Matt Wuerker Congress cools on Colbert

Members of Congress have been fooled time after time after time by Stephen Colbert, and after last week’s mockery, they have a message for the satirist who makes a living lampooning them: Colbert, you’re dead to us.

Colbert’s act had steadily been losing cachet on Capitol Hill, but his spoof testimony merely accelerated a pending divorce.


Lawmakers and their aides are repeatedly turning down requests for “The Colbert Report,” political advisers are suggesting members avoid Colbert like the plague and the infamous “Better Know a District” segment that put Colbert on the map on Capitol Hill appears to be dying out.

“My experience with that show is like herpes. It never goes away, and it itches and sometimes flares up,” said a former aide to Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, after his boss appeared on the show in 2006. The conservative Georgia Republican, co-sponsor of a bill requiring that the Ten Commandments be displayed in Congress, was skewered by Colbert in a segment of “Better Know a District” for appearing to be able to name only three of the commandments.

The episode has “haunted” the office for years, the former aide said. “I deeply regret letting him go on ‘The Colbert Report.’”

The Colbert divorce seems to be bipartisan. Spokesmen for both House campaign committees say they’d advise their candidates that there are better ways to raise their profiles than to expose themselves to Colbert.

“Generally, our advice is always to focus on the local media requests,” said Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesman Ryan Rudominer. “The only thing we would advise candidates against is inviting comedians to testify in character before their committee when they become members,” added National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Andy Sere.

The downside for Colbert Nation?

Now that he’s got members’ attention, they don’t seem to want his anymore. Colbert initially succeeded with his off-color “Better Know a District” shtick because many lawmakers saw it as free and friendly exposure.

Now, many realize that there are considerable risks that accompany those rewards.

Westmoreland is just one of the lawmakers who say their reputations have been trampled by the show and its heavy editing, making members appear as if they said things they didn’t during filming.

The segment is usually pretaped as a sit-down interview in a lawmaker’s D.C. office. Members who have gone through the process describe it as a two-hour interview that gets edited down to three minutes. Sometimes Colbert’s questions are paired with lawmakers’ answers, and sometimes the segment is selectively edited for humor, members say.

The number of “Better Know a District” segments has plummeted in the past few years.

In 2006, more than 40 segments aired. That number fell to a little over a dozen in 2007 and has fallen to less than 10 this year, according to POLITICO’s count.

“I have done many comedic interviews, but I did not appreciate his humor,” Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) told POLITICO, after being teased about being gay during his segment. “I did not understand that his mission was to make every politician look ridiculous. ... If I had a chance to do it again, I would only do it live.”

“I didn’t even know he was still doing the segment,” said one Republican House aide, whose boss recently refused to go on the show.

Former House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Chicago once warned his colleagues not to appear on the show. Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters, “I watch it all the time, and I think, ‘Why would anybody go on there?’” That advice is catching on.

“I had to tell [my boss], ‘no,’” said one Republican House aide. “He kept pushing back. He thinks he’s funny enough. But I said, ‘No, you don’t understand. They will edit it to make you look stupid.’”

Later while on the air, Colbert called the lawmaker — who declined to be identified — a “pussy” for refusing the interview, the aide said. “You’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t. You can go on and look like a fool, or not do it and he’ll say terrible things about you.”

A chief of staff to one Texas Democrat said his member has received multiple invites, but he refused every one for his boss.

Democratic Rep. Bobby Bright of Alabama also turned down Colbert.

“We try to focus on in-district press, and that would hold true for the present day as well,” said Bright spokesman Lewis Lowe.

“They have always called with the same serious line of pitching, saying it would be a great chance to talk about issues in the district. They never break character,” one Republican press secretary said of the Comedy Central bookers who reportedly hounded her office for months.

But Colbert has also played hardball with Congress.

In previous election years, if a member wouldn’t appear, Colbert invited the challenger. In one case, the challenger who appeared, New York Democrat John Hall, beat incumbent Sue Kelly, a victory that Colbert took credit for on the show.

“Colbert made Zoe Lofgren and a serious committee look like a bunch of idiots. I do not regret my decision,” Kelly told POLITICO. “Why would anyone in their right minds go on that show? Congress is serious work, and for him not to recognize that and treat it as if it’s another stupid object. ... It’s good to be able to laugh at yourself. That’s healthy. But he’s not healthy. He has no governor on him.”

Still, other members say the opportunity to connect with — and appear cool to — younger voters is too alluring to pass up.

“It worked out fine for me,” said Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), whose “Better Know a District” segment featured the congressman impersonating a robot and a lengthy piece on his district’s thriving porn industry. “But he suggested to me that I do this or that, which if I had done, would have shortened considerably the life span of my political career.”

Among those things? Eating a slice of pizza in a homoerotic porn spoof.

Members who dared to go on — including Reps. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) — say they knew what they were getting into.

“He’s a good, fun guy if you’re OK with getting made fun of. You never know how you’re going to respond to a question,” said Chaffetz, who appeared on the show in 2009. “But I like self-deprecating humor.”

Even Frank, who lambasted Colbert in the press after his initial segment, reappeared on the show most recently in August to promote Elizabeth Warren.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) appeared to admit during her interview that she was high on illegal drugs — an editing job that she shrugs her shoulders at.

“I got no negative feedback at all. No one said anything about ‘were you really high?’” said Schakowski, who called Colbert’s testimony last week “moving,” adding that it attracted media attention to an issue that otherwise would not have received notice.

Pascrell has the bluntest message for his Colbert-hating colleagues: “Aw, give me a break, would you please? We’ve got serious problems — come on, look! We took ourselves so seriously, people’s expectations rose, and we couldn’t meet them. ‘Get a life,’ I tell those people.”