Announcing Our 2025 Fellows

With now a decade of running our Congressional Innovation Fellowship, TechCongress has demonstrated our dedication to bridging the divide of knowledge and experience between politics and tech. Each cohort has seen us build and iterate upon our systems for providing fellows with the training and mentorship to support the transition from the technology to public sectors. Still, with every new orientation workshop or programming opportunity, TechCongress has remained focused on creating a non-partisan pipeline for tech expertise into government, one technologist at a time.

Our past recruitment cycle was our most competitive one yet, and our selected fellows have demonstrated the outstanding expertise and passion to excel in their future offices on the Hill. We are excited to welcome our 15th cohort of Congressional Innovation Fellows, and we look forward to seeing them shape the future of tech policy.

• Ilona Bodnar is a data scientist specializing in machine learning and software development. Ilona brings experience from industry, including Google and NerdWallet, and most recently, working at a medical AI startup. She is committed to safeguarding consumer rights and promoting the transparency and accountability of impactful technical systems at scale.

• Matthew Burtell is a technologist with interests spanning AI, national security, China competition, energy, industrial policy, and business innovation. Matthew holds a BS from Yale, where he studied Computer Science and Mathematics, and has published both technical and policy AI research at Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology.

• Joshua Chavez is a technologist with engineering and product experience in defense hardware, data, and processing. Joshua recently served as the Director of Products & Technology at HawkEye360 and the Lead Technical Product Manager at SeaWatch Labs. He graduated in 2019 with a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Yale.

• Rahul Hebbar is a technologist committed to AI serving humanity, not outpacing social readiness. Rahul was a Project Researcher for the New York City Council’s Legislative Division. Previously, he interned at Koopid.io, where he built machine-learning algorithms. Rahul has his B.S. in Computer Science from Rutgers University and a Master of Public Policy from Duke University.

• Shourya Jain is a product manager passionate about leveraging data and AI to strengthen American infrastructure. He previously worked at Microsoft, building features for the Azure AI platform, and Neufin, developing a platform to drive investment in energy and carbon projects. He holds a B.S. in Computer Science from the University of Washington, Seattle.

• Avanti Joshi received a B.S. in Computer Science and began as a software engineer at Goldman Sachs before pivoting to infrastructure and security at Trussworks, a civic technology company. She worked with government agencies to modernize cloud infrastructure and promote application security. Avanti is excited to advise on policy issues such as cybersecurity and data privacy.

• Dhruv Kathuria holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from UC Berkeley. He was most recently a Senior Engineer at Pavilion, where he worked on procurement modernization, and previously contributed to Trust and Safety at Nextdoor. Dhruv is passionate about digital privacy and improving how governments adopt and regulate impactful software technologies.

• Lauren Luo is a software engineer interested in data privacy and governance. She most recently worked at Instagram, where she built privacy-aware infrastructure to support consent order responses and established data consistency and governance mechanisms for sensitive user data. Lauren earned her B.A. in Computer Science and American Studies from Wellesley College.

• Sabelo Mhlambi is a technologist and AI ethicist who bridges technology, human rights, and ethics. A former fellow at Harvard Law School's Berkman-Klein Center and Carr Center and Stanford's Digital Civil Society Lab, he now leads a Techstars'22 backed fintech startup. His work maximizes AI benefits while addressing risks and ensuring equitable access for underrepresented communities.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

• Anna Nickelson is a technologist with a PhD in robotics, researcher, and science communicator dedicated to safe and responsible implementation of emerging technologies. Her academic research focuses on adaptive and ethical AI, and she formerly worked at Dolby Labs, the Naval Research Laboratory, and the Brookings Institution. Her policy interests include equitable access to technology and data privacy.

• Joe Putnik is a data scientist and business owner with expertise in AI and machine learning, digital infrastructure, and process automation. He has led technology transformation initiatives across enterprises in nearly every industry and size. His policy interests include ethical AI frameworks, government efficiency, and leveraging data science to enhance decision-making and serve the public good.

• Connor Sandagata is a data scientist who seeks to bring his expertise in machine learning, data analysis, and causal modeling to inform policy. Connor was the Senior Data Scientist at WPA Intelligence, where he specialized in using machine learning to analyze public opinion in political campaigns. He holds a Bachelors in International Relations from the University of Rochester.

• Pauls Toma is a computer scientist and a lawyer. Pauls interned with SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce, where he bridged the gap between blockchain technology and securities law. He previously interned at DOJ, where he combatted the criminal misuse of cryptocurrency. He has a BS and MS in Computer Science and a JD from the University of Detroit.

• Akash Wasil is a technology and national security professional with experience in research, entrepreneurship, and AI policy. His work has involved AI and cybersecurity, US-China tech competition, semiconductor policy, national security preparedness, and applying AI in healthcare. Akash was an NSF-funded Ph.D. student at UPenn and holds a B.A. from Harvard University.

#AskTechCongress: What does it mean for Congress to be at the end of a session?

TechCongress aims to bridge the divide of knowledge and experience between politics and tech for better outcomes for both. Our new #AskTechCongress series will answer your questions about Congress, providing insight into the legislative process from an introductory perspective. Submit questions and keep updated with the series by subscribing to our Today In Tech newsletter.

On January 3, 2025, the second session of the 118th United States Congress will officially come to a close, marking the end of this legislative period. In the time leading up to January, Congress may finalize pending bills, address budget appropriations, and attempt to pass key policies before the transition of power to newly elected Congress members. Negotiations and compromises on last-minute “omnibus” bundle bills and other unresolved pieces of legislation are common. With 18,455 bills and resolutions currently before Congress, and only about 7% passing and becoming law¹, this session marks an important shift in both legislative priorities and political dynamics. 

The term “session” describes the series of meetings held by the House of Representatives and the Senate each year. With elections every two years, each Congress serves for two legislative sessions. Because of the 20th Amendment, Congressional sessions have started and ended at noon on the January 3rd of odd numbered years since 1935². Before this amendment, sessions began with inaugurations in March and ended with elections in November. This created a four month “lame duck” period where members of Congress serving out the rest of their term were limited in their ability to hold meetings and carry out major changes during their last days in office. This shift in the timing of Congressional sessions provides a framework for understanding how the legislative calendar unfolds, from the introduction of bills to the final adjournment.

The legislative timeline consists of bill introductions, committee hearings, debates, votes, and more, but it typically concludes with a sine die adjournment. “Sine die”—“without a day” in Latin—signifies an end to a session without a specified date to reconvene, meaning Congress will not meet again until the next session. The exact timing of adjournment depends on various factors including legislative deadlines and elections, so instead, a target adjournment date—December 20th for this session³—is set before the holidays.

Ending a session plays a crucial role in legislative strategy, as any bills that are not passed into law by the end of the session will “die” and must be reintroduced in a future session. This puts lawmakers under pressure to pass—or block—critical measures before the session ends. Issues such as budget, defense, and healthcare are frequently brought up in last-minute policy proposals, and multiple bills may be repackaged into a single one to be voted on. The end of session may even include Senate confirmations of federal positions and judicial appointments. 

This waiting period before the new year puts Congress under a magnified lens of public scrutiny. People evaluate the “productivity” of a Congressional session by how many significant bills it passes. This adds more pressure for parties to push initiatives in the final months, and especially during a Presidential Election year since both major parties pivot priorities to fulfill campaign promises. 

The legacy of the 118th Congress will depend on how it prioritizes different issues and navigates the political landscape. Recognizing the importance of this phase of the legislative process is the first step in understanding the nuance and impact of the Congressional session. 

References

¹https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/#bystatus 

²https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/constitutional-amendments-amendment-20-date-changes-presidency-congress-and-succession

³https://www.senate.gov/legislative/2024_schedule.htm 

From the Courtroom to Congress: Bridging the Gap Between Law, Technology, and Policy

Earlier this month, the Congressional Internet Caucus Academy (CICA) hosted a panel discussion titled, “Tech Platforms and the 1st Amendment: Impact of Supreme Court Rulings.”
Separate from the Congressional Member Organization known as the Congressional Internet Caucus, CICA is a project launched by the Internet Education Foundation (IEF), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting informed policy making and digital literacy for all Internet stakeholders. The panel was moderated by Nadine Farid Johnson (Knight First Amendment Institute) and hosted panelists Steve DelBianco (NetChoice), Yaël Eisenstat (Cybersecurity for Democracy), Olivier Sylvain (Fordham University School of Law), and Vera Eidelman (ACLU).

In an effort to prevent social media platforms from deplatforming political officials, Florida and Texas enacted laws in 2021 that attempted to regulate how social media platforms exercised their content moderation guidelines and policies. However, NetChoice – an association of businesses and online consumers – challenged these laws on the basis of a violation of both the First Amendment and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. After hearing oral arguments in February of this year, the Supreme Court decided on both NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton, and Moody v. NetChoice, LLC at the beginning of this month. There was no clear cut decision; in fact, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded the case to lower courts, citing the lower courts’ lack of proper analysis in relation to the First Amendment and the regulation as part of its reasoning.

After panelist Vera Eidelman set the scene with an extensive description of the First Amendment, she also pointed out that the Supreme Court justices made it clear in the majority that the First Amendment applies to activities both online and offline, with social media platforms exercising these protected rights at their own discretion. However, as online platforms exercise these rights, we encounter blurred lines, a facet of internet governance that panelist Steve DelBianco touched upon: how do we ensure we get content moderation “right,” while pleasing both the user community and the advertisers? 

Alongside Steve and Vera’s statements, panelist Yaël Eisentat offered an alternative perspective through highlighting some main points from the Supreme Court justices’ opinions: a need for further transparency in the tech industry’s algorithm explanations, and the possibility that not every action taken by a social media company will qualify as expression protected by the First Amendment. What this would look like, however, is not specified–the Supreme Court has left the door open as to what such legislation would look like. 

As the conversation continued, a common theme arose: the gray area that is internet governance – more specifically, content moderation – and a need for both Congress and the Supreme Court to modernize. It’s in the intersection of technology and policy that the concrete wires and machines that power our networks become much more abstract and opaque, even with the Internet’s nearly 60 years of existence. In the midst of this current lack of clarity, panelist Olivier Sylvain emphasized that cases such as these open up space for Congress and regulators to think creatively about navigating the territory and additional considerations accompanied by conversations about content moderation in online spaces, namely that of consumer protections and the meaning of “free expression.”

As Congress thinks through such considerations for legislation, TechCongress can step in to fill in the gaps. Since 2016, we have worked tirelessly to bridge the gap between technology and policy, placing 109 fellows in Congressional offices and committees as subject matter experts in pre-existing and emerging technology policy issues. While policymakers work on up-to-date content moderation and transparency legislation that reflect how the Internet operates today, it is imperative they are backed by tech talent eager to pitch in based on their own backgrounds in technical expertise.

If you believe you have the wealth of knowledge necessary to guide and support such conversations, please consider applying for our Congressional Innovation Fellowship for early to mid-career technologists! Applications close on August 5th, 2024.

Day in the Life of a TechCongress Fellow: Joel Burke

Ask a Congressional staffer what their day to day is like and you’ll never get the same answer twice. For many, that’s partially why working in Congress (or on “the Hill” as it’s colloquially known) is so fulfilling. One day may be dedicated to meeting with constituents and hearing about the issues most important to those your boss represents. Another day may be spent preparing for a congressional hearing by writing up a memo, providing background on witnesses, prepping potential questions for the Congressperson to ask, and elaborating on how the hearing fits into a broader legislative agenda both for the office and the caucus. No matter what the day entails, whether it be attending mundane meetings or developing novel policy ideas, Congressional staffers are in a privileged position to create real change and serve the American people.

As a staffer who worked in both the House and Senate, I’ve been fortunate enough to experience many different days and work on a wide array of tasks for my bosses. I have found that most of the work of a staffer falls into three distinct buckets: research and policymaking, meeting with constituents and relevant stakeholders, and member support.

The first bucket, research and policymaking, is probably what most people think of when they imagine working in Congress — finding legislative holes that need to be filled and coming up with the right law (or letter, or even just the right hearing question). However, unlike traditional staffers, as a TechCongress fellow you are in a unique position to use your expertise on technology matters to contribute to your job. In my case, having previously worked an at A.I. startup gave me tremendous insight as to how the office of Senator Rounds should approach A.I. legislation, and helped to inform my work in the A.I. Insight Forums and multiple National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) amendments.

The second bucket of constituent and stakeholder meetings is relatively straightforward, but incredibly underrated in its importance. Every meeting with a constituent is an opportunity to understand an issue directly affecting someone within your office’s district; which can then inform your offices, and sometimes your personal legislative priorities. When I served as a staffer, meeting with a university in the district hugely influence the legislative ideas I worked on, especially around high skill immigration and entrepreneurship, Meetings with other stakeholders are important too; lobbyists, especially those who are former Congressional staffers, can be a great source of information as to the priorities of businesses, and are also some of the most knowledgeable and experienced resources available on legislative processes. Critically as important is building your own trusted stakeholder network so that you have a “braintrust” to turn to when issues out of your immediate area of expertise come up — TechCongress is an incredible shortcut here, as you go into Congress already having your cohort and alumni who are always happy to help. (Although TechCongress is an amazing foundation, beginning to build your network should be one of your first priorities when you start out on the Hill.)

The final bucket, member support, is the most vaguely defined, partially because every member and every office is very different. You’ll frequently hear that Congress isn’t a unified body, but rather hundreds of small businesses — and that’s the truth. If you’re like me, you might start out by joining a House office alongside a new member who is still learning the ropes, In many instances, you may have colleagues younger than yourself who have never heard of things like OKRs or standups, or even had a job outside Congress. On the other hand, you might end up working for a committee with staffers who have been there for a decade or longer and are old hands with deep real-world experience, or even working for members who wrote some of the original legislation affecting the tech industry. How you provide support to the member (directly or through the chain of command) also varies widely, and will mostly be based on the member’s preference. Because of this, it is important to adapt. Some members are rigid and structured and have defined processes to follow, and some will text you on the fly to get your thoughts. What is important to remember is that it is their name on the door — they are who the voters chose to represent them — and it’s your job to make sure they’re best equipped to serve their constituents in the way that they are most effective.

An average day in the life of a Congressional staffer is impossible to describe because it is constantly changing. Instead, I’ll share a few of my favorite moments to provide a taste of what a Congressional staffer may be in for. Some treasured memories include: standing by the water cooler and talking with the senator about the emerging impact of drone warfare and its role in the Nagorno-Karabakh ; seeing amendments I had drafted included in the NDAA and eventually pass into law; introducing my first bill; writing a letter that ended up being covered in Wired; and so many small moments with colleagues and friends celebrating a win or lamenting a loss.

Of course, it’s not all glamor and wins — there were scores of times where I was told my idea was impossible or had been tried before (take this feedback with a big grain of salt), probably hundreds of hours spent in meetings that could have been emails and frustrating bureaucratic hoops to jump through, numerous angry or uncomfortable meetings with constituent, and even a day spent sheltering in the office during an active shoorter incident.

Despite this, I wouldn’t trade my experience for anything and consider my time in Congress as a highlight of my career and an honor to be able to give back to my country in some small way. If you’re still wondering what a day in the life of a TechCongress fellow is like, I urge you to apply and find out for yourself firsthand.

---

Joel Burke

This piece was written by TechCongress alum, Joel Burke (Congressional Innovation Fellowship, January 2022). Joel is a technologist and Georgetown University alumnus based in Washington D.C., with experience working on four continents, advising startups and governments alike. Most notably, Joel led a team for the Republic of Estonia’s e-Residency program, and has advised members of Congress on tech and AI policy. During his time with TechCongress, Joel served with the office of Representative August Pfluger (R-TX-11) and worked on issues related to technology, defense, and energy. Now, Joel currently works for Mozilla, helping the company address urgent policy questions in A.I., privacy, and national security.

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/joelburke1/

Twitter: @billyjoelburke

TechCongress Bio