Dem lawmakers vow inquest into CISA cuts, intel policy

House Democrats plan to investigate how the Trump administration’s cuts to the nation’s cyberdefense agency affected its ability to protect federal networks and help states secure elections, while their Senate counterparts vow to scrutinize whether intelligence agencies can deliver findings that contradict the president without putting analysts’ jobs at risk.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., who is in line to chair the House Homeland Security Committee when Democrats take both houses of Congress in January, said he and his colleagues would examine the department’s use of its powers against Americans, its immigration enforcement practices, and its dealings with contractors. 

The party’s wins in both chambers mean Democrats will decide which officials to call before Congress and what records to seek, under subpoena authorities given to whichever party has the majority in a given chamber.

If a permanent director for the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency is nominated again, Senate Democrats will also have a say in who leads the agency. The same can be said for a nominee to lead the National Counterterrorism Center, whose previous leader resigned earlier this year.

“We will investigate the administration weaponizing DHS against Americans, its out of control immigration policies, and its blatantly corrupt self-dealing,” Thompson told Nextgov/FCW. “The American people expect nothing less, and we will deliver.”

The panel also plans to examine the department’s surveillance of Americans engaged in protected speech, its handling of whistleblowers and whether federal officials steered contracts to political allies. On cybersecurity, they want to know how DHS is preparing for attacks aided by artificial intelligence and what became of services the department scaled back.

What CISA lost in the cuts

Thompson and Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., who is positioned to chair the Homeland Security cyber subcommittee, have already asked Congress’ watchdog to assess the impact of staffing cuts at CISA, which helps defend civilian federal networks and other frequent hacker targets like water systems and telecom networks.

CISA lost roughly a third of its workforce after Trump retook office, though the agency has made efforts to refill its roster. By September, about 250 prospective hires had tentative offers and were waiting for clearances, acting Director Nick Andersen said, as part of an effort under DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin to recant some of the cuts made to the cyberdefense agency over the last two years.

Ramirez, in a June interview with Nextgov/FCW, said she was planning a significant DHS overhaul bill for next year. She also gave positive feedback on CISA’s rehiring plans, though she added it may not be enough.

In a post on X after the election, she had a message for Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, White House aide Stephen Miller and others involved in immigration enforcement: “Clear your schedule.”

In the Senate, the retirement of Michigan Democrat Gary Peters puts Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., next in seniority among Democrats on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Hassan and Peters have already asked DHS to preserve records belonging to former Secretary Kristi Noem and her adviser Corey Lewandowski. 

Hassan has also pressed CISA on its own security practices after reports that a contractor left agency account information and passwords in a public database.

One issue facing both homeland security panels could come due before Democrats take over. A law protecting companies from lawsuits when they share information about cyber threats is operating under a temporary extension through Dec. 11. Without a longer renewal planted this year, the incoming chairs could inherit a fight over the legal protections companies rely on when communicating with the government about cyberattacks.

When intelligence findings conflict with the White House

Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., and Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., are in line to chair the intelligence committees in their respective chambers after two years of disputes over whether spy agencies can deliver findings that contradict the president without putting analysts’ jobs at risk.

One major dispute centered on Tren de Aragua, the Venezuelan gang Trump said was carrying out an invasion at the direction of Nicolás Maduro’s government. 

Most U.S. intelligence agencies assessed that Maduro was not directing the gang’s operations in the United States. Then-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard subsequently fired the two leaders of the National Intelligence Council, which produced the assessment. 

Warner also challenged Gabbard directly over Iran. At a Senate hearing in March, weeks after the U.S. and Israel went to war, he pressed her on a passage in her written testimony that she skipped in her opening remarks. It said Iran had made no effort to rebuild its uranium enrichment capability after U.S. strikes the previous June, a finding that bore on President Donald Trump’s claim that Iran posed an imminent threat. 

A day earlier, Joe Kent, Trump’s director of the National Counterterrorism Center, had resigned over the war, saying he did not believe Iran posed such a threat.

Last June, after Trump said U.S. strikes had “obliterated” three Iranian nuclear sites, a preliminary Defense Intelligence Agency assessment suggested the attacks could have set the program back only a few months. 

When Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired DIA Director Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kruse that August without explanation, Warner pointed to the dispute in accusing the administration of “treating intelligence as a loyalty test.”

Himes has already signaled one investigation he wants to pursue. In September, he alerted an association representing intelligence contractors that lawmakers could seek records and testimony about donations to Trump’s White House ballroom. He wants to know who solicited the contributions and whether companies believed giving money would help them secure government work or access to senior officials.

At least a third of the Republicans on the House intelligence panel won’t return to Congress in January. Missouri Rep. Ann Wagner and Pennsylvania Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick and Scott Perry lost reelection Tuesday. New York Rep. Elise Stefanik didn’t seek another term, and Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw lost his primary. 

Himes and Warner also face a decision about the government’s own surveillance powers should lawmakers leave it unresolved this year, namely Section 702 authorities under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Those authorities let spy agencies compel internet and telecom providers for contents of phone calls, emails and text messages of foreigners located abroad without a warrant, but, in doing so, agencies can also collect Americans’ data if they are communicating with a foreign target. The controversial program expired in June, though certain collection procedures can continue through this spring under court approvals issued in March.

Who oversees military cyber operations

Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., and Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., are positioned to lead the Armed Services committees, which help write the annual defense policy bill. 

Smith told The Washington Post he wants to investigate military operations, politicization of the armed forces and possible corruption in defense contracting. Both lawmakers challenged the administration over the firing of Gen. Timothy Haugh, who led the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command. 

Much of the detailed oversight of military hacking and network defense would fall to Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., if they move up from their current posts as ranking members. Khanna is the top Democrat on the House Armed Services cyber subcommittee, which also oversees Pentagon software purchases and AI programs. 

Rosen is his counterpart on the Senate Armed Services cybersecurity subcommittee, where lawmakers have examined how the military recruits and trains its cyber forces. A major Defense Department Cyber Strategy was planned for release in September but has been sitting in limbo for sometime.

Khanna could also lead the House select committee on competition with China. That role would give him another avenue to scrutinize AI security. In October, he asked leading U.S. developers what they knew about Chinese efforts to obtain their code or use their models’ answers to train competing systems. He has also called for the U.S. and China to agree on when to shut down AI systems judged too dangerous to operate.

Morgan Adamski, a former executive director of U.S. Cyber Command and now PwC’s Cyber, Data & Tech Risk Platform Leader, said she will be watching how lawmakers approach CISA’s readiness and what federal agencies ask companies to report when they are hacked. 

Hearings could give stakeholders a clearer picture of where federal defenses have fallen short, even if the rules they operate under stay the same.

“But greater oversight doesn't necessarily mean immediate legislative or regulatory change,” Adamski added. “The administration will continue to play a significant role in shaping federal priorities, so businesses should be prepared for continued policy uncertainty.”