WASHINGTON, DC — “A dysfunctional agency led by a chairman who manipulates and withholds data and reports to advance his own policy positions.” Such was the description of the Federal Communications Commission and its chairman, Bush appointee Kevin Martin, within a 110-page report released Tuesday by the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s oversight and investigations subcommittee. The report followed a year-long investigation of Martin’s FCC stewardship.The report stopped short of accusing Martin of lawbreaking, but it often was scathing in its condemnation of his management of the agency. Among the findings: Martin routinely pressured staffers to rewrite reports that didn’t agree with his viewpoints (such as one about a la carte cable television pricing) and employed a “heavy-handed, opaque, and non-collegial management style [that] has created distrust, suspicion and turmoil among the five current commissioners.” Moreover, the report reveals Martin micromanaged staff and created a “climate of fear” that made congressional oversight of the agency difficult.

“Any of these findings, individually, are cause for concern,” House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Dingell [D-MI] told reporters upon the report’s release. “Together, the findings suggest that, in recent years, the FCC has operated in a dysfunctional manner and commission business has suffered as a result. It is my hope that the new FCC chairman will find this report instructive and that it will prove useful in helping the commission avoid making the same mistakes.”

Although the investigation began as a bipartisan probe, only two Democrats were willing to sign the final document: Dingell and subcommittee chairman Bart Stupak [D-MI]. An unnamed source told The Washington Post ranking Republicans on the committee declined to sign because they disagreed with the findings.

A spokesman for Rep. Joe Barton, however, said the Texas Republican “supported starting the inquiry into problems at the FCC because there are problems there and the investigation seemed serious. But it didn’t turn out that way, and he and his staff are unconvinced that the discovery of a lack of gentility warrants much hoopla, or any hoopla at all.”

For his part, Martin brushed aside the report as irrelevant, saying investigation found no violations of law or procedure. He added that some of the shortcomings for which he was criticized occurred under previous FCC chairs.

“The process we follow here at the commission has been the same for decades and have been under chairmen Republican and Democratic alike,” he told The Washington Post.

Stupak disagreed, telling reporters during a conference call that Martin violated the Communications Act by mismanaging a federal fund for deaf TV viewers, among other things.

“To restore integrity to the FCC and to stimulate economic growth in the telecommunications industry, I believe that President-elect Obama should replace Mr. Martin immediately upon taking office,” Stupak wrote to The Washington Post in an email.

Consumer watchdogs applauded the report as a major step forward in government transparency.

“The FCC needs to reform and it has needed to for 25 years,” Gene Kimmelman, vice president of federal policy at Consumers Union, said. “Too much is done behind closed doors secretly, and it has been that way through Democratic and Republican leadership. So, I think a call for reform is welcome, but it’s not unique to what’s been going for the last several years.”