The SFRC hearing today is interesting

[karynnj]

I am watching the already archived video at http://foreign.senate.gov/hearings/2009/hrg090205a.html The agenda is very misleading - as it is on Afghanistan.

Kerry explained how he wants to do the hearings - he is trying a really different approach to the hearing. More an attempt to get a conversation and answers to questions. They will not go around with everyone having a turn, but everyone can ask questions as part of a conversation. Kerry will act as moderator.

The content on Afghanistan is really interesting and far less dry than earlier hearings. There also seems to be far more interaction between the experts. This could lead to questions and information that none of the Senators or experts on their own would get to. The experts he invited were very interesting - including a woman, from MA, who has lived in Khandahar for several years.

(At the beginning when explaining what he wanted to do, he spoke of wanting transcripts of all the hearings - he didn't say on the web (unless I missed it), but that would be consistent with his desire that they be available for scholarly and journalistic use. )

At any rate, it is a pleasant diversion from the Republicans whining on the floor of the Senate - especially Coburn - who rejects the idea that Bush had much to do with the financial crisis.

[karynnj]

1. Finished watching - this really was a very good interesting hearing

The consensus really seems to be that it did a very good job getting issues out - and more importantly getting beyond prepared statements and formal questioning of the Biden or Lugar led committee- where there is no continuity because many Senators took their turn using their prepared questions. (Not knocking Biden or Lugar, but this really seems a different good approach.)

Kerry said that, votes permitting, he was going to the NATO meeting that Biden is going to. It came up because there was discussion on things NATO should do.

[globalvillage]

2. Watching now

I like the round (rectangle) table format. I'm sure the intent is for it to be more interactive, which it hasn't so far but I'm only about a third of the way through. Maybe after the opening comments that will change.

The woman from MA is interesting.

[karynnj]

3. I agree that it likely was not as interactive as it could have been

maybe because it was a novel idea for everyone. Kerry clearly encouraged people to do so. If you compare it to the Biden or Lugar led hearings, it was substantially more interactive and they could go deeper on some issues than they would have otherwise. The main gain was that they covered topics extensively then moved to something else. That was different than having each Senator get n minutes to ask questions that could be totally unrelated to things addressed by the Senator before him. (The group of experts were interesting especially the MA woman.)

I did hear things that I had not heard before - I knew the Taliban and some tribal leaders were involved with heroin, but didn't know that some in the Karsi government were. The MA woman's idea to pay them to start growing trees (because they have no fruit for 4 years) was very interesting - she made an excellent point that after 4 years it would not make sense to cut the trees to grow poppies. The comment of the counterintelligence guy that it was somewhat like Vietnam at the time Diem was in charge was chilling - especially after Kerry compared it to Vietnam at HRC's hearing.

[globalvillage]

4. It's actually much more conversational now.

I'm about 2/3 through.

I think it's a lot more conducive to learning what's really going on than the traditional hearing format.

Is that the new Sen from NY on the SFRC?

[karynnj]

5. yep - that's her

I really liked the tone that it gave to the proceedings. There was a warmth there that fostered the ability for people to question the view point the Senators started with. Kerry encouraged that by essentially prefacing comments with words like "would you agree" or "Am I right". This was the first time they did this - and I think the witnesses were impressed. In comparison, many of the normal hearings almost seemed sterile meetings where experts read their statements and Senators often just read prepared questions. ( Think of what this format would have done in 2005 - Allen likely would have been unable to really contribute.) I don't think many Senators could pull off moderating something like this.

[YvonneCa]

6. This sounds like a 'Socratic Seminar' style...

...discussion. Schools use them sometimes as a knowledge building tool about a subject being taught or a book everyone is reading. It's very good for comprehension. The hardest part for the leader is to get the group members comfortable questioning each other...and not just responding to leader posed questions. That's where the shared knowledge really grows.

Now I'm anxious to see this hearing! :) Thanks for posting.