National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011--Continued--

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I think the first and probably most important point to make on this amendment is that it does not belong on this bill and it imperils the whole bill.

This issue about whether to expand GAO's authority to be able to investigate the intelligence community, which has been an issue in the fiscal year 2010 intelligence authorization bill, has been the subject of veto threats from the administration and is one of, if not the reason, here 4 months before the end of the fiscal year we still do not have an intelligence authorization bill.

So it does not belong here. This is the DOD authorization bill. It is being discussed in another forum where it should, the intelligence authorization bill, and if it gets added to the DOD authorization bill, it puts in danger this entire bill because just today, the administration sent another email which confirmed the veto threat over this provision.

So however Members feel about the particular issue one way or another, I would suggest that you ought to be very careful about endangering the whole bill over this provision.

Second point I'd make is this is not a change to be taken lightly. As the gentlelady, my colleague on the Intelligence Committee mentioned, the GAO has not had this power, authority before since the modern intelligence community has existed. Congress after Congress of both parties, President after President of both parties have rejected this, I would suggest, for some very good reasons.

So this is not a step to be taken lightly.

I think the only argument one can make is that the current intelligence committees are incapable of performing their oversight responsibilities and therefore they have to get this other entity, GAO, in to help them do that. I don't agree with that position. I think the intelligence committees in the House and the Senate are capable of performing their job. Now, I get frustrated. I don't agree with everything that the majority chooses to do, but I believe that the committee is perfectly capable of oversight of the intelligence community as we were tasked to do in the House rules and by statute.

These committees were created in the 1970s to fill a very unique role, and to undermine them by saying they are incapable of performing their job which, without bringing GAO and investigators and so forth, I think is a mistake.

I also believe, Mr. Chairman, that this amendment may undermine the role of the DNI at a time that is very sensitive for the role of the DNI. Because if you look at the amendment itself, it says the Comptroller General decides what he needs access to, has control over how these investigations will be conducted. Now, the amendment says that you can have discussions with the DNI, but the decision is with the Comptroller General, further undermining the DNI's control over classified material. I think that's a mistake.

There are other flaws, in my view, in this amendment. But the bottom line is it undermines the bill. It does not belong here. And it is a step that previous Congresses, previous Presidents have not chosen to take because of the sensitivity of the material and the unique role that the select committees on intelligence play.

Therefore, I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will reject this amendment. I urge them to do so.

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I certainly agree with the distinguished Speaker about the importance of our role in national security and the importance of Congress' role in overseeing the intelligence community. I agree that national security is the first job of the Federal Government.

I also agree with both the gentleladies from California that oversight can be improved from the Congress. As a matter of fact, I've had legislation, which has not been allowed to be voted on the floor, to make clear the notification requirements and statute about what any administration must notify Congress about, the information it must give us.

I'd also have to point out that theÐ9/11 Commission made a number of very important recommendations on how we can improve oversight in this Congress. Unfortunately, that have not been adopted. Now, they adopted a kind of a hybrid panel of the Appropriations Committee, but that was not at all what the 9/11 Commission, the WMD Commission recommend we do to improve oversight.

I think we should focus on making our committees of oversight more effective rather than bringing in this other entity, the General Accounting Office, that has historically never had a role with the intelligence community, and that the President says he will veto the bill over if we allow it to happen.

Let's look at ourselves, improve ourselves first before we start bringing in others.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source