[Mb-civic] The Gap in Intelligence Oversight - Nancy Pelosi -
Washington Post Op-Ed
William Swiggard
swiggard at comcast.net
Sun Jan 15 06:27:12 PST 2006
The Gap in Intelligence Oversight
By Nancy Pelosi
Sunday, January 15, 2006; B07
The uproar concerning President Bush's admission that he authorized the
National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct certain electronic
surveillance affecting people in the United States is a wake-up call for
intensive congressional oversight of intelligence activities.
Review of intelligence-gathering and analysis is a critical
responsibility of the legislative branch. But as the independent Sept.
11 commission concluded, "so long as oversight is governed by current
congressional rules and resolutions, we believe the American people will
not get the security they want and need." As one who served on the House
intelligence committee for 10 years and who continues to serve in a
non-voting capacity, I know that the commission's concerns are justified
and require immediate action.
Congress is not an afterthought in assessing intelligence activities;
federal law requires that it be kept informed of all such activities.
But despite that clear statutory directive, the Bush administration
consistently acts as though it alone owns intelligence information.
The products of our intelligence agencies belong to the government, of
which Congress is an equal branch. The executive branch operates
intelligence programs and activities, and Congress oversees and pays for
them -- and thus has a responsibility to ensure that they are effective
and carried out in a manner consistent with the Constitution, our laws
and our values. That's why the intelligence committees were created. But
as the Sept. 11 commission noted, the way intelligence information is
conveyed to Congress and the way Congress operates make rigorous
oversight impossible.
The executive branch provides notice of some especially sensitive
intelligence information only to the chairman and the ranking member of
the minority party of the House and Senate intelligence committees, and
to the leaders of Congress. This is how I came to be informed of
President Bush's authorization for the NSA to conduct certain types of
electronic surveillance.
But when the administration notifies Congress in this manner, it is not
seeking approval. There is a clear expectation that the information will
be shared with no one, including other members of the intelligence
committees. As a result, only a few members of Congress were aware of
the president's surveillance program, and they were constrained from
discussing it more widely. That limitation must change.
In the executive branch, decisions about who should have access to
intelligence are made on a "need to know" basis. Congress must adopt a
similar principle. The members of the intelligence committees are
entrusted by their colleagues with the responsibility for making sure
that intelligence practices are consistent with our laws and our values.
Unless the entire committee has access to the same information, under
tight confidentiality rules, Congress cannot respond legislatively to
intelligence activity by the executive branch.
In the 17 months since the Sept. 11 commission called on Congress to
review the adequacy of its intelligence oversight system, I have written
to House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.)four times to urge that we
proceed in a bipartisan fashion to get that job done. In the letters, I
have proposed that the House create a bipartisan, bicameral working
group to recommend improvements to the oversight process. Its goal would
be to find ways for Congress to more effectively carry out our statutory
requirement to specifically authorize all intelligence activities; to
make sure that all information provided to the chairs and ranking
minority-party members of the intelligence committees is made available
to every committee member, and to better ensure that information
provided to Congress by intelligence agencies is complete and candid.
Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) and other members with intelligence expertise
have made similar requests. So far no action has been taken. Until we
ensure that Congress can conduct thorough oversight, consistent with our
constitutional responsibilities, we will not have honored our
responsibility to protect the American people.
We all recognize that our efforts against terrorism or other threats
require new, more flexible approaches. But in a democracy, those
approaches cannot be fashioned unilaterally by an administration with a
disturbingly expansive view of the powers of the president.
The writer is Democratic leader of the House of Representatives.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/13/AR2006011301698.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060115/17803eb1/attachment.htm
More information about the Mb-civic
mailing list