Congressional Investigations in a Trump Era

Donald Trump era in American politics, for the purposes of this analysis understood as starting with President Trump inauguration, will be famous for high profile congressional investigations, among other things. The probe on 2016 Trump campaign alleged contacts with Russians, two impeachment proceedings, January 6 Committee, investigation devoted to Donald Trump taxes, as well as enquiries U.S. House majority has already opened (weaponization of government) or is about to do so (Hunter Biden?), among others, prompt to ask about the nature of congressional investigations in the contemporary United States. The political setting makes this issue feasible to study, as both presidents Trump and Biden where initially dealing with unified government, while after their first midterm, the opposition party is majority party in the House. It thus allows to inquire whether there are any differences in partisan approaches to investigations, both on the level of lawmakers and public opinion? Are party members interested in conducting oversight only over presidential administration of opposing party, while supporting the president from their own party when they are under investigation? Or are partisan attitudes more nuanced? The conduct and quality of all major investigations in a Trump era – two impeachments and January 6 Select committee activities, as well as inquiries to be opened by the 118th Congress – will be tested against the model of good investigation created by Paul Light (2014). This scholar considered investigations through such categories as commitment, readiness, insulation persevarace, persuasivess, and standing. Using Light’s methodology, I shall review the investigation conducted in a Trump Era and find out how do they situate against 100 investigations analyzed by Light. The preliminary research suggests that good investigation in contemporary Congress barely exists. The nature of contemporary congressional investigations is consistent with Levinson and Pildes (2006) separation of parties, not powers thesis, as partisan affiliation is the main predictor of the representatives and senators behavior. As they are ready and willing to actively investigate the president from opposition party, they are equally keen to disregard congressional probes on presidents from their party. This attitude prompts to also discuss whether this delegitimization of congressional enquiry, conducted when politically convenient by members of both political party, might have institutional consequences for the congressional investigations and oversight function of Congress in the future.