Kozlowski: Congress wastes time with Colbert

Dave Barry once… Dave Barry once wrote, “[H]ere in the United States, we do not have an official court jester. We have Congress.”

Behind the solid, stoic walls of the Capitol and underneath the cast-iron dome are 535 fun-loving chuckleheads who would be beloved by Americans if only they didn’t actually govern us. Congress has concerned itself with hilarious pieces of legislation, like authorizing bridges to Alaskan islands, naming the oak the national tree and each year’s farm omnibus bill. However, some joker in Congress decided all this funny business just wasn’t funny enough.

Stephen Colbert was brought to testify before Congress as an expert in illegal immigration last week. His expertise came about entirely as a result of a day spent working as a farm laborer in upstate New York. I found his testimony flippant, not funny. And I’m not alone in right-winger grumpiness. Colbert’s testimony irritated Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., hardly a tea-party activist, to the point where Colbert was asked to submit his statement in writing and leave the committee room. Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., told the hill that “using an actor in character to give testimony makes a mockery of the committee process.” I agree. Congress should not deal with fiction, at least any more than it usually does.

Ultimately, this column is not about Stephen Colbert. It is about the calling of dumb congressional hearings and the questioning of questionable witnesses. Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., pointed out that Republicans have called up Clint Eastwood and Elmo previously, no doubt to see how the crisis on Wall Street affects Sesame Street. Of course, Rep. Chu then made the non-sequitur argument that this fully justified having Stephen Colbert testify.

The Colbert hearing was at least about a serious issue on which both parties agree Congress must act: illegal immigration. But some hearings haven’t even been on serious issues, my favorite example being the BALCO hearings about steroids in baseball. What concern is it of Congress that some Major League Baseball players used steroids? Congress is not responsible for the prosecution of crimes. If a crime has been committed, it falls to the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute that crime and to the judiciary to adjudicate the case. Unless Congress was proposing some law on regulation of steroids not already on the books, these hearings had no point. ESPN.com reported that some thought the hearings were relevant for showing the youth of America that crime doesn’t pay. I would argue that a federal indictment of a baseball star, and perhaps testimony of a baseball star in front of a grand jury, would have the same effect.

This is not to say that these hearings are pointless. Calling hearings and less-than-expert witnesses allow political points to be scored. In the case of steroids in baseball, both sides of the aisle could look big and tough for saying “that dangerous and illegal behavior is dangerous and illegal” in the apt words of George Will. Hearings give Congress the appearance of doing something, and doing something everybody agrees with, like procrastination on serious assignments. There are equally good reasons to summon celebrities to testify. That allows congressmen  to look like a bunch of fun-loving, regular folk who love good jokes as much as the next person who loves pork, “the other white meat.”

The waste of time generated by these hearings and witnesses is not unimportant. The average Congress-creature and its staff has mountains of paperwork to wade through: answering constituent letters, researching the 251 bills that became public laws during the 111th Congress, figuring out how to vote in the 565 roll calls in 2010 alone, appearing at functions to do things like pin the blue ribbon on the heaviest cow bred by a member of the 4H club in Box Butte County, Neb. — useful things like that. Now add to this a special commission to do something Congress has no business doing, like re-open both O.J. Simpson cases. Our congressman now has one more dumb thing that has to be attended to, researched and checked on with the folks at home.

Calling silly witnesses or having silly hearings also means that serious hearings and serious witnesses are overshadowed. The President of the United Farm Workers, Arturo Rodriguez, testified alongside Colbert. This gentleman no doubt had a distinct point of view, research, expertise and policy prescriptions he’d like Congress to enact. Though I might disagree with what he had to say, at least I can see why he would be talking to Congress. Oh wait. Who remembers what he had to say? We remember only that he testified with a celebrity. By the same token, there were no doubt things more pressing than the steroid crisis in baseball that Congress held hearings on. Who remembers what they were?

Whereas it might not be as bad as the other things congressmen have done — like running up a huge deficit, waiting for Social Security to collapse, keeping 90 grand in the freezer or molesting pages — the pattern of political grandstanding in hearings is still pretty bad. Congress should stop the levity and focus more on the pressing issues of today.

Write the truthiness to kozthought@gmail.com.