Good news! The US Congress has fixed all the other problems that face our great nation and has found time to hold hearings on the fairness of the BCS!
I think I can save the Congress some time: You cannot use a subjective term (fairness) to measure a system that uses subjective methods (polls). What is "fair" to some will seem "unfair" to others – hence the nature of subjective systems.
The only "fair" way to set up college football is to have all 117 teams (119 is you count the two reclass schools) play one another in a best two out of three series – first on a neutral field, then at home for the game one winner, and at home for the game two winner (if needed). The teams that advance would (of course) then play another best two out of three series and so on until such time as a final winning team is determined. Of course, that would be six years worth of games, but it would be difficult to dispute the equity of the process.
Whether its the mythical national champion, the BCS, a playoff system – whatever – there will always be room for debate. How many teams in the playoff? How do you seed them? How do teams qualify for playoff? And so on.
There are a lot of good models for deciding a champion and ALL of them would work. That said, NONE of them would be free of debate – that's part of what makes college football great. Besides, everybody knows that the only "real" national champion is the one touted by Fanblogs. 😉