Give each congressional member two investigative FBI agents

Homeland Security
1

Currently all meaningful investigative powers rest within the executive branch under DHS., However congress, and more specifically “The House” as the representatives of the people have the power to investigate through their executive oversight powers. It seems like the executive can simply “we don’t feel like cooperating even if you have the authority to investigate us” and Congress has no mechanism by which to force compliance. This policy would give each represented district (“the people”) the means to directly investigate their government in whatever topic they (through their representative) see fit to pursue.

I propose we give each member of congress two FBI agents and the discretion to open cases to investigate whatever they can show just cause to open an investigation into. This might be a separate agency created within the legislative branch create to aid in carrying out its oversight powers.

We could even limit it to not being usable against American Citizens, or outside the Executive Branch. But instead of Congress needing to ask the Executive to open an investigation into itself, Congress has direct authority and powers to get whatever information it needs to satisfy itself regarding what’s happening within the executive.

The government should fear its people, this investigatory power to expose corrupt activity and/or explain how/why certain things operate as they do ensure the government is acting in the people’s interests and not the government’s.

2

This has “Bad Idea” written all over it.

2 Likes
3

It very much might…

I assume you are alluding the insane potential of using it for weaponized, never ending, partisanship “investigations”?

At the moment it seems the executive branch absolutely can and has weaponized investigative agencies like the IRS and FBI against whomever they deem a political enemy (be it a citizen or not) and further has outright refused to cooperate with lawful FOIA requests and Congressional subpoenas…

Ultimately our government is beholden to us. It seems to me, much like Iran’s Nuclear Program Inspectors, we aren’t able to see all the goods we’re supposed to be able to see to execute our (through our congressional representatives) executive oversight.

I want the executive branch to fear exposure from congress, specifically the house, but the senate has its place too, and not just the elitist cabal of senior leadership that tells the newbie members to sit down, shut up, and tow your party’s line as happens now.

There is no area of government, and most especially the executive branch, that we, as those who endow our government with power to govern and act in our name, that is off limits to our prying eyes (through our elected representatives).

Ultimately we have to entrust someone with these oversight and investigative powers, it should be someone who we elect, and a method that those who have something to hide cannot control easily. by simply refusing to cooperate with minimal to no consequences (because partisanship will protect its own).

A group of 1076 (538 * 2) investigative agents authorized to crawl all over the executive branch agencies as directed by congressional members (likely made off limits would be people like the oval office staff and direct cabinet members, and maybe even agency heads) similar to a “special counsel” investigation to exercise powers to talk directly to the employees, get documents from people, and ask about the practices and procedures (reasonably scheduled in advance) of our government backed by the authority of Congress.

The only direct consequences that congress can produce through this mechanism are reports. Partisan actors will produce skewed reports, which will also be responded to by reports from the other side. Any criminal activity would be referred for further investigation and processing.

Is there any set of limitations, or checks and balances, that you can see that would make this less than a bad idea but still give Congress the teeth it needs to hold the executive branch in check. It seems to me that atm, the executive is using a “phone and a pen”, wild interpretations of laws to enact regulations, and selective enforcement of laws to bypass the will of the people as passed by our legislative bodies.

1 Like
6

Respectfully, we’d be better off if we disbanded the FBI.

Congress could easily “hold the executive branch in check” by not funding the executive branch’s Stasi-like three letter agencies, and their other shenanigans. Unfortunately, neither side of the aisle is willing to perform their constitutional responsibilities in this regard.

3 Likes
7

You’re saying that we can investigate the behavior of executive branch employees by eliminating all the employees? Or at least eliminating all the employees tasked with the function of investigating?

In your world, what government employees should be funded?
If we had reasonable suspicion that one of those funded employees was abusing the public with their authority, who has the authority to investigate the situation and write a report in your world? Or is it simply not possible that a government employee could act corruptly except for those Stasi-like three letter agencies?

I mean, scorched earth solutions sound fun and all, but we still have to live there once the guy with the napalm gets done with the place…

Plus, it looks to me like you refuted your own idea here. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
You don’t, and nor do I, see any viable way to get the votes we’d need to get the napalm delivery man authorized and funded.

8

“We have investigated ourselves and determined that ourselves did nothing wrong!”

This ought to be the motto of all of your beloved three letter agencies.

It is foolish beyond childishness to believe, given what we have seen over the past few years, to even pretend our .gov is capable, or even interested, in investigating itself.

The system exists to protect the system. I know that threatens your “Everything is fine” worldview. Sorry. Truth hurts.

What government employees should be funded? As few as possible.

When the incoming boss at DOGE (Department Of Government Efficiency) bought Twitter, he fired 80% of the workforce. Now X operates better than it did before.

Regarding your napalm comment…did you know that forest fires begin an entire cycle of renewal? It’s the best thing that can happen once a forest becomes old, overgrown, and diseased.

2 Likes
9

LOL, agreed, it’s not just the TLAs it’s the entire Executive Branch.
The check on those things is supposed to be the investigative powers of the House in Congress.

Whether they come from the FBI or a whole new Legislative Branch Investigative Agency, stopping them from being able to investigate themselves by giving the House control directly over what investigators look into and report on is the underlying point of this proposal.

There are 435 House Members, which would become 870 investigators, each directed by each individual representative for the represented people. Each district in the country would have two agents dedicated to them to investigate whatever that district, through their representative, deemed worthy of investigation inside the Executive Branch.

1 Like
10

It seems like the United States Capitol Police (USCP) could be tasked with investigating suspected criminal activity in the executive branch? It’s already a huge agency, although I don’t know how much of their workforce is dedicated to investigations. The USCP is independent of the executive branch, so maybe they’d be capable of doing real investigations??? And there is an existing mechanism for referring charges to federal prosecutors.

11

This sounds potentially reasonable to me…

Also, it’s not purely criminal investigations, it could be something like “My constituents are having a hard time getting the answers they need on something that matters to them from the TLA, would you two go figure out what the story is there and let me know?” These communications are done through reports that all citizens could read and have access to.

The heart of the proposal wasn’t so much regarding where the investigators came from, but to forward the idea that every Congress member gets to direct an investigation on behalf of the people, like a citizen journalist might, but with more authority.

Are you saying you agree wit the principle that Congress members should be able to direct investigators on their staff, paid for by the people, and are simply suggesting they come from a more independent agency (since that seems to be an issue)?