With fewer than 180 days until the midterm elections, Democratic Members of Congress are laying the groundwork for future congressional investigations in the event the party regains control of one or both chambers next year. Even as Democratic Members prepare for the possibility of winning the majority, developments such as the Virginia Supreme Court’s redistricting decision underscore that the outlook for partisan control remains fluid. Nevertheless, as Democratic oversight priorities come into sharper focus—and are increasingly telegraphed to the press and the public—companies should begin preparing now in advance of facing inquiries from newly empowered Democratic committee chairs in the next Congress. They should also carefully assess their responses to requests currently issued by the minority, recognizing that today’s “voluntary requests” could easily become tomorrow’s congressional subpoenas.
Democratic leaders reportedly remain optimistic about regaining the House, notwithstanding recent events. At the same time, the prospect of a Democratic Senate—and bicameral Democratic oversight—has emerged as more plausible. A potential Senate majority would significantly expand Democratic Members’ and Senators’ capacity for congressional oversight, opening new fronts for investigations across a variety of issues and industries. And importantly, the powerful Democratic Senators who would be expected to assume leadership positions in key Senate committees are some of the most aggressive investigators in Congress.
In a newly Democratic Senate, for instance, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) could be in line to become the chair of the Senate Banking Committee. As the Committee’s ranking member, Senator Warren has been prolific in issuing requests to private industry, with a particular focus on oversight of the financial services industry, cryptocurrency and digital asset companies, large technology firms operating in or adjacent to financial markets, and business practices she views as detrimental to market competition, consumer well-being, or financial stability. As chair, Senator Warren would wield broad authority to pursue aggressive investigations focused on these and other topics, including the power to issue subpoenas for documents and testimony.
Other Senate committees would bring their own (sometimes overlapping) oversight priorities to bear. Under the current senior Democratic ranking members—including Senator Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) on Judiciary, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) on Environment and Public Works, and Senator Ron Wyden (D-Or.) on Finance—committees have already issued extensive information and document requests to companies. A potential shift to Democratic control may transform these oversight efforts into formal committee investigations. Likewise, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, under the leadership of potential Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), would almost certainly pick up where it left off under Senator Sanders’s prior chairmanship—investigating pharmaceutical companies, pharmacy benefit managers, health insurers, and large employers, and seeking the testimony of these companies’ CEOs at high-profile hearings. Senator Sanders would also likely focus on artificial intelligence and its effects on the workforce.
The potential for a Democratic majority in the Senate and the House significantly raises the risk and complexity of future congressional investigations by opening target companies to multiple, bicameral investigative fronts. During the current Congress, we have already observed a growing trend of Democratic ranking members in both chambers—whether working together or in parallel—pursuing investigations focused on the same targets and topics.
As an additional risk, if control of the House flips but the Senate does not, the Republican leaders of key Senate committees may feel compelled to increase their oversight activities as counterprogramming to the aggressive oversight expected from a potential Democratic House. Traditionally, Senate oversight has been most active when the House is controlled by the opposite party for exactly these reasons.
In the House, Democratic leaders continue to emphasize that oversight of the Trump administration—and entities engaged with the administration—remains a central priority. Democratic leaders have framed alleged corruption and perceived self-dealing within the administration as a unifying narrative for both oversight and campaign messaging, signaling that ethics‑focused investigations would continue to be a central theme through congressional investigation hearings in 2027 and into the 2028 presidential cycle.
The dynamic after the 2018 midterm elections may be instructive to future oversight activities ahead. After the Democratic majority took control of the House in 2019, Democratic investigators found that the Trump administration often fought, resisted, or litigated document requests and subpoenas issued by House committees. In response, the Democratic investigators frequently turned their focus to the private sector, seeking information, documents, and testimony about the activities of the administration. If a Democratic majority controls the House next year, this scenario is likely to be repeated. In addition to issuing oversight requests directly to agencies and the White House, Democratic leaders will look to private sector actors—companies, contractors, donors, financial institutions, advisers, and platforms—as repositories of information relevant to oversight of the administration. Accordingly, even in instances where they may not be the true targets of an investigation, entities and individuals with business before the government or other interactions with regulatory agencies and officials should anticipate becoming a focus of congressional investigations. Recent inquiries into funding, contracting, and corporate involvement connected to the White House ballroom project illustrate that private party records and communications can become focal points for broader investigations into administration conduct. Democratic Members have similarly launched investigations of companies engaged with the administration on various policy matters, such as drug pricing, tariff refunds, energy exploration in Venezuela, and financial regulation.
Similar to investigations of business entities engaged with the administration, oversight is also expected to extend to law firms interacting with the administration, with House Oversight Democratic Members already probing agreements under which major law firms reportedly provided pro bono services or other concessions in connection with threatened or imposed executive actions. These inquiries are highly likely to continue in the next Congress, should the Democratic Party regain control.
In addition to an overall increase in investigative requests to private actors, Democratic messaging, press releases, and investigative steps continue to point toward a variety of high-priority topics for congressional investigations and oversight across specific industries and topics. Below, we outline some of the likely Democratic priorities that are coming into sharper view as we approach Election Day.
- Affordability: Recent geopolitical developments, including the conflict involving Iran, have reinforced Democratic messaging around affordability, particularly with respect to energy costs. Democratic leaders have linked energy price volatility from this conflict to broader cost pressures affecting housing, food, and healthcare, and are using these dynamics to frame oversight of corporate pricing practices, market concentration, and regulatory decision-making as directly responsive to household affordability concerns. These themes have been elevated in the Senate, where Democratic leaders have used budget proceedings and floor votes to spotlight energy and healthcare costs as central affordability failures warranting sustained oversight.
- Artificial Intelligence: Artificial intelligence remains a core Democratic oversight concern, and recent developments have shifted increased attention toward AI infrastructure—particularly data centers—as lawmakers respond to local opposition driven by concerns over ratepayer effects, energy consumption, and other public costs associated with rapid AI expansion. The introduction of the Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act by Senator Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio‑Cortez (D-N.Y.) provides a tangible example of parallel legislative efforts underway to regulate the AI industry. Lawmakers can point to AI oversight as a vehicle to suggest further regulation is necessary.
- Prediction Markets: Recent reporting on trading activity related to the conflicts in Venezuela and Iran has sharpened scrutiny of prediction markets, raising concerns about information asymmetry and the adequacy of existing regulatory frameworks. Democratic Members have sought increased regulatory oversight of prediction markets and introduced legislation banning prediction markets tied to elections, sports, war, and government activity. Democratic-led committees could likewise open investigations involving prediction markets to develop support for their related legislative efforts.
- Government Donors and Business Before the Government: Oversight interest in private donors and contributors appears to be intensifying. The White House ballroom project remains the most visible example, but similar scrutiny will likely extend to other public‑private projects or fundraising efforts involving capital improvements, infrastructure, or events that rely heavily on private financing. In recent inquiries, investigators have questioned whether donors received enhanced access or other preferential treatment in conjunction with their contributions. Relatedly, recent initiatives led by House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D‑Cal.) reflect a broader focus on private entities whose business dealings with the administration may trigger oversight of alleged or perceived access, influence, and conflicts of interest.
- Pharmaceutical Industry and Healthcare: A Democratic majority is also likely to advance a broad oversight agenda focused on healthcare affordability, with particular attention to the role of business practices and market structure in driving patient costs, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry. In April, for example, Senator Sanders highlighted drug pricing and insurer practices as central areas of scrutiny, reinforcing healthcare costs as a core target of future Democratic investigative efforts.
Covington will continue to monitor congressional oversight developments closely as the midterm elections approach. If you have any questions regarding the issues discussed in this alert, or would like assistance preparing for potential congressional inquiries, please contact any member of our congressional investigations practice listed below.
Back
