Why a 9/11-Style Commission for Trump-Russia Ties is a Bad Idea
by Whitney Ahn
The connection between the President, the Trump Campaign, and Russia is a complex, tangled web that most agree should be investigated so that the American people can gain clarity of the web. The investigation is so unanimously supported among the political leadership of both Democrats and Republicans alike, save the presidential subject of the investigation, that the main point of contention is not the subject matter of the investigation but the investigators themselves.
Can the Senate and House Intelligence Committees be trusted to produce a convincing report that gives the American people and our leaders a full picture of what happened regarding the 2016 election and related events? Some say yes; some say no; some say the Senate, yes, but the House, no.
Those that say no generally call for an independent commission, similar that created for the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center. The idea of ensuring independence from partisanship in an investigation so political nature is both positive and necessary. However, upon researching further, one may find that this is not the best route forward.
Firstly, there is the problem of funding. The White House and Congress must together agree upon an appropriations bill to fund the theoretical commission. Even if the White House would agree to fund this commission, it seems unlikely that they would approve a large enough sum to fund a through and quality investigation.
This appropriations bill would also require both sides agree to details like the scope of the investigation, as well as whether or not to put a deadline on it. Giving the White House that much power over what would likely be the most trusted investigation into its own self seems to be troubling at the very least.
Then there is the issue of membership. The 9/11 commission had 10 members, 5 Republicans and 5 Democrats, appointed by the House, the Senate, and the White House. To suggest that the Democrat leadership would not place their most zealous members, such as Rep. Maxine Waters or Rep. Pramila Jayapal, on the committee is as ridiculous a notion as the suggestion that Republican leadership would not place their own most zealous members, such as former Gov. Mike Huckabee or Rep. Jack Kingston. The parties may do so for no other reason than they suspect that the other side will do the same.
While an independent and Congressionally-authorized special committee or commission would most certainly be ideal for the sake of the validity and trustworthiness of the investigation's ultimate results, whatever they may be, it is very important that the 9/11 style of commission not be copied, and that partisanship plays no role in the investigation.
Can the Senate and House Intelligence Committees be trusted to produce a convincing report that gives the American people and our leaders a full picture of what happened regarding the 2016 election and related events? Some say yes; some say no; some say the Senate, yes, but the House, no.
Those that say no generally call for an independent commission, similar that created for the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center. The idea of ensuring independence from partisanship in an investigation so political nature is both positive and necessary. However, upon researching further, one may find that this is not the best route forward.
Firstly, there is the problem of funding. The White House and Congress must together agree upon an appropriations bill to fund the theoretical commission. Even if the White House would agree to fund this commission, it seems unlikely that they would approve a large enough sum to fund a through and quality investigation.
This appropriations bill would also require both sides agree to details like the scope of the investigation, as well as whether or not to put a deadline on it. Giving the White House that much power over what would likely be the most trusted investigation into its own self seems to be troubling at the very least.
Then there is the issue of membership. The 9/11 commission had 10 members, 5 Republicans and 5 Democrats, appointed by the House, the Senate, and the White House. To suggest that the Democrat leadership would not place their most zealous members, such as Rep. Maxine Waters or Rep. Pramila Jayapal, on the committee is as ridiculous a notion as the suggestion that Republican leadership would not place their own most zealous members, such as former Gov. Mike Huckabee or Rep. Jack Kingston. The parties may do so for no other reason than they suspect that the other side will do the same.
While an independent and Congressionally-authorized special committee or commission would most certainly be ideal for the sake of the validity and trustworthiness of the investigation's ultimate results, whatever they may be, it is very important that the 9/11 style of commission not be copied, and that partisanship plays no role in the investigation.
