Introduction of the Security Clearance Oversight and Accountability Act

INTRODUCTION OF THE SECURITY CLEARANCE OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, today I'm proud to introduce the Security Clearance Oversight and Accountability Act and I'm pleased that the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Intelligence Community Management of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Mr. Issa, has joined me as a co-sponsor of this legislation. We have spent this Congress conducting oversight of the security clearance process.

Security clearances are determinations that a person is trusted to have access to our nation's secrets. They are the gateway to serving our nation in national security, homeland security, and many foreign policy positions. In recent decades, the number of federal government employees and contractors requiring clearances expanded. This was especially true after the tragic attacks on September 11, 2001. We also realized the importance of sharing information and promoting collaboration across government agencies.

Sadly, our security clearance system was still cumbersome and outdated. We were using a cold-war system in the Internet age, where the process was primarily paper-based, and relied on investigators going door-to-door to talk to neighbors. It did not take advantage of the vast stores of data collected on people on line to verify their trustworthiness and it did not use electronic tools to speed the process.

In 2004, Congress passed the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, which contained many provisions to improve the security clearance process. The law called for uniform policies and unity of responsibility for security clearances across the Federal Government. It required that security clearances issued by one agency be accepted by all agencies. To make that possible, it called for an integrated data base and for the evaluation of available information technologies. Finally, it set forth specific targets for the length of time that security clearance processes should take, and required annual progress reports.

During this Congress, our subcommittee has undertaken a thorough review of the process. We had round-table meetings with representatives of industry and with representatives of the Intelligence Community agencies. We carefully reviewed all reports submitted in response to the Intelligence Reform Act as well as GAO reports on security clearance reform in the Department of Defense. We held a series of open hearings with Administration witnesses and GAO to discuss accomplishments and areas where progress was lacking.

We found that though the Act has resulted in significant improvements in the clearance timelines, significant work remains to be done. The law requires full reciprocity of clearance investigations and adjudications, but provides no tools for measuring the implementation and success of such measures. The clearance data as it is reported to Congress does not provide adequate insight into the improvements that have been made. Aggregated data covers up poor performance by averaging it with excellent performance.

We provided the results of our oversight in an ICM Subcommittee Report which will be filed with the House. I'm pleased that all members of the Subcommittee were supportive of the Report, and it was reported out of committee on a unanimous voice vote.

This provision is designed to remedy the shortcomings we discovered in our report. It takes a new approach to reform, by requiring agencies to report to Congress annually on certain key metrics related to the security clearance process. These metrics would enable Congress and HPSCI to perform effective oversight over the security clearance process, would allow both branches to track improvements from year to year, and would allow agencies to judge the effectiveness of each other's security clearance process, improving. confidence in the system. In a few areas where adequate metrics have not been developed, the Administration is required to propose metrics to Congress.

I hope that we will move this legislation as soon as possible, given the strong bipartisan support that it enjoys. It will improve our insight into the security clearance process, and by doing so, improve the process itself.

The security clearance process is key to our national security establishment and we must make sure that it works as efficiently as possible. An effective security clearance system keeps out those who pose a security risk, while quickly identifying those who are trustworthy to work in the system. For too long it has been a troubled system and I'm hopeful that it is getting back on track and this legislation would allow us to know for sure.