial management. [ 00:27:38-00:27:53 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 They supported the actions of President Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), led by Elon Musk, arguing these efforts address public demand for fiscal responsibility by cutting unnecessary federal jobs. Marjorie Taylor Greene asserted that Doge's actions were constitutional and necessary given the national debt.

Scope of Oversight: Democratic Perspective

Democrats criticized the Republican plan for ignoring crucial oversight of President Trump and Elon Musk's administration. They raised concerns about President Trump's alleged "Friday Night Massacre" of inspectors general, the purge of nonpartisan civil servants, and the unconstitutional impoundment of congressionally appropriated funds. Dave Kunnghee Min and Gerald E. Connolly specifically accused Elon Musk and Doge of exceeding their authority, misusing federal systems, and acting for personal financial and political interests. Concerns were also voiced regarding the potential privatization of the U.S. Postal Service. [ 00:40:47-00:41:04 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Debate on Presidential and "Doge" Authority

Republicans staunchly defended President Trump's and Elon Musk's actions through Doge, citing Article II of the Constitution as vesting executive power in the President and authorizing such appointments and initiatives to maximize governmental efficiency. They argued that identifying and removing underperforming federal employees is a necessary executive function. Democrats contended that Doge and Musk illegally usurped congressional authority over lawmaking and appropriations, emphasizing that Congress alone holds the constitutional "power of the purse." They highlighted ethical conflicts and the lack of a congressional oath for Elon Musk, questioning his legitimate role in federal governance.

Tone of the Meeting

The meeting exhibited a highly contentious and polarized tone, characterized by frequent partisan accusations and procedural disputes. [ 00:24:45-00:25:11 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 The Chair intervened multiple times, notably silencing a Democratic member for disparaging the President, which led to further heated exchanges about free speech and parliamentary rules. Despite attempts by the Chair to move the discussion forward, the meeting was dominated by fractious debate, reflecting a deep partisan divide and limited willingness for bipartisan cooperation.

Participants

Transcript

?
Unknown
Thank you.
All right, we were waiting for you, Glen.  We were waiting for you, we can start now.  The committee will please come to order.   A quorum is present.  Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time.  Pursuant to Committee Rule 5V and House Rule 11, Clause 2, the chair may postpone further proceedings today on the question of approving any measure or matter or adopting an amendment on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered.  Now, pursuant to notice, I call up the Committee on Oversight and Government Reforms Authorization and Oversight Plan for the 119th Congress.   The Clerk will report the plan which has been distributed in advance.  The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's Authorization and Oversight Plan for the 119th Congress.  I ask unanimous consent that the plan be considered as read and open for amendment at any point.  Without objection to order, the Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.  The Clerk will please report the amendment.
An amendment in the nature of a substitute to the committee's authorization and oversight plan is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
Without objection, the amendment is considered as read and the substitute will be considered as original text for the purposes of further amendment.  I now recognize myself for five minutes for a statement on the ANS.  Good afternoon.  We're here today to approve the committee's authorization and oversight plan.   The rules requires to mark up and submit this plan at the beginning of each new Congress.  Last Congress on February 28th, 2023, the committee's oversight plan was adopted by voice vote after the Democrats worked with me to finalize the plan.  In fact, I accepted some suggestions from the previous ranking member last Congress.  Because of this and Mr. Connolly's past efforts to forge bipartisan consensus, I was hopeful that our oversight plan for the next two years would once again be a bipartisan work product this Congress.   In an effort to facilitate a productive conversation, we shared a draft of the plan with the Democrats one week ago.  We also offered to discuss any questions or legitimate additions the Democrats had.  Our hope was that ranking member would meet us at the table, but we didn't hear anything back.  Then this week we offered to add in their minority views to the plan.  This offer would allow the ranking member to have his voice heard and contribute to the plan, but unfortunately they declined.   Instead of working together, the Democrats informed us that they have amendments to the plan but are refusing to discuss them with me in advance.  They kept any changes they wanted a secret.  Democrats have rejected every opportunity I offered to contribute to the oversight plan.  So how am I supposed to incorporate secret opinions that they refuse to share?  You may be asking yourself, why would the Democrats do that?   Democrats say they want to participate in oversight, but if that were true, why would they decline multiple opportunities to actually engage in the plan for that oversight?  Because they don't want to participate, they want to stonewall and engage in theater.  In fact, they say they were sticking to their original plan today.  So whatever you all hear from the minority today, just know it was their plan all along.  It was their plan to distract from the committee's mission.  It was their plan to delay a hearing.
on rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse.  It was their plan to obstruct the operations of this committee.  The minority made this clear when they previously stated that they had zero interest in working with many Republicans on this committee to help them with anything as it relates to Doge.  No interest in working together to root out waste, fraud, and abuse.  Instead of legislating and conducting actual oversight, the Democrats are more interested in disruption and spectacle.  Their actions speak louder than their empty words.   They want to pretend that they're trying to fight to put their words in the oversight plan, but I already gave them two opportunities to work with me to do that, and they rejected both of those gestures.  I'd like to list a range of important topics that the Democrats have declined to participate in working together on in the authorization oversight plan that I have submitted for the 119th Congress.  This year's plan includes sections four, lapse in expiring authorizations, preventing waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in federal programs, the federal workforce,   federal regulations, the government accountability office, inspectors general, GSA real property disposal, whistleblower protection, federal financial management, government contracting, grant reform, cybersecurity and data privacy, information technology and management, open government and transparency, the United States Postal Service,   Oversight of the District of Columbia, National Archives and Federal Records, Office of Government Ethics, and the Federal Disaster Response and Recovery.  Those are a lot of important topics that Democrats apparently don't consider worth their time.

Sign up for free to see the full transcript

Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.

Sign up