Hearing of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee

September 14, 2004 Tuesday

HEADLINE: HEARING OF THE SENATE SELECT INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: NOMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVE PORTER J. GOSS TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

CHAIRED BY: SENATOR PAT ROBERTS (R-KS)

WITNESS: REPRESENTATIVE PORTER GOSS (R-FL)

LOCATION: 562 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C.
SEN. MIKE DEWINE (R-OH): Congressman Goss, thank you very much for being with us.

You have been, throughout your career, a strong proponent of human intelligence. You and I have had discussions in the past about our concern about human intelligence. I wonder if you could tell us where you think the agency is and the community is today in regard to the building back up of human intelligence and where we are today.

I wonder if you could also comment-the former DCI, Tenet, estimated that it would take at least five years to get where we should be in regard to HUMINT. I wonder if you could comment about his perspective on that.

And in doing so, I wonder if you could also talk about the issue of the use of (knocks ?). This is something that I've been concerned about. If you'll recall, when we had our joint investigation into September 11th, I actually filed a supplemental of comments where I talked about the use of (knocks ?) and I thought that we should be using them more in the community. I wonder if you could talk about that as well.

REP. GOSS: Senator, yes. On a scale of 10, we're about three on build-back. In terms of years, I don't believe five is enough, but I can report some good news: that in my estimation, that we have some that we will be able to bring on before five years is up. But the great bulk of what we need is more than five years out there.

In terms of global eyes-and-ears coverage on the core mission, which is close-in access to the plans and intention of the enemy, the mischief-makers, and other things we need to know in this country for our national security, it's a long build-out, a long haul.

It's been started. It needs continuous monitoring, attention, pushing and help. And it's certainly going to take the help of this oversight committee, as well as all the management on the executive side.

On the question of how we do our business overseas, I want to be very careful what I say in an open session --

SEN. DEWINE: I understand that.

REP. GOSS: -- but I do agree with your observation that different types of platforms and different ways of doing business are entirely not only relevant, but necessary. And I believe that that is now understood in the community. It is certainly my position-very close to yours-that that's the type of business we're going to have to do. I am looking for innovation. And I believe that the type of the target and what I call the adjustment of the capability requires dealing in different ways with the enemy.

SEN. DEWINE: One follow-up question with regard to human intelligence. So what you're telling us is you believe that it's going to take more than five years to get where we need to be in regard to that?

REP. GOSS: That's my estimate, sir. I will admit that I've only been doing homework for a couple of weeks. But in my previous position, combined with that homework, that would be my estimate.

SEN. DEWINE: That's a rather frightening answer --

REP. GOSS: It doesn't mean --

SEN. DEWINE: -- but I appreciate your candor.

REP. GOSS: Candor's important, sir, especially with an oversight committee.

SEN. DEWINE: Absolutely.

Let me ask another question in regard to a general policy issue. And I understand this is a policy issue, and I understand the job that you're up for. But the use of supplementals is something that is very bothersome to me, and I believe it inhibits us from doing our job. But in the job that you will be, we hope, heading into, I believe it will also pose some problems for you doing your job. I wonder if you can comment about that in general, understanding that you would be part of a budget team and that you won't be making all of those decisions.

REP. GOSS: Senator, I won't make a policy comment, but I will make a manager's comment. If confirmed, I assure you that my management style would not be based on supplementals. I like to do more comprehensive planning. I like to have a better idea of what the tooth-to-tail ratios are on some of these activities. Very hard to do that with supplementals. Understanding what the ops tempos are going to be, the kinds of things we're going to be engaged in is, obviously, predictive, but I think that you'll have a better chance of getting your efficiencies and your resources in the right place, in the right time and the right amount if you have a plan rather than if you're just ad hoc-ing it with supps.

SEN. DEWINE: I think there's a general consensus among at least the Senate Intelligence Committee that we have not historically done as good a job in oversight as we should have. I think there's some institutional problems connected with that.

I wonder if you could possibly comment on what, as CIA director, future CIA director, you could do to help us do our job in oversight?

REP. GOSS: Senator, a lot of recommendations about oversight, I believe this committee labeled the oversight dysfunctional. I paid a lot of attention to that in my former position, of course. I don't think it's appropriate for me today to talk about how the Congress of the United States ought to solve its oversight problems.

SEN. DEWINE: That was not my question.

REP. GOSS: I agree. And I wanted you to understand why I was not going to go there. I do think oversight is a critical complementary part of the arrangement. I think it takes candor with the DCI, whoever is leading the intelligence community, the elements of the community; it takes understanding. This is complex business, as you well know. Just learning the jargon of this business takes a degree of education and getting used to. And I worry a lot that we always have a supply of knowledgeable members of Congress on the oversight committees who can participate in the constructive and innovative, creative solutions we're needing to have to deal not only with the management, but with the policy questions of how we apply the capabilities because I don't want to be ever put in a position, if I'm confirmed, of building capabilities for the wrong policies.

SEN. DEWINE: You sat-if I could follow-up. You sat where we are sitting --

REP. GOSS: Yes, sir.

SEN. DEWINE: -- and you sat there for quite a while.

REP. GOSS: Yes, sir.

SEN. DEWINE: And you, I'm sure, had some of the frustration that at least this member has felt in trying to get answers from the agency, at least from some of the witnesses in the agency.

What can you do to alleviate some of that problem?

Quite candidly, not all of the witnesses that come before this committee are as forthcoming as you are today, Mr. Goss. What are you going to do as the leader of that team to make sure that the people who come up here have as their mission to be as-not only as open to answer the questions that are specifically narrowly asked, but to be as-trying to be as forthcoming as possible? Sometimes we get the impression that you got to ask just the-precisely the right question, and if you don't ask it the exact right way you're not going to get the right answer. You set the culture. You're going to set the culture for this team. How are you going to do that?

REP. GOSS: Senator, I share your frustration from my past position. If you confirm me as DCI, you are going to get just as candid presentations from every member of the community that are before your committee as you get from me.

SEN. DEWINE: Good.

And your commitment to us is that that will be part of your mission, to drive that culture down through your team and to hold people accountable to do that?

REP. GOSS: Yes, sir. That will be the standard, and if there are complaints about it there will be ways to deal with it.

SEN. DEWINE: Good.

We have also been very frustrated, of course, with the National Intelligence Estimate in regard to Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction. A very general question but I think important question is: you've looked at this, you've studied it; what were the lessons that you learned from this failure, and what are you going to do to ensure that the next major NIE that is produced by the community does not have that kind of problem?

REP. GOSS: I think --

SEN. DEWINE: What did we learn?

REP. GOSS: The two major things we learned is we didn't have enough collection. Obviously, we all know we didn't have that close- in access for plans and intentions, therefore we didn't have enough for the analysts to work with. And what they did work with they did not work with in a creative enough way. I believe that the WMD report that your committee has put out has basically hit just about every possible point you could hit on that.

I know that the community, even before your report came out, on the analytical side has started to go back and talk about why they have not had the necessary remedies to groupthink, as your committee expressed it; why they've not had more competitive analysis; why they have abandoned some of the tradecraft; why they have been not doing some of the things that should have been done. So I know that there is a bit of energy and a bit of vision already being expended. That needs to be reinforced.

I don't think there's any question now in hindsight that it wasn't our best possible job by any means. I think people did it honorably and sincerely, but the way I characterized it in my letter to the committee was they didn't test conventional-excuse me, to the community, my letter to the community back last September, I think it was, co-signed with Ms. Harman, was they didn't test conventional wisdom enough. There were questions in the caveating. All of those kinds of questions so that the reader, the consumer of the product, clearly knows what is known, what is not known, and what is predictive.

I think those things help the product consumer very much as well.

So I think those are the areas of understanding there. Now it's a question of employing it. And we need some more analysts, I've got to tell you that, too.

SEN. DEWINE: Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.