|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
House GOP Leaders Unveil Intelligence Reform Bill By Mike Nartker WASHINGTON — The Republican leadership of the House of Representatives Friday unveiled a bill intended to implement the recommendations made this summer by the Sept. 11 commission, including the panel’s chief intelligence reform proposal — the creation of a national intelligence director (see GSN, Sept. 24). The bill would create a national director to serve as the “principal” intelligence adviser to the president, responsible for developing objectives and priorities for intelligence collection and analysis. The director would also have budgetary and personnel authority over the various agencies that make up the intelligence community In addition, the director would oversee a National Counterterrorism Center and would have the authority to create other intelligence centers on specific topics such as WMD proliferation — measures also recommended by the Sept. 11 commission. As requested by the White House, a Cabinet-level Joint Intelligence Community Council would support the national intelligence director. “This legislation reflects the best thinking by those most knowledgeable about the problems in our intelligence community. The time for reform is now. There can be no more business as usual in intelligence,” said Representative Christopher Cox (R-Calif.), chairman of the House homeland security committee. The bill came under fire from Democratic lawmakers, who charged that it was developed without their input. “Unbelievably, the Republicans claim to have introduced a bipartisan bill, as Senate leaders have done. It is simply not true,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was quoted by the Los Angeles Times as saying in a statement. The House intelligence reform bill differs in several ways from companion legislation approved last week by the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, such as by providing a lesser degree of budgetary and personnel authority. For example, under the House bill the national intelligence director would have more of a consultative role in the nominations of various intelligence agency heads than in the Senate bill (see GSN, Sept. 23). Also contrary to the Senate bill, the House legislation does not contain a provision to create an ombudsman in the national intelligence director’s office intended to prevent the politicalization of intelligence. The House bill further differs from the Senate legislation and the Sept. 11 commission in keeping the amounts of the total intelligence budget requested by the president and appropriated by Congress classified. “In the past, liberal Democrats have sought to publicize that number in order to increase the pressure to cut intelligence spending in order to pay for other spending priorities. And I believe that telling our enemies how much we spend on certain intelligence programs diminishes our national security,” House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) said. Relevant House committees are set to hold markup hearings on various sections of the bill this week, with a goal of moving the bill to the House floor next week, according to Hastert. “This is clearly one of the items that our members want to complete before we take a break for the elections. And we will get that done,” House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said. The full Senate is also scheduled to hold debate beginning today on intelligence reform legislation. Last week, a group of former U.S. senior officials and lawmakers led by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger called on lawmakers to take a slower approach to the issue of intelligence reform (see GSN, Sept. 22). “Racing to implement reforms on an election timetable is precisely the wrong thing to do. Intelligence reform is too complex and too important to undertake at a campaign’s breakneck speed,” the group said in a statement released by the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
| ||||||||||
Back to top
