The perils of a politicized select committee

Gary J. Andres wrote in National Review Online Congressional Democrat leaders thrilled left-wing bloggers and other liberal activists last week by picking a fight with Republicans about how to investigate the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. But the minority party's tactics — premised more on pugilism than precedent — might not lay a glove on Republicans, but instead leave Democrats with a bloody nose and Congress a black eye. Most think congressional investigations of high-visibility issues hold the potential for partisan posturing. They do. But Democrat leaders are doing their share of grandstanding before an investigation even begins, threatening congressional-reputation suicide in exchange for what they really want: an independent commission. The House last week created a "Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina" on a near-party-line vote (all Republicans, plus seven Democrats voted for the measure). The Senate took a different path when Senator Frist announced last Tuesday that the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, chaired by Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, would also undertake an investigation,

That was a mistake. Collins is a RINO

but prospects of bicameral hearings with the new House select committee now appear remote. Trying to avoid a partisan food fight, GOP leaders are working to coax minority-party participation — so far to no avail. House and Senate Democrat leaders seem dug in on boycotting any kind of select-committee meeting.

The Sunnis boycotted the last Iraqi elections; they now realize they shot themselves in the foot. How long will it take before Dems realize the same thing?

House Republicans structured the new panel along the same lines as other select committees that investigated issues such as Iran-Contra, the Kennedy assassination, and Pearl Harbor, including breakdowns that reflect the existing partisan ratios in Congress. Since 1946, the House used this select committee model 41 times to investigate a host of issues, usually while Democrats controlled the majority.

While attacking the select-committee idea, Democrats see no sins in commissions. Despite historical precedent for the proposed structure, the House minority is insisting on an investigative body more like the 9/11 panel or a committee with equal representation from both sides of the aisle. Keeping with their favorite tactic of non-cooperation, House Democrats are holding their breath until they get their way.

Don't give in to them. I realize they are catering to Blue States, but when they turn blue from holding their breath, they will find blue is not their best color.

Blood pressures in the Senate are a little lower. Majority Leader Frist decided against creating a select committee, instead saying the Senate Homeland and Government Affairs Committee (which includes a full complement of nine Republicans and seven Democrats) will take the lead in that body. But Democratic leader Harry Reid has not indicated much interest in authorizing the government-affairs panel to join in any kind of bicameral investigation. The scrum continues this week.

Clause 11 of Rule I in the House of Representatives says "The Speaker shall appoint all select, joint and conference committees ordered by the House." Denny Hastert announced the 11 Republicans on Wednesday but is still waiting to hear Nancy Pelosi's recommendations. Technically he could appoint the nine Democrats to fill out the panel, but the speaker will likely indulge Pelosi a bit longer. House Select Committee chairman Tom Davis of Virginia has said Republicans will wait a few more days for Pelosi to provide names for the speaker to appoint. Davis did invite several Democrats from the Gulf states to participate at the select committee's first hearing last week and two representatives, Gene Taylor of Mississipi and Charlie Melancon of Louisiana, attended.

Further complicating the Democrats' boycott strategy is the scheduled appearance of former FEMA director Michael Brown, slated to testify at what promises to be a much more high-profile hearing before the committee on Tuesday, September 27. The prospect of a hearing that promises to get a lot of media attention with the minority represented only by a couple of "unofficial" representatives could prove highly embarrassing to the Democrats.