This diary is in response to the Congressional Committees Project (CCP), and the difficulty in obtaining timely transcripts of committee hearings.
Just three reminders why citizen oversight is needed: Powerful Committee Chairmen that are clueless about the subject matter; alleged 'experts' presenting false evidence to a committee; alleged 'experts' presenting false/misleading statistics that continue to get repeated after being exposed (opening remarks of Senators Allard and Stabenow).
What follows addresses several issues that have been raised, and why official GPO transcripts cannot be produced within several days.
Although the official GPO transcript is not available until long after the record has closed, there is a way to get a timely transcript before the record closes, without paying for a subscription.
Committee Hearings
As PoliSigh noted, the grunt work is done by the staffers, which include legal counsel and investigators. They do the research, interview witnesses, prepare questions and summaries. In short, they set the tone of the hearing, which is usually evident from the prepared written statements, which can be found on the committee's Homepage, but not always.
After the hearing there is a short window of time (a week or less) for members to posit additional written questions to the witnesses, who are obligated to respond in writing. At the end of the hearing(s), the Chairman will designate that the record stay open for a length of time, anywhere from a week to thirty days. This is to allow requested documentation, resource material, exhibits, responses etc. to be supplemented into the record. I'll assume these time frames are at the discretion of the chairman. I don't know what, if any, public input is allowed during these time frames, but that is a subject that needs to be addressed.
Government Printing Office
The GPO coordinates all federal government printing, and is subject to Title 44 of the U.S. Code, with oversight by the Joint Committee on Printing (see prior link).
GPO Access is a division of GPO which provides the public with electronic access to congressional hearings but
Only hearings released to GPO from the committees are made available on GPO Access.
Hit the "more" button and you get this Note:
Not all congressional hearings are available on GPO Access. Whether or not a hearing is disseminated on GPO Access depends on the committee.
These statements appear to be inconsistent, as GPO and GPO Access are distinct, and calls into question how and why a committee would hinder public access to an open hearing. The alternative would be that the transcript would be available on the committee's Homepage. A small sampling of sites reveals otherwise.
Congressional Quarterly/LexisNexis Academic
CQ and Federal News Service transcribe congressional hearings and other government documents within days for its subscribers/clients, which includes LexisNexis, also subscription based. LexisNexis has many services, including LexisNexis Academic. This database can be found on most university/college library computer systems, and I imagine all law library computer systems. Generally, these libraries are open to the public/alumni (days and times will vary), and the LexisNexis Academic database can be accessed for free through these computers (check your local public library first).
At the LexisNexis Academic homepage, click on 'News' at the menu in the left sidebar. At the first sub-menu, scroll and click on 'News Transcripts'. At the next sub-menu, scroll and click on 'Political Transcripts' (last option). Type in the keywords and set a time frame (using the date of the hearing seems to work best as a key word). Hit 'enter' and you'll be presented with everything that CQ and Federal News has transcribed for that hearing, within days of the hearing (there is a Load Date at the end of each transcript). There is a wealth of resource material in this database, so plan on staying for awhile. Note: as these are public access computers, the library's Homepage changes. If the library has the database and you can't find it, ask the librarian, they are very helpful.
bring cash
More than likely you will have to pay for copies, or use a copy card. Hearings can run 80 pages or more, and there is such a wealth of information, it's difficult not to take advantage. I have not tried it, but it may be possible to download the hearing onto a disc, and print it at home.
respect the students
If the library is busy, wait to tie up a printer with an 80 page job.
downside
CQ and Federal News do not cover every hearing, and the transcript is not the complete record. Also, they scream, "Copyright", so there are legal concerns (how can one copyright a public hearing?). But this is the only avenue I'm aware of to access semi-immediate hearing transcripts for the cost of copying. There is the webcast (if available) which has plusses, but it's not a substitute for a transcript. If, a week after the hearing, you can't find anything in the LexisNexis Academic database, chances are it was not covered, which I believe is manipulated by the committees. Call CQ or Federal News and ask why.
What To Look For
Committee: In general it will be evident what the agenda is from the members' opening remarks in the transcript. If the committee is trying to shoehorn the hearing to fit an end result, you'll find members answering their own questions, and accepting statements of fact and referenced material without question. You'll also notice a failure to call root witnesses, as in, hacking at branches instead of striking at the root. After reading a few transcripts, you'll get a feel for the committee and the various members.
Witnesses: Look for diversity. A number of committees tend to call the same 'expert' witnesses, federal officials or pull from the same agencies or organizations, who repeat the same testimony. If that's the case, look for a conflict of interest. There's never just one expert.
Look for opposing views. There's almost always two sides. If all or most of the witnesses are mere sock puppets, this indicates the committee needs testimony to support 'findings of fact' justifying particular legislation, or lay the foundation for an agenda.
Investigate the witnesses background, especially the 'experts'. Have they stated one thing in front of congress and something different in another environment? It would be interesting to know who controls the witness list.
Testimony: Look for testimony that cites from, or speaks for, third parties that are not present. Contact the party and clarify their position, research, findings etc.
Look for referenced material that is not offered nor requested for the record, and all referenced material in support of testimony should be accessible to the public and reviewed for contextual accuracy.
Look for foundations, statistics, methodology, or results that would not survive scrutiny in the relative field, or can be interpreted in several ways. Testimony that obviously requires further analysis, yet is ignored, is suspect.
Forget the fact that most testimony is under oath. Supporting an agenda supercedes any oath.
Dealing With The Staff
Keep copies of everything sent and received. Follow up to confirm that what was sent was actually received by the person indicated. Document all contact, and keep a summary of said contact.
telephone calls
Control the conversation by being prepared. These people are busy and not used to dealing with the general public, and some don't want to. Write down your concerns, questions, possible defenses, and have all reference material in support at hand.
Try not to play phone tag, it's one of their favorite games.
Don't get baited into an argument, either on the phone or email--unless you're curious as to what a federal agent looks like (there will be two of them).
Document all calls; date, time, name and title of person spoke with/voicemailed; summary of the discussion, promises made, attitude, etc. You will need it.
What You Can Do Now
In a few weeks, the committee Homepage will transfer to the Dems, so there is time now to review the current version, including making copies, for future reference. The Kos community could devise a checklist of essential components that all committee Homepages should incorporate, and keep updated. Post your review and compare with others. Set up a best/worst list. In short, hit the ground running.
Call the current committee staff to address any concerns, questions, etc. You won't get much of a response, but you'll get practice and confidence in dealing with staffers. At a minimum, if the current version meets or excedes transparency in government, you can shame the Dems into upgrading their site by claiming the prior regime did it better--and you have the documentation to prove it.
I'm not an expert by any means, but I agree with tikkun that this is a major undertaking that will probably meet with resistance from congress.