Making the Case for Affordability Through Congressional Investigations

Concerns over affordability, the cost of living and the economy remain politically salient, with "six in ten people say[ing] the government should prioritize bringing down the cost of everyday essentials – like groceries, electricity bills and gas prices."¹ If Democrats win control of the U.S. House of Representatives or U.S. Senate after the 2026 midterms, companies operating in consumer-facing sectors such as food, energy, utilities, telecommunications, technology and travel should plan for the committees to aggressively focus congressional oversight on issues related to affordability in the 120th U.S. Congress.

What to Expect in the 120th Congress

Concerns over affordability are often viewed against the backdrop of increased consolidation and a favorable climate for dealmaking through a decline in antitrust enforcement actions by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission, including an uptick in high-profile settlements rather than efforts to seek to block potentially anti-competitive mergers. Companies in concentrated industries should expect Democrats to scrutinize perceived enforcement failures through oversight as they make the case for electoral victory going into 2028.

Companies across consumer-facing sectors and those considering new mergers or acquisitions should plan for Democrats to review any transaction or enforcement matter in which the president was rumored or reported to have taken an interest or personally intervened to encourage a settlement. Corporations, especially those with a global footprint, should also be prepared for congressional oversight into the administration's trade deals as they aim to contrast corporate profits and alleged self-dealing with higher costs of goods or services domestically, in addition to investigating any "pay-to-play" accusations. This includes expanding ongoing investigations into surveillance pricing in various industries. Companies should also expect Democrats to continue investigating corporate entities over alleged failures to properly disclose lobbying activity related to enforcement actions or proposed settlements. Relatedly, consumer-facing industries and their partners – such as trade associations or affiliated tax-exempt organizations – should be prepared for Democrats to investigate their involvement in any regulatory changes, especially those focused on consumer protections and public safety.

In addition to what has been widely reported in the press and covered by Holland & Knight's earlier alerts on private equity, healthcare, environmental and surveillance pricing oversight, the following sectors – and any company, firm or fund looking to invest in those areas – should be prepared for congressional oversight in the coming Congress and for those investigations to be leveraged into legislative reform efforts aimed for passage in a post-2028 landscape.

Agriculture and Food

Companies considering acquisitions or investments at any point in the agricultural supply chain – or those already firmly entrenched in it – should prepare for the risks posed by congressional investigations. Democrats are expected to aim to connect high fertilizer and food prices not just to the president's tariffs but to consolidation throughout the supply chain, the war in Iran and a lack of agency enforcement actions against perceived corporate allies of the administration. Democrats will most likely point to recent merger and acquisition activity and information revealed in recent surveillance pricing or price-fixing lawsuits as additional reasons for the rising prices of food and drinks, both in stores and at restaurants.

Furthermore, as America's farm sector debt is expected to reach record highs in 2026 and consumers remain concerned about food prices, Congress will likely face pressure across the political landscape to engage in oversight to support legislative solutions. This may involve examining how consolidation or foreign ownership affects issues such as the number of dairy farms and cattle ranchers, the cost of raising cattle or producing fertilizer, and the number of dairy producers moving into processing. Companies should be ready for inquiries into the administration's decision to delay implementation of the Poultry Tournament System Rule and its impact on producers, or for member offices to take cues from a recent settlement against a data company for enabling price-fixing. Congress could also seek opportunities to identify region-specific goods – dominated by a small number of key players – to conduct delegation-oriented oversight. Finally, the sector should be prepared for investigations into regulatory actions related to food and agricultural safety, including but not limited to food recalls and the role companies or their partners had in advocating for recent changes.

Energy and Utilities

With reports of the Iran War costing consumers $265 billion in increased energy prices while the oil and gas industry reports record profits, Democrats will argue that any regulatory changes or deals pursued during this administration have inflated fuel and energy costs at the expense of consumers. As larger deal activity becomes scarce, dominant producers divest noncore assets and consolidation of midstream assets increases, companies involved in or planning for mid-cap transactions should prepare for increased scrutiny. Recent acquisitions, such as those focused on midstream processes and assets throughout the Permian Basin, could be targets as Democrats try to make the case that the administration is approving such transactions and passing those costs down to voters. This includes preparing for members to take inspiration from ongoing antitrust litigation, including the lawsuits alleging shale producers conspired to fix prices, and use that to inform new investigations. Any oversight of the industry will likely include reviewing how companies benefited from tax provisions throughout the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

With data centers becoming a major political issue, congressional oversight will be used to examine the link between data center energy use and rising cost of energy to consumers, as well as support legislation that will determine how the utilities industry operates moving forward. Moreover, the public's growing awareness of grid disturbances, aging transformers and coal plants, grid security threats and private equity investments in utilities – and the effect they may have on household bills – leaves the energy industry and utilities vulnerable to even more political attention that is often a precursor to congressional oversight activity. Any dealmaking or investments in this space should consider this risk. This includes preparing for (likely bipartisan) oversight of investor-owned utilities, transmission planning, grid security, the production of transformers or other grid technologies, aging coal plants and any investments or acquisitions that may impact those concerns.

Technology, Telecommunications and Media

Intensifying public backlash to data centers and technology companies across congressional districts, means that companies considering acquisitions or investments related to any aspect of the artificial intelligence (AI) stack should be prepared for congressional scrutiny. Congress will be incentivized to look beyond the traditional Big Tech applications and examine supply chain issues relating to AI, hyperscalers, graphics processing units and data centers more broadly. Meaning, if Democrats want to assess the health of the AI ecosystem and encourage innovation (as they claim), then Congress will likely consider consolidation's impact on cloud computing, licensing structures, AI security, data infrastructure and developer tooling, to name a few. Companies should prepare accordingly for this risk in addition to Congress' ongoing concerns about supply chain bottlenecks. Companies and investors planning for transactions in adjacent sectors (e.g., semiconductors) should also prepare for congressional oversight into how consumers are absorbing the costs of an increasingly constricted supply chain that is supporting AI acceleration and emerging technology more broadly.

As Democrats look to make their affordability case to voters, companies should expect Congress to investigate what some members view as excessive consolidation in the telecommunications sector. Looking into recent transactions driven by fixed-mobile convergence and bundling, for example, and any impact on household costs and service availability is an example of a matter Democrats could pursue. Parties should assume a newly empowered majority will also review how AI is impacting device costs and network expense savings and if those costs and savings are passed down to consumers.

Parties looking to invest in film, media, games or content creation should be aware that Democrats are already concerned that consolidation in the industry is limited to a small number of companies with close ties to the current administration. Any new acquisitions or investments – including those focused on consolidating streaming platforms, digital/online publishing, advertising technology, content ownership, news or live event ticket sales – will likely face further congressional scrutiny. Media and content oversight may also address broader concerns related to technology consolidation and its impact on information concentration. The technology and media industry should prepare for oversight into how dominant platforms are changing how information is presented to users and how that may impact consumer awareness more broadly.

Transportation and Travel

As part of the affordability agenda, Democrats may investigate stakeholders who advocated for delays or changes to rules addressing compensation, hidden fees, family seating or rights for disabled travelers. Moreover, as the avenues for budget air travel decrease, fare prices increase and the number of fortress hubs drops, companies should plan for Democrats to investigate the impact this may have on price-sensitive consumers.

Beyond the airline industry, companies should anticipate oversight of consolidation of the railroads, accusations of anti-competitive behavior and questions over the impact such actions may have had on public safety regulations. Democrats have already expressed concerns about alleged rate increases for customers who opposed a freight railroad megadeal. They will point to the risks of further consolidation in an already concentrated industry by focusing on cost-of-living or public safety matters and highlighting prior examples of food and supply chain logjams following railroad consolidation.

Companies should plan for Democrats to continue their investigations into the use of surveillance pricing across the travel industry and the integration of AI across different modes of transportation. This will likely include oversight into reports that online booking tools favor certain providers over competition and lower prices; booking companies enforce rate parity to inflate prices and AI tools used to streamline travel and physical infrastructure may lead to new cost and safety concerns.

State Authorities

Companies should also anticipate congressional oversight to unfold alongside state attorney general investigations, state regulators and private litigation. This will encompass not just investigations of anti-competitive or predatory practices in targeted industries, but also broader antitrust enforcement or consumer protection efforts.

How Should Companies Prepare?

Congressional investigations are unlike other forms of government scrutiny because they require companies to navigate legal, political and reputational risk simultaneously, often with consequences for both the company and high-profile individuals. If Democrats win the majority in either chamber, the private sector should be ready for Congress to both investigate and legislate issues relating to competition and cost-of-living concerns, especially when voters believe that companies are concentrating their power and benefiting from the administration's decisions at the expense of consumers. Although a transaction may have been approved by the antitrust authorities, it does not mean Congress will look upon it favorably. It may, instead, spur a motivated Democratic Party to point to certain examples of consolidation activity as inspiration for industry-specific reform and creating new legislative frameworks.

Rather than waiting until the new Congress is sworn in on January 3, 2027, companies with potential exposure can use this period to prepare. Holland & Knight's Congressional Investigations Team combines former congressional investigators and oversight committee chairs, experienced transactional and regulatory attorneys, white collar litigators, experienced antitrust counsel and public policy professionals to help clients navigate congressional scrutiny, parallel investigations, and related reputational and business risks. We can help companies prepare for the new Congress in the following ways:

Perform Political Exposure Analyses

Companies that wait for a committee letter or subpoena before considering their congressional vulnerabilities give up the most valuable asset in any investigation: time. A political exposure analysis takes a candid, outside-in look at the company to identify the issues most likely to draw scrutiny from committees, subcommittees or individual members seeking oversight targets. As discussed, these issues will likely relate to affordability, so companies in the agriculture and food; energy and utilities; technology, telecommunications and media; and transportation and travel sectors should take a close look at factors such as their pricing, labor, data privacy, environmental or consumer protection practices; whether they rely heavily on government contracts, subsidies or regulatory approvals; and any public statements by executives that could be cast as misleading or inconsistent with internal records.

The review should also cover the company's political footprint, including lobbying disclosures, trade association memberships, political action committee activity, and corporate or executive political contributions, which often shape how members of each party view the company. Companies should also consider the wider legislative and political setting: hearings, pending bills and agency actions affecting the industry; shifts in committee jurisdiction and leadership priorities, which are certain to take place post-election; and events, such as product failures, data breaches or high-profile litigation, that could quickly put the company in the spotlight. The result should be a prioritized map of exposure that leadership can use to direct preparation and set expectations with the board.

Compliance Gap Analyses

Having identified where scrutiny is most likely, a company should assess frankly whether its internal infrastructure could withstand a congressional inquiry, which differs sharply from litigation and agency enforcement. Committees are not bound by the rules of civil discovery, may not recognize attorney-client privilege or work-product protection, can issue broad subpoenas with short return dates and can make documents and testimony public in ways meant to cause the most reputational damage. A compliance gap analysis should therefore test compliance programs and internal policies against the conduct most likely to be investigated and examine whether document retention and legal hold procedures can quickly identify, preserve, collect and review relevant materials, including emails, messaging platforms and other ephemeral communications.

Creating a Crisis Response Plan

The findings of these reviews should be built into a written crisis response plan tailored to congressional inquiries, so the company can act decisively in the first hours and days after a committee letter, subpoena or hearing invitation arrives. The plan should designate a core, cross-functional response team with clear decision-making authority. It should set out protocols for quickly issuing legal holds, assessing the request's scope and the requesting committee's jurisdiction and political motivations, and engaging with committee staff early to negotiate priorities, timing and confidentiality.

Because congressional matters often unfold alongside parallel agency enforcement, civil litigation and media scrutiny, the plan should coordinate positions across those fronts so that statements to Congress, regulators, investors, employees and the public stay consistent and do not create new exposure. It should also address board notification and oversight, disclosure obligations under the securities laws where relevant and the preparation of witnesses and draft holding statements for likely scenarios. A plan is only as effective as its rehearsal, so companies should test it periodically through tabletop exercises and update it as personnel, business lines, and the political landscape change. Deficiencies should be remediated before an inquiry begins, allowing the company to respond credibly and in an organized way, protect its legal and reputational interests and avoid the impression of disorder or concealment that can drive an inquiry well beyond its original scope.

Notes

¹ Jessie Blaeser & Anna Wiederkehr, What Americans Really Prioritize When It Comes to Affordability, Politico (Oct. 18, 2026).

Information contained in this alert is for the general education and knowledge of our readers. It is not designed to be, and should not be used as, the sole source of information when analyzing and resolving a legal problem, and it should not be substituted for legal advice, which relies on a specific factual analysis. Moreover, the laws of each jurisdiction are different and are constantly changing. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. If you have specific questions regarding a particular fact situation, we urge you to consult the authors of this publication, your Holland \\\& Knight representative or other competent legal counsel.