Don Wolfensberger at The Hill:
The House seems to have a special penchant for birthing select committees to complement the work of its 20-plus standing committees. In the last Congress, for instance, it created select committees or subcommittees on the strategic competition between the U.S. and the Chinese Communist Party, COVID and the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
It wasn’t until Republicans took control of the House in 1995, after 40 years in the minority, that they abolished four select committees, all of which had existed for ten or more years: the select committees on Aging; Children, Youth and Families; Hunger; and Narcotics Abuse and Control.
What is it about select committees that so entices Congress to propagate them? There are many possible explanations. Sometimes there are problems that need to be addressed immediately. Sometimes there is a partisan promise or priority that needs to be fulfilled. Sometimes, a member or group cause requires special attention. Sometimes, there is a jurisdictional conflict between committees that requires coordination and resolution. Sometimes, a longstanding popular public obsession requires constant boosting. And finally, sometimes there is a valued member of Congress who has not been named a standing committee chairman and needs to be mollified with a select committee chairmanship instead.