We have gotten used to singing duets together. It is good to be with you. Thanks to each of you for your service. I am Derek Kilmer. I represent the west coast of Washington State, a little north of Jaime. About every 20 or 30 years or so,…
We have gotten used to singing duets together. It is good to be with you. Thanks to each of you for your service.
I am Derek Kilmer. I represent the west coast of Washington State, a little north of Jaime.
About every 20 or 30 years or so, Congress realizes things aren't working the way they ought to, and they create a committee to look at potential reforms. The Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress is the most recent iteration of that.
The title of the committee makes it sound like we are the IT help desk, but we have been nicknamed the ``fix Congress committee,'' which usually either causes people to giggle or offer to pray for us.
Pretty much under the radar for the last 4 years, our committee has been focused on a single mission, which is to make Congress work better for the American people.
I served as chair. Tom Graves was the vice chair in the last Congress and William Timmons in this Congress. It has been a truly bipartisan effort.
I say that in part because the rule that established our committee set it up with six Democrats and six Republicans and a requirement that a two-thirds vote was required to pass any recommendations. As of last month, our committee very quietly passed more than 200 recommendations, all focused on making Congress work better.
Some of them are on pretty wonky things, issues like how we make sure that Congress is a more modern institution that uses technology better. Congress has been described as an 18th century institution using 20th century technology to solve 21st century problems. That is pretty apt, so some of our recommendations have been focused in that regard.
A lot of our recommendations, despite the fact that it wasn't one of our assignments, have been geared toward trying to make this a place where there is more civility and collaboration. Our committee brought in management consultants and organizational psychologists, and we thought about consulting an exorcist to figure out how to make this a place that functions better.
We made about a dozen recommendations in that regard, everything from having committees do bipartisan planning retreats to having the institution do a bipartisan retreat and to changing how orientation is done so it is not so segregated by party.
I think every one of you former Members will acknowledge that part of the success of the institution depends on staff, on having talented people who work in this institution. Unfortunately, because this place hasn't sufficiently invested in our staff, we see a massive turnover, so a number of our recommendations were geared toward having this be a place that can recruit and retain and have a more diverse staff.
I thank the FMC for being partners in this undertaking. We have had some of you testify at hearings. We have had your sort of subcommittees geared toward the same topics that we were interested in.
If I can go from the rearview mirror into the windshield, we are not done. About two-thirds of our recommendations have either been implemented or are on the path to implementation, but we are going to have to kind of keep pushing the institution to make change. Each one of you, as stewards of the institution, I think, has a role to play in that regard.
On top of that, in terms of the future of this work, our committee will go away. Having said that, it appears that there will be a select subcommittee on House admin to focus on implementation of the recommendations.
We also made a recommendation that it shouldn't take another 20 or 30 years before Congress takes up the subject of reform again. So, one of our recommendations was, every three or four Congresses or so, Congress ought to do a committee like this just to make sure that there is constant focus on improving the institution.
We have had extraordinary partnerships, including with some of your Members and some of your soon-to-be Members, Ed Perlmutter, as well, who have been just terrific partners in this undertaking.
I will say one other thing, and then I will kick it over to William. Throughout the course of this work, I kept thinking about a comment made by former Secretary John Gardner. He talked about the importance of stewardship of an institution, and he said it was important for those who care about an institution to be loving critics of it, that it would be a mistake to
be an uncritical lover because it denies an institution of the life- giving drive toward improvement. And it is important not to be an unloving critic that just treats the institution like the pinata at the party and bashes it with an eye toward destruction, not improvement.
I thank the FMC and each of you because I think the manner through which you have engaged our committee has very much been through that lens of being loving critics of this institution which you served, and I thank you for that.