United States Congress: Tech Policy and Institutional Reform

Will Rogers once said of Congress, “Every time they make a joke, it’s a law, and every time they make a law, it’s a joke.” Nearly a century later, that line still lands. Nearly 9 in 10 Americans say they are unhappy with Congress. The institution that Article I of the Constitution designed as the first branch of government is widely seen as dysfunctional — gridlocked, partisan, and increasingly sidelined by the executive branch and the courts.

For the technology sector, the stakes of this institutional weakness are high. The United States Congress is responsible for writing the rules that govern AI, data privacy, cybersecurity, and platform accountability. Yet the 119th Congress has passed fewer bills than many of its predecessors. Lawmakers have ceded authority to the president on matters ranging from tariffs to war powers, and the same pattern holds in tech policy, where executive orders and agency rulemaking often fill the legislative void.

The Tech Policy Vacuum

When Congress fails to act, the executive branch fills the gap. The Biden administration issued a sweeping AI executive order; the Trump administration used executive authority on social media moderation and data flows. Each time, Congress watched from the sidelines. Carl Hulse, chief Washington correspondent for The New York Times, has covered Capitol Hill since the Reagan administration and described covering “the decline of Congress.” He noted that Republicans in the current Congress have been “ceding power to the administration” on issues enumerated in the Constitution. “They’re giving away the store,” Hulse said. “And once you give away some power, you never get it back.”

That dynamic is especially visible in technology regulation. Without clear statutory frameworks, companies face a patchwork of state laws and unpredictable federal enforcement. AI oversight, in particular, demands legislative clarity on safety testing, transparency, and liability — areas where Congress has held hearings but produced little law. Cybersecurity standards for critical infrastructure similarly languish, leaving the private sector to navigate voluntary frameworks while threats escalate.

Why Congress Struggles to Keep Up

The reasons for congressional paralysis are well documented. Partisanship, gerrymandering, and the president’s pressures to do his bidding have turned the House and Senate into arenas of perpetual conflict rather than lawmaking. As both parties point fingers, the institution’s capacity to address complex problems — like regulating artificial intelligence or securing the electric grid — has eroded.

Beneath the surface, a deeper structural issue is at work. As the Democracy Project’s series on Congress argues, most of the federal government’s growth over the past century has been housed in the executive branch. The president and the bureaucracy control a vast jurisdiction of regulatory powers that often circumvent Congress’s essential function: lawmaking. And as the Supreme Court becomes more proactive in advancing its own political preferences, Congress’s representative authority again falls to the wayside.

This imbalance is not accidental. It is the result of decades of underinvestment in congressional capacity — in staff expertise, technology infrastructure, and analytical resources. When Congress lacks the internal capability to understand AI models, evaluate cybersecurity threats, or draft technically sound legislation, it defaults to oversight theater or inaction.

Reinforcing Article I with Institutional Investments

The Democracy Project’s proposal to reinforce Article I with institutional investments offers a concrete path forward. The idea is straightforward: if Congress is to reclaim its role as the primary lawmaking body, it needs the tools to match the executive branch’s expertise. That means funding for the Government Accountability Office, the Congressional Research Service, and the Congressional Budget Office. It means creating dedicated tech policy units within key committees. It means investing in secure digital infrastructure for remote hearings, data analysis, and member communications.

Some of these investments are already underway. The House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress has recommended upgrades to IT systems and staff pay. But the scale of the challenge — and the speed of technological change — demands more. A Congress that cannot hire engineers to review AI safety protocols or cybersecurity analysts to audit federal networks will remain dependent on the executive branch for information and, ultimately, for policy direction.

The tech industry has a direct interest in this reform. Companies that operate across state lines and global markets need federal rules, not a patchwork of state laws and executive orders. A Congress with stronger institutional capacity is more likely to produce durable, bipartisan legislation on data privacy, AI governance, and platform accountability. The alternative is continued uncertainty — and continued decline.

What’s at Stake for the Tech Sector

Consider the trajectory of AI regulation. The European Union has enacted the AI Act. China has issued binding rules. The United States relies on executive orders and voluntary commitments. Without congressional action, U.S. companies face an uncertain regulatory environment that complicates compliance, investment, and international competitiveness. The same applies to cybersecurity: mandatory incident reporting and baseline standards for critical infrastructure remain stalled, even as ransomware attacks disrupt hospitals and energy grids.

Congress’s weakness also affects the courts. When lawmakers fail to write clear rules, judges fill the gap — often with unpredictable results. The Supreme Court’s recent decisions on social media moderation and data privacy have reshaped the legal landscape without the democratic legitimacy of a legislative process. The Democracy Project’s analysis notes that as the Court becomes more proactive, Congress’s representative authority falls to the wayside. The solution is not to attack the Court but to strengthen the branch that the Constitution placed first.

A Path Forward

Reversing the decline of Congress will not happen overnight. It requires sustained investment, bipartisan cooperation, and a recognition that institutional weakness harms both parties in the long run. Hulse put it bluntly: “The Republicans might be looking at this and going, ‘Well, you know, this is President Trump, our guy. We needed to do that.’ Trust me: the next Democratic president isn’t going to turn around and say, ‘You know, that was a big mistake letting Congress get so weak. We need to empower them again.’ No, it’s not gonna happen. It goes for good.”

For the technology sector, the message is clear. A weak Congress means unstable policy. Institutional investments — in staff, technology, and expertise — are not a luxury. They are a prerequisite for the kind of thoughtful, durable regulation that the digital age demands. The question is whether lawmakers will treat the cure as urgently as the diagnosis.