Intelligence Committee Reorganization-Continued

INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE REORGANIZATION-CONTINUED

AMENDMENT NO. 3999

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise to support Senator McCain and his amendment to the McConnell-Reid measure amending S. Res. 445.

First, I pay tribute to the former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mr. Graham. I thank him for his service to our country. He is retiring, although that certainly does not describe the Senator, but I thank him for his leadership and his suggestions as we go through this very difficult task of reforming how we do our oversight responsibilities in reference to our intelligence obligations.

Back to Senator McCain and his amendment, if we approve the McCain amendment, Senators will implement what is the most important recommendation of the 9/11 Commission for improvement of congressional oversight of intelligence activities-most important by the 9/11 Commission.

Now, why is JOHN MCCAIN getting in the middle of what would have to be termed a sheep and cattle war, if one goes back to the history of Arizona, and taking on the challenge of suggesting that the Intelligence Committee, or any authorizing committee, have appropriations power? That is tough. I mean, that really is tough.

I think everybody knows there is more than one way to skin a cat that is sticking his head in a bootjack than simply pulling on his tail. That is hard work. That is where nobody wants to reach their hand into, but there again that is JOHN MCCAIN.

JOHN is from Arizona. I used to reside in Arizona. There is a lot of cactus in Arizona. One does not have to sit on each and every one of them. Sometimes people think that Senator McCain does that. Why is he doing this? Why is he fighting this sometimes lonely battle? Well, on page 420 of the 9/11 report, the Commissioners wrote this:

Under the terms of existing rules and resolutions the House and Senate intelligence committees lack the power, influence and sustained capability to meet this challenge.

He is right. He is dead on. He is pulling that cat by the tail in the bootjack. And in terms of being right, there are times that one can take on tough measures and sort of let them go and slide or one can do the right thing. The truth of it is that I can tell my colleagues, as chairman of the Intelligence Committee and an 8-year veteran of that committee-and it has been a privilege-we are fractionalized when we talk to Lee Hamilton, Governor Kean, Bob Kerrey, the former Secretary of the Navy, John Lehman, and others. They came to visit before the Intelligence Committee with Senator Rockefeller and myself, Senator Rockefeller being the distinguished vice chairman and my bipartisan partner in trying to do what is right on behalf of our national security-and we think we have done a good job, by the way, backed up by 22 professional staffers, the most of any committee. So, consequently, what happens to us is that when we do our work as quoted by the 9/11 Commission-and after the visit by the 9/11 Commission to the Committee, they agreed with us that we are fractionalized, that our job is pretty tough, that in terms of being an authorizing committee we probably are expected to have the most obligation, independence, leadership, clout in regards to oversight in reference to intelligence and national security of any committee in the Congress, but we have the least.

Why is that? It is because we are fractionalized in terms of sequential referral on demand. I am not going to get into that speech again because I think we are trying to work it out. I think we have a compromise, or I hope we have a compromise, and I thank Senator Rockefeller for being a leader in this instance.

Whatever we do, we know that we have to then first go to the Armed Services Committee and then, of course, we have to go to the Appropriations Committee.

Now, that is not a bad thing because we have many fine people serving on the Appropriations Committee. I do not mean to perjure the Appropriations Committee. Far from it. They have many obligations. They have their constitutional authority to do this. But what happens? The intelligence community comes before us during the long session of 6 months, 8 months, 9 months when we do our authorization and make priority changes and make recommended changes and make reform changes, some of which have been very dramatic. And I think they understand that, obviously, then we are going to have to go to the Armed Services Committee and then, obviously, we are going to have to go to the Subcommittee on Defense of the Appropriations Committee where they have done, I might add, a splendid job of doing their very best in terms of their obligations to meet our national security obligations vis-a-vis the intelligence community.

Now, what would someone do if they were a member of the intelligence community? They would appear before the authorizing committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee-and I am not saying it was wink them, blink them, and nod to a committee that has no authority, but one can sort of make that case-and I do not perjure anybody who has come before the committee because they are great people. They are laying their lives on the line. They are dedicated people. That is not my point.

What they do, however, is go to the Senate Armed Services Committee and then they also go to two primary members of this Senate whom I personally call friends and admire and respect, and there have been no two people in the Congress of the United States, perhaps in the history of the United States, who have done more for the military and done more during those times where we were stretched thin and hollow and addressing the tremendous problems we have today. I am talking about the distinguished Senator from Alaska, who is chairman of the committee, TED STEVENS and his counterpart, the Senator from Hawaii, DAN INOUYE. I do not know who has been the stagecoach driver and who has ridden shotgun. During these particular years, they both worked equally well.

But what happens to them is that time demands come in and the intelligence community comes in and says: Wow, we have a problem. We have just had an "Oh, my God" hearing before the Intelligence Committee. Oh, my God, how did this happen? Khobar Towers, embassy bombings, USS Cole, the lack of really trying to figure out what happened when we missed the India nuclear explosion, 9/11, Somalia-do you know what. It was all tied together.

So the Appropriations Committee is faced with this urgent need, and they respond. And the intelligence community pretty well gets what they want. That is not all bad, especially when we are facing some kind of emergency, but it basically cuts out the Intelligence Committee's authorization process to some degree. It cuts out what the Armed Services Committee does as well. It is time based.

The 9/11 Commission took a look at this and said: Congressional oversight for intelligence and coun ter ter ror ism is now dysfunctional. Congress should address this problem. We have considered various alternatives. The primary suggestion: a single committee in each House of Congress combining authorizing and appropriating authorities. The McCain amendment will accomplish this alternative. The McCain amendment will accomplish this by giving appropriations authority to the Senate Intelligence Committee.

The distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee, a man whom I admire, a man who has been a great friend, basically cited the example between 1865 and 1885 that when they took away powers from the Appropriations Committee, storm clouds arrived, lightning struck, and it was doom and gloom time until they restored that authority.

Let me suggest another number. It is called 9/11. Let me suggest all the hearings we have held in the Intelligence Committee-I call them "Oh, my God" hearings: Oh, my God, how did this happen?-indicated the systemic failure of the global intelligence community in regard to WMD and the situation in Iraq-not just the United States, everyone, including the United Nations.

The chairman of the Appropriations Committee and his counterpart, the ranking member-when he says there is no turf battle, I believe him. I don't know of any two Members who would put turf over conscience and turf over performance and the obligations of what they have already done. I know the chairman has mentioned that he and the members and the qualified staff of the Appropriations Committee have gone the world over, and they have. I know. I have been with them on many occasions, looking at intelligence and looking to see how the money is spent on the ground, taking a hard look. I understand that.

But we have 22 staffers, 22 professional staffers who have background and experience in regard to being an analyst at the DIA, being an analyst at the CIA with at least 10 years' experience. We have the staffers who put together the 521-page WMD report, where the chips fell where they may. Guess what happened. The intelligence was wrong. Some people try to put that at the foot of the President. He made very declarative and aggressive comments. Others in this Congress received the same intelligence and made the same statements. Now, of course, a lot of that has changed because it is an even-numbered year, and you know what kind of situation we are in.

But I am trying to say your Intelligence Committee stands ready to do a professional job in regard to budget authority, should we be granted that privilege, with 22 professional staffers. We have done that. There have been occasions where we have been granted access. I don't mean that in a cynical way because the Appropriations Committee usually is in a big hurry with what they have to do, meeting obligations that are emergencies-where we have made our suggestions. Some of them, not all of them-as a matter of fact, not very many of them-were accepted by the Appropriations Committee or, for that matter, the Armed Services Committee. Some of them, a lot of them, ended up on the cutting-room floor.

In some cases we were not granted access because of the time equation, and wouldn't you know that many of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and many of the problems we have experienced that nobody wants to see that we have had hearings on are the same kinds of things we have tried to fix in the Intelligence Committee and maybe could have had we not had this fractionalized process that the 9/11 Commission has talked about.

I have talked about what a hard job this is. I talked about the courage Senator McCain has had to approach this topic. It is a tough topic. Really, this is not hard. Members have a choice. They have a choice to make. A vote for the McCain amendment enhances the congressional oversight by addressing the findings of the 9/11 Commission, period. The amendment will enhance the power, influence, and sustained capability of the Senate Intelligence Committee; that is, to conduct oversight of this Nation's intelligence activities. It couldn't be any more simple.

Members, you should vote for the measure if you want to enhance the Senate Intelligence Committee's ability to conduct congressional oversight as recommended by the 9/11 Commission and, by the way, virtually every other commission that has studied this. So the McCain amendment is in harmony with the 9/11 Commission's major recommendation for improving congressional oversight and intelligence activities.

I am not saying the appropriators or the Armed Services Committee has done anything wrong, egregious, dysfunctional, whatever. They have done a great job under the circumstances with the setup of the Congress as it has been. But we stand ready with 22 professional staffers to do the job. I believe we can do the job.

I am voting for the McCain amendment. In behalf of our national security, I urge my colleagues to do the same.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I have two amendments to offer. I wish to offer them in sequence, taking 2 minutes at most for each one. I propose to only give a very brief description of each amendment.

AMENDMENT NO. 4019 TO AMENDMENT NO. 3981

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside, and I call up amendment No. 4019.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will report.

The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Roberts] proposes an amendment numbered 4019 to amendment No. 3981.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To clarify staff provisions)

In section 201, strike subsection (g) insert the following:

(g) STAFF.-Section 15 of S. Res. 400 is amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 15. (a) In addition to other committee staff selected by the select Committee, the select Committee shall hire or appoint one employee for each member of the select Committee to serve as such Member's designated representative on the select Committee. The select Committee shall only hire or appoint an employee chosen by the respective Member of the select Committee for whom the employee will serve as the designated representative on the select Committee.

"(b) The select Committee shall be afforded a supplement to its budget, to be determined by the Committee on Rules and Administration, to allow for the hire of each employee who fills the position of designated representative to the select Committee. The designated representative shall have office space and appropriate office equipment in the select Committee spaces. Designated personal representatives shall have the same access to Committee staff, information, records, and databases as select Committee staff, as determined by the Chairman and Vice Chairman.

"© The designated employee shall meet all the requirements of relevant statutes, Senate rules, and committee security clearance requirements for employment by the select Committee.".

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, this amendment simply clarifies language in the McConnell-Reid amendment regarding the staffing of the Intelligence Committee.

The amendment ensures that the professional staff of the Intelligence Committee and the personal staff now designated by Members to serve on the committee will be provided similar access to committee resources and information as determined by the chairman and vice chairman.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank Senator Kyl for his assistance. It provides modest but important clarity to the proposals of Senator McConnell and Senator Reid.

I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by the Senator from Kansas.

The amendment (No. 4019) was agreed to.

Mr. McCONNELL. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. ROBERTS. I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

AMENDMENT NO. 4018 TO AMENDMENT NO. 3981

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside, and I call up amendment No. 4018.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will report.

The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Kansas [Mr. ROBERTS] proposes an amendment numbered 4018 to amendment No. 3981.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I thank the clerk and ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To clarify the nominee referral provisions)

In section 201, strike subsection (h) and insert the following:

(h) NOMINEES.-S. Res. 400 is amended by adding at the end the following:

"SEC. 17. (a) The select Committee shall have final responsibility for reviewing, holding hearings, and reporting the nominations of civilian persons nominated by the President to fill all positions within the intelligence community requiring the advice and consent of the Senate.

"(b) Other committees with jurisdiction over the nominees' executive branch department may hold hearings and interviews with such persons, but only the select Committee shall report such nominations.".

AMENDMENT NO. 4018, AS MODIFIED

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, this amendment makes explicit what is already implicit in the McConnell-Reid substitute amendment; namely, that the Intelligence Committee will have explicit jurisdiction for the consideration and reporting of nominees for civilian intelligence community positions.

I urge my colleagues to support the amendment and hope the managers will agree to incorporate the modification.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is so modified.

The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

In section 201, strike subsection (h) and insert the following:

(h) NOMINEES.-S. Res. 400 is amended by adding at the end the following:

"SEC. 17. (a) The select Committee shall have jurisdiction reviewing, holding hearings, and reporting the nominations of civilian persons nominated by the President to fill all positions within the intelligence community requiring the advice and consent of the Senate.

"(b) Other committees with jurisdiction over the nominees' executive branch department may hold hearings and interviews with such persons, but only the select Committee shall report such nominations.".

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the pending amendment, as modified.

The amendment (No. 4018), as modified, was agreed to.

Mr. McCONNELL. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. ROBERTS. I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, Senator Biden, in his usual flare, has offered an amendment to add the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as ex officio members of the Intelligence Committee. Under S. Res. 400, the organizing resolution for the Senate Intelligence Committee, eight members are already crossovers from other committees: two from the Judiciary Committee, two from Armed Services, two from Appropriations, and two from foreign Relations. This is on purpose, because we believe these four committees should have crossover representation on the committee as it now stands. That is under S. Res. 400.

With all due respect, I think the members of the Foreign Relations Committee-Senator Hagel, Senator Rockefeller-do an excellent job in representing the Foreign Relations Committee on the Intelligence Committee. These crossover members do perform an invaluable service for the Intelligence Committee.

First, they ensure that the insights and perspectives of the other Senate committees are considered in the oversight of the intelligence activities of the United States. And second, they do already provide the Armed Services Committee and the Judiciary Committee and the Appropriations Committee and, yes, the esteemed members of the Foreign Relations Committee, with a view of the Intelligence Committee on issues that cross jurisdictional boundaries.

Now, under the McConnell-Reid reform proposal, the Intelligence Committee would grow by two ex-officio members already. The chairman and ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, the majority and minority leaders, already serve as ex-officio members of the committee. So following reform, the Intelligence Committee will be composed of eight crossover members. If Senator Biden's amendment is successful, there will be six nonvoting ex-officio members.

Now, any chairman or any ranking member who has crossover jurisdiction with any other committee, under this logic, should be an ex-officio member of the committee. After all, we need to keep an eye on one another. I have every trust in thee and me, but I wonder about thee. This is like Bob Barker: Come on down, be an ex-officio member of the Intelligence Committee. This is empowerment? This is further dissolution in terms of the responsibilities and cohesion and pertinence in regard to the Intelligence Committee.

Well, does the Intelligence Committee need that much oversight? Do the guaranteed crossover memberships not really protect sufficiently the equities of the Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees?

As chairman of the Intelligence Committee, I said on the Senate floor earlier today that I often have concerns with the actions of the Armed Services Committee, Foreign Relations Committee, Appropriations Committee, and the Judiciary Committee-not necessarily in that order.

Given this logic, as such, given the proliferation of ex-officio memberships, perhaps the chairman and vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee should have ex-officio membership on other committees with jurisdiction that overlap the intelligence issues. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. I will leave Members to decide who is the goose and who is the gander. I focus on four primary committees: Armed Services, Foreign Relations, Appropriations, and Judiciary. I was going to have a second-degree amendment to say, why can't Senator Rockefeller and I be ex-officio on these committees if they want to be ex-officio on our committee? I am not sure exactly what they would do other than monitor. We can certainly find something for them to do as they follow the work of the Intelligence Committee. I could go on. We could have ex-officio status for Senator Rockefeller and myself for the new Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Banking, Finance, and Agriculture Committees. They all have cross-jurisdictional interests that touch on intelligence issues.

With only limited exceptions, all Senators have access to the information and activity of the Intelligence Committee. As chairman, I and the distinguished vice chairman, Senator Rockefeller, have invited all Senators to come down and take a look at the classified portions of the Iraq review or any other Intelligence Committee product or holding. You are welcome. Just ask. Come on in.

The committee assists in the arrangement of classified briefings for all Senators by our intelligence agencies. Ex-officio membership is an unnecessary requirement and maintains the status of the Intelligence Committee as a weak child of the Senate.

Let's not have any further diminution of the Intelligence Committee. I urge colleagues to oppose the Biden amendment.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I believe I have approximately 9 minutes remaining.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, let me say to the Senator from Delaware, whom I admire for his expertise on foreign policy, I think all of us have an obligation to learn from, to ask, to seek guidance, to seek expertise from other Members, and I hope it is in that spirit that we are able to do this.

As Chairman of the Emerging Threats Capabilities Subcommittee on Armed Services, I work very closely with Senator Lugar on the Counterthreat Reduction Program. I do not think I can do the job without talking to Senator Lugar. Senator Nunn and Senator Lugar put that together, the Nunn-Lugar program. I talk with Senator Lugar a lot in regard to his perspectives on foreign policy.

I have not taken the opportunity that I probably should have to talk with the Senator from Delaware at great length-we talk about some things but certainly not enough. I welcome the Senator to come to the Intelligence Committee in regard to any desire he might have to go over or to review any of the intelligence material that pertains to foreign policy. All of that does, as a matter of fact. It was the State Department that pretty much got it right in the WMD review in regard to possible WMD in Iraq, and we know that and we respect that. We made a special effort to invite the State Department in, and we will be happy to visit with the Senator from Delaware about that.

I yield the remaining time I have to a member of the Foreign Relations Committee who is always telling me about the need to tie in the relationship with regard to foreign relations and intelligence. He is the distinguished vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee. We work together in a bipartisan way. We have gone through pretty tough times. We achieved a 17-to-0 vote in regard to the WMD inquiry.

We are not trying to deny information to anybody. We want to share it. We want to learn, especially from people such as Senator Biden.

I yield my remaining time to Senator Rockefeller.