It appears unlikely that the bipartisan legislation for a January 6th Commission will find the ten Republican votes it needs to pass the Senate — even though the legislation as passed by the House includes essentially everything Republicans asked for, giving them equal representation on the commission and equal subpoena power.
But, wrote Andrew Prokop for Vox, it is almost beside the point, because even if the bill somehow passes the Senate, Republicans have means and motive to sabotage the operation and findings of the commission.
"There's nothing magical about this proposed bipartisan commission — it would have the same formal powers as any ordinary congressional committee looking into the matter," wrote Prokop. "In fact, its requirement for bipartisan support to issue subpoenas means it could well be less aggressive at unearthing new information than, say, a Democratic-only House committee investigation could be. Its hoped-for advantage would instead be in the realm of messaging. The idea is that if such a body is deemed above politics, it could deliver an assessment of what happened that would be viewed as credible by both sides, shaping a national narrative."
The commission is modeled after the famously bipartisan 9/11 Commission, wrote Prokop, but there is a key difference.
"The question of who in the US government deserved blame for the September 11, 2001 attacks had potentially monumental implications for both parties," wrote Prokop. "Republicans had blamed Bill Clinton for failing to act against Osama bin Laden while he was president in the late 1990s, while Democrats had blamed George W. Bush for ignoring warnings in the advance of the attacks themselves. The report was crafted as Bush's reelection was looming, and with widespread speculation that Hillary Clinton would run for president one day."
Ultimately, the commission created a "balanced" report that didn't disproportionately blame either party — and it's hard to see how that would be possible for a January 6th Commission because the attack was perpetrated directly by supporters of former President Donald Trump, acting on what they saw as Trump's orders. "Feel-good bipartisanship isn't in the cards, and fact-finding would probably be difficult too if the Republican commissioners agree to vote as a bloc against any controversial subpoenas," wrote Prokop.
All of this, concluded Prokop, means Democrats may be better off establishing a House select committee and just doing it all themselves — even if that comes at the cost of "bipartisan" messaging.
"Most Republican voters now inhabit an information environment dominated by conservative media outlets like Fox and social media similarly designed to tell them what they want to hear," wrote Prokop. "Acknowledging that reality, the most Democrats may be able to do is push on forward, trying to gather facts and make a public case to their best of their ability — on their own."
You can read more here.
