The artificial intelligence industry could face a new, dedicated congressional investigative committee if Democratic Members of Congress take control of the House of Representatives following November’s midterm elections.  The House Democratic leaders are reportedly laying the groundwork to create a select committee focused on artificial intelligence (“AI”) in the new Congress, potentially with a broad investigative mandate and subpoena power.  Proponents of a new AI House select committee have reportedly briefed House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the likely speaker if Democratic Members reclaim the majority, who expressed openness to the idea.

The Significance of a Select Committee

A select committee on AI would establish a single forum within the House to coordinate AI oversight, rather than rely on multiple standing committees with overlapping jurisdiction for various aspects of AI.  A select committee would also potentially give House leadership tighter control over AI-related investigations and messaging, although it would not strip the standing committees of their respective jurisdictions over various aspects of AI matters. 

The full House would need to create a select committee by resolution, which would define the scope of the committee’s powers.  Such a resolution could, for example, be included in the usual package of rules measures enacted at the start of each House session.  If the House granted subpoena authority to a new select committee on AI, the committee would have the power to compel documents and witness testimony, just as standing committees do under the House rules.  A select committee’s ability to report legislation, unlike a standing committee’s authority, depends entirely on its authorizing resolution.  Historically, select committees have served as investigative and policy-development bodies while standing committees have retained legislative jurisdiction.  The House Select Committee on China, for example, follows this model—it conducts investigations, holds hearings, and issues reports and recommendations, but it cannot consider or report legislation.

A select committee could help House leadership coordinate oversight across multiple issue areas implicated by AI.  Congress has often used select committees to focus attention on issues viewed as transcending traditional committee boundaries, including intelligence, climate, and strategic competition with China.  In addition, House leadership controls the selection of members to serve on a select committee, which often enables leadership to select Members with common or aligned views.  Select committees are therefore often uniquely positioned to advance a unified perspective, aligned with party leadership, on the relevant underlying issue.

The House’s Select Committee on China illustrates that a select committee can become very influential, spurring focus and attention on a key policy matter.  Since its creation in 2023, the Select Committee on China has conducted oversight across numerous industries, held dozens of hearings, sent oversight letters to corporations and executive agencies, issued multiple reports, and developed bipartisan policy recommendations that have influenced broader legislative and executive branch policy related to China.

Scope of the Mandate

The proposed AI select committee follows earlier efforts by House Democratic leadership to establish a dedicated forum for AI policy, and a bipartisan AI task force led by Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Cal.) and Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Cal.) that issued a report on AI at the end of the last Congress.  The AI task force, however, had a narrow mandate of developing policy recommendations.

In contrast, a resolution establishing the jurisdiction of a select committee on AI could authorize a far wider range of activities.  AI policy spans multiple existing committee jurisdictions, including consumer protection, privacy, intellectual property, national security, energy infrastructure, labor, and scientific research.  Accordingly, an AI committee’s scope could span from a relatively narrow mandate focused on coordinating oversight and investigation of discrete cross-cutting issues, to a broader mandate authorizing investigations and legislation on matters that standing committees traditionally handle, including the regulation of advanced AI models, data center construction, the procurement and use of AI by government agencies, and federal preemption of state AI laws.

Depending on its ultimate scope, a select committee on AI could become the focal point for investigations into technical AI risks, along with the business practices, governance structures, training data, and government relationships of companies developing and deploying AI systems.

Standing committee chairs could resist a select committee with broad powers and jurisdictional scope.  The House Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology all currently oversee significant aspects of AI policy.  If there is a change in control, the incoming chairs of these committees may be reluctant to cede authority at a pivotal moment in shaping AI policy.  Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), Ranking Member House Energy and Commerce Committee, has already expressed concern over the proposed select committee, specifically noting the select committee “would only further delay legislation.”  Securing support from these committees may be one of the principal challenges facing the proposal.

Implications for Industry

Although Congress and the executive branch have devoted substantial attention to AI governance, lawmakers have struggled to achieve consensus on comprehensive legislation, and states continue to pursue their own regulatory approaches.  The proposed select committee could become particularly significant in an environment in which Congress remains divided on comprehensive AI legislation.  Even without advancing major legislation, a select committee could exert significant influence by holding hearings, requesting information, investigating industry and government actors, and issuing reports.  

As we recently previewed, a potential Democratic majority would likely feature AI prominently on its investigative agenda.  Based on existing Democratic oversight priorities, areas of focus could include frontier model safety, competition within the AI sector, the use of copyrighted works and personal data to train AI systems, workforce displacement and labor effects, the energy and environmental consequences of data center expansion, and relationships between AI companies and federal agencies.  Such inquiries could also extend beyond AI developers to include companies deploying AI systems in consumer-facing products and in sectors such as critical infrastructure, healthcare, financial services, defense, and workforce management.

These efforts would not start from scratch.  Recent oversight activity has included inquiries into AI safety, national security risks, intellectual property issues, algorithmic pricing, and the infrastructure needed to support AI development.  A select committee could consolidate AI-related efforts within a single forum with a broad mandate and a dedicated staff armed with the power to subpoena documents and testimony.  Companies developing or deploying AI could face deeper and more sustained scrutiny from a select committee than is typical from standing committees balancing competing priorities.

Whether this House select committee on AI materializes will depend on the outcome of the November elections and the ability of the proposal’s proponents to overcome potential resistance from standing committee leadership.  But even if the House does not establish the select committee, the proposal illustrates the central role AI will likely play in the next Congress.  Companies involved in developing, deploying, financing, or using AI systems should expect congressional scrutiny of AI-related issues to intensify.

Photo of Brian D. Smith Brian D. Smith

Brian Smith assists clients with challenging public policy matters that combine legal and political risks and opportunities.

Brian represents companies and individuals facing high-profile and high-risk congressional investigations and hearings, and other criminal, civil, and internal investigations that present legal, political, and public…

Brian Smith assists clients with challenging public policy matters that combine legal and political risks and opportunities.

Brian represents companies and individuals facing high-profile and high-risk congressional investigations and hearings, and other criminal, civil, and internal investigations that present legal, political, and public relations risks. He assists companies and executives responding to formal and informal inquiries from Congress and executive branch agencies for documents, information, and testimony. He has extensive experience preparing CEOs and other senior executives to testify before challenging congressional oversight hearings.

Brian develops and executes government relations initiatives for clients seeking actions by Congress and the executive branch. He has led strategic efforts resulting in legislation enacted by Congress and official actions and public engagement at the most senior levels of the U.S. government. He has significant experience in legislative drafting and has prepared multiple bills enacted by Congress and legislation passed in nearly every state legislature.

Prior to joining Covington, Brian served in the White House as Assistant to the Special Counsel to President Clinton. He handled matters related to the White House’s response to investigations, including four independent counsel investigations, a Justice Department task force investigation, two major oversight investigations by the House of Representatives and the Senate, and several other congressional oversight investigations.

Brian is a Professorial Lecturer in Law at the George Washington University Law School.

Photo of Angelle Smith Baugh Angelle Smith Baugh

Angelle Smith Baugh is of counsel in the firm’s Election and Political Law and White Collar Litigation practice groups. She has significant experience in broad-based crisis management, advising clients on legal and political matters presenting complex risks. She has been individually ranked by…

Angelle Smith Baugh is of counsel in the firm’s Election and Political Law and White Collar Litigation practice groups. She has significant experience in broad-based crisis management, advising clients on legal and political matters presenting complex risks. She has been individually ranked by Chambers for Congressional Investigations for three consecutive years, with clients describing her as “…incredibly responsive, thorough and has great expertise in congressional investigations.”

Angelle’s practice focuses on defending companies and individuals in high-profile congressional investigations, as well as other criminal, civil, and internal investigations. She represents clients before House and Senate Committees, as well as in criminal and civil government investigations before the Public Integrity Section of the Department of Justice, Federal Election Commission, and the Office of Congressional Ethics.

She assists companies and executives responding to formal and informal inquiries from Congress and executive branch agencies for documents, information, and testimony. She has experience preparing CEOs and other senior executives to testify before challenging congressional oversight hearings.

Angelle also has experience and expertise navigating federal and state ethics laws, and provides ongoing political law advice to companies, trade associations, PACs, and individuals.

Photo of Matthew Shapanka Matthew Shapanka

Matthew Shapanka is a strategic policy and regulatory attorney who helps technology companies and other businesses navigate complex, high-stakes legislative, regulatory, and enforcement matters at the intersection of law and politics. Drawing on 15+ years of experience across private practice, the U.S. Senate…

Matthew Shapanka is a strategic policy and regulatory attorney who helps technology companies and other businesses navigate complex, high-stakes legislative, regulatory, and enforcement matters at the intersection of law and politics. Drawing on 15+ years of experience across private practice, the U.S. Senate, state government, and political campaigns, Matt develops comprehensive policy strategies that identify regulatory risks and position clients to shape policy outcomes.

Public Policy and Regulatory Strategy

Matt serves as a strategic advisor to Fortune 200 companies on emerging technology policy, including artificial intelligence regulation, connected and autonomous vehicles, semiconductors, IoT, and national security matters. He translates complex legal and technical issues into actionable legislative and regulatory strategy, building the policy frameworks and advocacy infrastructure that enable clients to influence policy. He develops policy collateral for federal, state, and international advocacy, coordinates multi-stakeholder coalitions, and represents clients before Congress, federal agencies, and state legislative and regulatory bodies.

His technology policy experience includes securing unprecedented Presidential intervention in the $118 billion Qualcomm-Broadcom transaction (for which Covington was recognized as The American Lawyer 2019 “Dealmakers of the Year”), advising Fortune 200 companies on Bureau of Industry and Security connected vehicle rules, and counseling major internet platforms on autonomous vehicle policy across dozens of states.

Matt leads Covington’s state public policy practice, managing complex multistate legislative and regulatory advocacy campaigns. His state-level work includes securing a last-minute amendment to California’s 2023 money transmitter legislation on behalf of a fintech client and representing major technology companies on state AI, autonomous vehicle, and political advertising compliance matters across dozens of jurisdictions.

Matt rejoined Covington after serving as Chief Counsel for the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration under Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), where he negotiated the landmark bipartisan Electoral Count Reform Act – legislation that updated presidential election certification procedures for the first time in nearly 140 years. He also oversaw the Committee’s bipartisan January 6th investigation, developing protocols that resulted in unanimous passage of new Capitol security legislation.

Both in Congress and at Covington, Matt has prepared dozens of corporate executives, nonprofit leaders, academics, and presidential nominees for testimony at congressional committee hearings and depositions. He is a skilled legislative drafter and strategist who has composed dozens of bills and amendments introduced in Congress and state legislatures, including many that have been enacted into law.

Election and Political Law Compliance and Enforcement

As a member of Covington’s Chambers-ranked (Band 1) Election and Political Law practice, Matt advises businesses, nonprofits, political committees, candidates, and donors on the full range of federal and state political law compliance matters, including:

Election and campaign finance laws
Lobbying disclosure
Government ethics rules
The SEC Pay-to-Play Rule

He also conducts political law due diligence for M&A transactions, counsels major political funders and donors in compliance and enforcement matters, and represents candidates, ballot measure committees, and donors in election disputes and recounts.

Before law school, Matt served in the administration of former Governor Deval Patrick (D-MA), where he worked on policy, communications, and compliance matters for federal economic recovery funding awarded to the state. He has also staffed federal, state, and local political candidates in Massachusetts and New Hampshire.

Photo of Elizabeth Upton Duncan Elizabeth Upton Duncan

Elizabeth Upton Duncan is a member of the Election and Political Law Practice Group in the Washington, DC office, representing and counseling corporate, political, and individual clients in matters before government agencies and Congress. Elizabeth defends clients in high-profile congressional investigations before House…

Elizabeth Upton Duncan is a member of the Election and Political Law Practice Group in the Washington, DC office, representing and counseling corporate, political, and individual clients in matters before government agencies and Congress. Elizabeth defends clients in high-profile congressional investigations before House and Senate Committees, as well as in criminal and civil government investigations before the Public Integrity Section of the Department of Justice and the Federal Election Commission. She has experience assisting companies in responding to formal and informal inquiries, requests, and subpoenas for documents, information, and testimony, and has experience preparing senior executives to testify before congressional committees. Prior to joining Covington, Elizabeth served as a Law Clerk to the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI).

Elizabeth also advises companies, PACs, nonprofits, and individuals on the full range of political law compliance and enforcement matters involving federal election, campaign finance, lobbying, and government ethics laws, as well as the election and political laws of states and municipalities across the country.

Photo of Joshua Schenk Joshua Schenk

Drawing on his prior background in government service, Josh Schenk advises clients on high-profile investigations before Congress and the Department of Justice, litigation, regulatory and public policy issues, and election and political law matters.

Prior to joining the firm, Josh served in key…

Drawing on his prior background in government service, Josh Schenk advises clients on high-profile investigations before Congress and the Department of Justice, litigation, regulatory and public policy issues, and election and political law matters.

Prior to joining the firm, Josh served in key White House roles from 2022 to 2025. Most recently, Josh served as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Advisor in the White House Chief of Staff’s Office. In this role, he helped to oversee the administration’s domestic policy apparatus and advised the President, members of his Cabinet, and senior Administration officials on domestic and economic policy initiatives. His portfolio included regulations and executive action related to artificial intelligence, civil rights, criminal justice reform, education, environmental protection, and healthcare. Previously, he worked in the White House Staff Secretary’s Office, where he prepared the President’s daily briefing materials and traveled with the President on over 50 domestic and international trips. 

Josh maintains an active pro bono practice focused on immigration and voting rights.