-9999

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, when it comes to safeguarding the American people, the United States has multiple layers of defenses.

We have, of course, the world's most powerful military, whose ranks are filled with courageous and dedicated servicemembers. Our military is equipped with cutting-edge technology, whether it has to do with weapons systems, aircraft, ships, submarines--all the tools necessary to defend our country and our country's freedoms.

But an important part of our defenses is our intelligence community, the 17 Agencies that make up what is known colloquially as the intelligence community. It is the intelligence community that collects and analyzes information from around the world to make sure that we can always remain at least one step ahead of our adversaries.

This information gathering is an invaluable part of our national defense, and that critical national security information is, of course, carefully safeguarded under what is known as the classification system--secrets. Classification gives us an invaluable edge when it comes to the ability to plan and prepare for threats over the horizon. It strengthens our relationship with our allies around the world, with whom we share much of this information, and it prevents consequential information from falling into the wrong hands.

It also protects--and these are the keys to the kingdom, when it comes to classified information--the sources and methods. In other words, the way that our intelligence community collects information and the people from whom that information is acquired are among the most important secrets maintained by the government, because, many times, if that were revealed, either our adversaries would be able to cut off that access to information or, frankly, maybe even go so far as to kill the sources of that information in the case of human intelligence. So protecting sources and methods is absolutely critical.

Closely guarded intelligence information is vital to our national security, but there is a very fine line between strategic classification and excessive secrecy. If too much information is withheld from the public, it can sow distrust. People let their minds run away with them. They wonder what is going on--conspiracy theories and the like. But, more fundamentally, the American people will question what their government is actually doing and how it is using the vast powers that they have delegated to the government.

Consent of the governed has always been the foundation of our democratic system of government and the legitimacy of government action, and, of course, the people cannot consent to something that is withheld from them. So there is a very fragile balance here from what is necessarily kept classified and secret and the information that should be made public, because without transparency, there is no political accountability. Without accountability, there is no confidence that the government is actually acting in the best interest of the people.

I have long been an advocate for reforms to the Freedom of Information Act--in other words, the public's right to know. Former Senator Pat Leahy was chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. He and I were sort of the odd couple when it came to ``freedom of information'' reforms. Senator Leahy was one of the more liberal Members of the U.S. Senate, and I am one of the more conservative Members of the Senate. But we found common cause when it came to the public's right to know because it is too easy for bureaucrats to hide behind a classification system that results in overclassification. And when that bureaucrat can hide or bury that information using an overly broad classification system, there can be no accountability and, thus, the public's confidence in the people who actually are governing is compromised.

So we need to figure out how to make sure our classification system is rightsized so that it covers the things that it must cover in the interest of our national security. Then we need to figure out what represents overreach or overclassification, which undermines the public's right to know and the political accountability that should come with it, which is a fundamental basis for our form of government.

America's classification system has been ripe for reform for many years. Daniel Patrick Moynihan chaired a committee that made recommendations, but unfortunately those recommendations made many years ago were put on a bookshelf somewhere and basically ignored. But the problems have not gone away, and we have seen in recent days the focus come back to how classified documents are handled and what exactly represents our Nation's secrets, what should be protected and what should not because it is really not important to our national security.

Earlier this year, a trove of highly sensitive military documents began appearing online. These documents included classified assessments of the war in Ukraine, including tactical information about the expected offensive. They detailed conversations between world leaders and intelligence on adversaries and allies alike. These documents didn't just reveal intelligence itself but also the methods by which the United States collected intelligence. This information, of course, was supposed to be kept confidential because it was intended for high- level military and intelligence leaders and policymakers--not a global audience.

Based on the nature of the leaked documents, there was widespread speculation that the source was a high-level military or intelligence professional, but we now know that was not the case. The source of the leak has been identified as a 21-year-old member of the Massachusetts Air National Guard. He was an airman first class in the 102nd Intelligence Wing, where he worked as an information technology specialist.

So the first question that arose when the leaker was identified was, How in the world did this relatively low-ranking 21-year-old information technology specialist have access to some of our Nation's most guarded secrets? How was he able to view, transcribe, photograph, and remove these documents from a secure setting?

If this young man, who had a history of violent and racist remarks, was granted access to our top-secret national security information, is that some indication that maybe too many others have been granted access to this information and that maybe too many individuals have security clearances authorizing them to view this information?

Well, at last count, there were about 4.2 million Americans in this country--4.2 million Americans--who have security clearances. That number strikes me as incredibly large and I think is some evidence that too many people have been getting too many security clearances because too much information is classified when it shouldn't be, when it doesn't need to be. Those 4.2 million people with security clearances include more than 1.2 million with access to top-secret information.

The issue isn't just that too many people have access to classified information but also that too much information is classified. As members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, my colleagues and I regularly receive classified briefings and review documents that are highly confidential. There have been many times when I left one of these briefings thinking, this is something that any reasonably informed person already knows. All they need to do is read the major newspapers or watch television--television news in particular.

Many times, we are presented with information which is deemed ``classified'' in a secure setting which is, frankly, common knowledge. That is another indication that our classification system is working in overdrive and needs to be rightsized.

We are presented with information briefed as ``classified'' which could be just as easily learned by watching the news or reading a newspaper, as I said. Still, these documents are classified at the same level as sensitive military documents and intelligence analysis have been classified.

Honestly, I think one reason why we see not only President Trump but President Biden and Vice President Pence concerned about access to classified information outside of a secure setting is because many people who have access to classified information recognize that we have an overclassification problem, and so they let down their guard and they say: Well, this is information that is not particularly secret because a reasonably informed person would already know it or have access to it.

So I submit we have an overclassification problem, plain and simple, and we are not doing nearly enough to declassify information for the public or our allies and make it available to the American people.

There are many circumstances in which declassification safeguards our national security. We can't just be an absolutist about this. We need to be careful. One great example is the way we declassified and shared information with our allies in the runup to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. That gave Ukraine enough battlefield awareness to push back against the initial attack and save countless lives. It also unified the Western response, leading to quick condemnation of Russia's attack and resources for the Ukrainian forces.

Declassification is an important way to share valuable intelligence with our friends and allies around the world when we can, and it promotes cooperation, which is key to combating the threats we face today like the Ukrainians are facing with the Russian invasion, but it is also a crucial way to show the American people what their government is doing on their behalf--declassification, that is.

Our ability to govern ourselves depends on public access to information. As I said earlier, you can't consent to something you don't know anything about, and consent of the government is the foundation of our system.

The American people have a right to know what their government is doing. Declassification builds trust and transparency. It inspires confidence in the incredible work our intelligence professionals are doing, and it equips scholars with the information to conduct academic research that informs decision making by looking back on our history and learning from those lessons of history.

As all of our colleagues know, there is a very delicate balance between transparency and secrecy, but it is time that we tune-up the system. We need to examine and refine the processes that govern the classification and declassification of sensitive information and make some long-overdue reforms.

Last month, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Warner, and I introduced a bill we called the Sensible Classification Act, which includes critical reforms to modernize America's classification system. This legislation would increase accountability and oversight. It would require training to promote sensible classification and also promote efficient declassification. It would direct Federal Agencies to justify security clearance requirements, so only those individuals who need access, given the nature of their jobs, are given access to classified information.

This legislation has already garnered broad bipartisan support and a long list of cosponsors, including Senators Moran, Wyden, Collins, King, Rounds, Heinrich, Lankford, and Casey.

As the Senate Intelligence Committee prepares the Intelligence Authorization Act, I have offered this legislation as an amendment to that bill, which hopefully will be included as part of the National Defense Authorization Act. When the committee votes to advance this bill in the coming weeks, I hope this legislation will be included.

This is an example of broad bipartisan cooperation and the result of many conversations we have had with leading intelligence and national security experts in the United States.

I am confident that this legislation will both protect the integrity of America's classification system and help restore needed trust and confidence in the government.

Recent headlines have shone a light on the flaws in our classification system. It is overwhelmed and in need of reform, and that is exactly what the Sensible Classification Act aims to fix.

I look forward to working with all of our Senate colleagues as we fight to restore transparency and accountability and preserve our ability to classify the most sensitive national security secrets as part of our layered national defense. We can and should and must do both.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source