Getty Images Members Only The Right Way to Investigate Russia’s Election Meddling History confirms that a congressional investigation will be of value only if the American public perceives it as being bipartisan.

Carl Levin, a Democrat, served as a U.S. senator from Michigan from 1979–2015, and now chairs the Levin Center at Wayne Law. John Warner, a Republican, was U.S. senator from Virginia from 1979–2009.

As Congress gears up to investigate Russia’s reported interference in American elections, precisely what form that inquiry will take is up for debate. But even at this early stage, one thing is clear: Whether it is done by the Intelligence Committees, a joint or select committee, or some other congressionally created framework, a vital goal of any such investigation must be bipartisanship.

It’s not simply that an investigation must be conducted—from start to finish—in a bipartisan manner; it’s that history confirms that an investigation will be of value only if the American public perceives it as bipartisan. Indeed, some of the most important investigations Congress has ever conducted—the hearings on Watergate, Iran-Contra and the joint inquiry into the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001—made a real difference precisely because their bipartisan nature enabled them to get at the truth and gain the trust of the American people.


Unfortunately, such bipartisanship will now pose a challenge.

Recent sessions of Congress have seen some investigations conducted in a partisan fashion, eroding past norms and producing results that have been poorly received and often criticized as a waste of taxpayer dollars. But it doesn’t have to be that way.

For 30 years, we served together on the Senate Armed Service Committee, including as its chairman and ranking member. In those leadership roles, we always made bipartisanship an explicit goal of our investigations. One noteworthy example is the Senate Armed Services Committee’s 2008 inquiry into the military’s treatment of detainees in U.S. custody. During the investigation, the majority and minority staffs worked together, reviewing more than 200,000 pages of documents and jointly conducting dozens of interviews. The end result was a report adopted by the committee and released to the public. The long record of the Armed Services Committee has demonstrated time and again that bipartisan investigations are both achievable and effective.

How does it work? There’s no real secret to it: We required the staffs of both parties to work together during every phase of the investigation. Republican and Democratic staff members jointly drafted requests for documents, and reviewed any findings together; jointly developed interview lists; jointly prepared and asked questions; and jointly authored hearing memos for the committee’s members—all culminating by drafting a joint report, or, in the cases where a joint report was not possible, releasing the majority and minority reports together. Working and deliberating across party lines ensures an objective analysis of all of the facts and provides a solid foundation for whatever findings and conclusions an investigation might yield.

In a congressional investigation—particularly one as politically fraught as an inquiry into Russian meddling in U.S. elections—bipartisanship is essential to success. Tracking and analyzing any Russian contacts and activities will present huge challenges. It will require access to individuals and documents not only here at home, but in other countries as well. Some of the evidence will be classified. There may be leaks and false leads. Targets of the investigation will be defensive. Witnesses may obstruct the inquiry. There will be efforts to delay and efforts to seek back channels to weaken the committee’s commitment to the facts.

Despite all of these threats, the investigation can be successful, but only if those members of Congress leading the inquiry direct the majority and minority staffs to operate in a completely bipartisan manner—to link arms and hold tight.

Such a mandate requires leadership, and that is what our current moment demands from Congress. We urge the leaders of any congressional investigation to direct their staff members to be fully transparent with each other in the conduct of the investigation, and to proceed jointly in the identification of witnesses and needed documents, the issuance of subpoenas, the structure of any hearings, the drafting of any report and the deliberation of any findings and recommendations.

An investigation of this enormous significance and consequence necessitates full bipartisan participation. The American people deserve no less.