Congress = Gong Show?

[Ed Note: So... in editing and updating this post, I inadvertently deleted it. My apologies. Here' s my best effort at quickly recreating it, with notes on what I've changed/added.]

All that today’s episode of the Gong Show… er, I mean all that the latest Roger Clemens hearing on Capitol Hill is missing is Gene Gene The Dancing Machine. Who knows, maybe he’ll make an appearance too:

Now, some of Fight The Hypo’s nearest and dearest friends will be present for and involved in today’s hearings of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. We wish them well.

So, we’ve tried to not be too critical, but…. this whole thing is a sham.

I know. Hardly an original thought, Mr. Sherpa. You’re right. And while I know this isn’t a political or health or sports blog, I have come to believe three four things about these hearings:

1. There is no real purpose for this. Congress has these folks testify under oath, but they’re not really charged with anything, nor will their testimony influence the development of drug policy (the task which the committee claims as the purpose for this hearing)
2. This isn’t Congress’ role. Rather than developing national policy, they are attacking these guys. They are conducting a trial. [update: added at 12:45 p.m. EST] The Committee interviews Clemens under oath for an alleged breaking of federal law. Counsel can whisper to him but cannot directly address the committee. While the chairman allowed Mr. Hardin to question the Chairmans allegations, Clemens’ counsel is not permitted, under the rules, to directly address the committee (including objections). So while the questioning is on whether a violation of the law has taken place, the “witness” must answer the questions largely without the benefit and protection of counsel who can directly address the court. Again, this is a criminal prosecution conducted publicly with the “defendant’s” right to counsel.
3. [new] Where is management? For all the aspersions cast at these players, there is little or no accountability expected of management. Why didn’t they test? When did they know there was a problem?
4. Notwithstanding my previous concerns, it’s still fun to watch. I used to work on Capitol Hill, so it’s interesting to watch from the outside. Make no mistake, I think this sham hearing is a waste of time. Nonetheless, how Clemens and McNamee answer questions, how the lawyers conduct themselves in trying to defend their client, and how each Member of the Committee approaches his or her questions is quite fascinating.

No related posts.