National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 - Part 1
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE REFORM ACT OF 2004
Ms. COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. President. The bill is now officially before the Senate. It is open for amendment. We have great deal of work to do on this legislation, as the Presiding Officer is well aware. I do anticipate many votes later today, starting at 4:15. I do anticipate a late session tonight in order to make considerable progress on the bill.
In addition, I want to alert my colleagues to the fact that the majority leader, with the consent of the Democratic leader, did file a cloture motion last week that will ripen tomorrow morning. So we are determined to make good progress on this bill. We made a great deal of progress last week. Negotiations continued over the weekend. But we have to finish this highly significant bill.
That is the leader's intention. It is the floor managers' intention. And we will be working long and hard to do so both tonight and tomorrow night.
I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, in a helpful way, wishes to inform the Senate that under the previous order, at the hour
of 4:15 today, the Senate will proceed to a series of votes on the pending amendments with 2 minutes equally divided for debate prior to each vote.
Ms. COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. President.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, if the Senator from Ohio will yield, I will be happy to respond to his question. The Senator from
Ohio is exactly right. The amendment offered by the Senator from West Virginia would greatly weaken the authority of the national intelligence director to move funding and people. That is one of the most important reforms made by this legislation.
That is one reason I am strongly opposed to the amendment offered by the Senator from West Virginia.
I believe the Senator from Ohio is exactly right, that were the amendment to pass, it would severely undermine the reforms called for by the 9/11 Commission to create a NID with real authority. That means the authority over the budget, over the people in the national intelligence program, the authority to set priorities, and certainly the Byrd amendment would greatly weaken that authority.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, if the Senator from Ohio would yield on that point.
Mr. DeWINE. I sure will.
Ms. COLLINS. The amendment offered by our colleague from West Virginia would actually give the national intelligence director less authority than the DCI has under current law to move people and money around to address urgent needs. It not
only would undo the reforms in our bill, it is a step back from current law.
Under the Byrd amendment, aggregate transfers from a department or agency would be limited to $100 million or 5 percent of the funds available to the department or the agency. There is no such limitation in current law. The amendment offered by the Senator from West Virginia not only undermines the reforms in this bill and significantly would weaken the authority of the NID to move people and money to meet urgent compelling needs, but it actually is weaker than the authority that the Director of the CIA now has. I just wanted to make that point. I know the Senator from Ohio is aware of that as well.
Mr. DeWINE. I thank my colleague for her answer, and that is something that should alarm all the Members of the Senate. I believe there is a general consensus-certainly there is in the intelligence community, a general consensus at least, and I think there is among Members of the Senate-that the power of the DCI today is not enough, and to think that we would be thinking about passing a bill that would pass with this amendment possibly that would weaken the head of our intelligence agencies and give that person less power to me is a shocking thought.
I believe our whole goal should, in a very responsible, rational way, create a new system, which this bill has done, to empower one person to have the authority to run the intelligence in this country. I am afraid, as this discussion has pointed out between my colleagues and myself, that the Byrd amendment will take us actually in the wrong direction. It is a weakening amendment.
At least for this Member, it is a gutting amendment. It, frankly, would make it impossible for me to vote for this bill. It would destroy the power of the head of intelligence, this new position, and it would be the wrong thing to do. It is very well intended, but it would be a very serious mistake. This discussion we just had certainly brings that out.
Again, I want to congratulate my colleagues. They have done a very good job in trying to deal with all of the diverse needs we have in the intelligence community, the Defense Department, and all the other agencies. It has been a very tough job, and I congratulate them for their work.
I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I have enormous respect for the Senator from West Virginia, for his years of experience and his dedication to the Constitution and his ability to protect the rightful prerogatives of this body. I do, however, disagree with him, respectfully, on the contents of his amendment.
I note, as I said this morning, the limitations in Senator Byrd's amendment would inhibit the ability of the national intelligence
director to move people and money around to counter the threats facing our country. That is a major reform that has been recommended not only by the 9/11 Commission but by the witnesses before our committee and is a major reform supported by the administration.
Senator Byrd argues that the transfer authorities in the underlying bill cede too much power to the executive branch. But, in fact, the DCI currently has transfer authorities.
This is not a novel concept. We give the NID more transfer authority than the DCI currently has, but we are not taking power from Congress in any way because our bill does not change the existing process through which transfers must be approved by the appropriate congressional committees.
Mr. President, I will have more to say on Senator Byrd's amendment later.
AMENDMENT NO. 3950 TO AMENDMENT NO. 3705
Mr. President, at this point, I would like to take the opportunity to clear a pending amendment, so I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside, and I send to the desk a second-degree amendment to the Collins-Carper-Lieberman-Coleman amendment No. 3705.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the Senator's request?
Without objection, it is so ordered. The pending amendment is set aside.
The clerk will report the amendment.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Maine [Ms. COLLINS], for herself and Mr. Lieberman, proposes an amendment numbered 3950 to amendment No. 3705.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To make certain technical amendments)
On page 5, after line 2, insert the following:
(7) Grant programs under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121-5206).
On page 10, line 17, strike the semicolon and all that follows through page 11, line 7, and insert a period.
On page 12, line 5, strike "(5)" and insert "(6)".
On page 12, lines 17 through 20, strike "technical assistance provided by any Federal agency to States and local governments to conduct threat analyses and vulnerability assessments" and insert "technical assistance provided by any Federal agency to States and local governments regarding homeland security matters".
On page 18, line 9, insert "secure" after "for".
On page 23, line 18, insert "on the basis of terrorist threat" after "grant".
On page 25, line 24, insert "on the basis of terrorist threat" after "distribute".
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, this second-degree amendment addresses several relatively minor concerns raised by some of the Members of this body and the Department of Homeland Security about the underlying amendment. I know of no objection to the second-degree amendment. The changes it would make do not in any way affect the funding formula of the underlying amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, as the Senator from Connecticut has indicated, the underlying amendment would implement the Homeland Security Grant Enhancement Act. This legislation is the product of three hearings and 2 years of negotiation on the Governmental Affairs Committee. It was approved by a unanimous vote, and it currently has 29 cosponsors.
It is supported by Senators from big States, such as Michigan and Ohio, and small States, such as Maine and Delaware. The widespread support in the Senate demonstrates that the amendment takes a balanced approach to homeland security funding. It recognizes that a threat-based funding formula is a critical aspect, but it also preserves and recognizes the fact that first responders in every State stand on the front lines of securing the homeland.
I am constantly reminded that two of the hijackers on 9/11 began their journey of death and destruction from Portland, ME. So small States are not immune from being used as staging grounds for terrorist attacks.
I think we have come up with a carefully balanced formula that will help make our Nation safer. Secretary Ridge frequently reminds us that homeland security starts with hometown security. Our legislation recognizes that as well.
I note that the legislation is supported by a wide variety of organizations, including the National Governors Association, the National Council of State Legislatures, the Council of State Governments, the National Association of Counties, the National League of Cities, Advocates for EMS, the International City/County Management Association, the Fraternal Order of Police, and the Fire Chiefs Association.
I know the Presiding Officer is very familiar with this issue in his capacity as the distinguished chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, and we have enjoyed working closely with him and his staff as well.
I want to mention one aspect of the underlying bill; that is, it would provide greater flexibility in the use of homeland security funds so we can ensure that if a State needs to have more training as opposed to buying more equipment, there is more flexibility for the use of those funds in a flexible manner via a waiver from the Secretary of Homeland Security.
This was a particular concern to the Senator from Missouri, Mr. Talent. I know having that flexibility will enable our first responders, whether they live in Maine, Missouri, or Mississippi, to be better prepared.
Mr. President, I know of no further requests for debate on the second-degree amendment nor on the underlying amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
If not, the question is on agreeing to the second-degree amendment No. 3950.
The amendment (No. 3950) was agreed to.
Ms. COLLINS. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
AMENDMENT NO. 3705, AS AMENDED
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I know of no further debate on the underlying amendment, the Collins-Carper-Lieberman-Coleman
amendment No. 3705.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment No. 3705, as amended.
The amendment (No. 3705), as amended, was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no objection, the motion to table is laid on the table.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I note the Senator from North Dakota is on his feet. I wonder if the Senator could inform us
whether he is seeking recognition to talk about the bill or offer an amendment or morning business.
BREA K IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I note that the Senator from North Dakota gave a very troubling and compelling example of the fact that the FBI is so far behind in translating critical messages and documents. I am troubled by that, also.
Where we may differ is, I believe, that the authority given to the national intelligence director by the bill will allow us to address that problem. Now we will have one person in Government who is accountable and responsible and who will be able to-unless the Byrd amendment is agreed to-transfer the people and the funds necessary to tackle that backlog. That can't happen because of a very cumbersome process. I see our legislation and the authority it gives the new NID to be critical in allowing us to address just those kinds of problems.
We know there is a shortage of linguists throughout the Federal Government, but we also know there are thousands of linguists. Some of them are in the FBI, some of them are in the CIA, and some are in various other agencies. If we had a national intelligence director who was able to marshal those resources, then we could get rid of those backlogs. I think that would be very helpful.
I have other comments I want to make in response to the Senator's comments on the Byrd amendment.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for one point?
Ms. COLLINS. If I could complete my sentence, I would be happy to yield briefly for a question.
The Senator from Missouri has been waiting for some time to speak on the amendment that was just cleared on homeland
security grants. I will yield briefly for a question.
Mr. DORGAN. I thank the Senator.
I only make the point that I don't think any of us disagree with the point of having sufficient flexibility so the agencies will make decisions to hire people to translate the tapes. Somebody must be accountable today-not just tomorrow-for 120,000 pages not being translated.
My point is, whether Senator Byrd or myself or any other Senator, we all want sufficient resources to be devoted to the task at hand-especially the urgent task at hand. With or without the kind of flexibility you provide in this bill, I believe the evidence is that in every circumstance in the last 3 years when the administration asked for flexibility in moving funding, it has been granted by this Congress, and it has done so immediately. I know that because I am an appropriator and I see what comes to us. We move it immediately.
I wanted to make the point that I don't think there is any disagreement at all about our interest in seeing critical issues funded.
We all want that to happen.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, reclaiming my right to the floor, let us look at what happens under the current system when funds are reprogrammed. I would like to quote from the acting CIA Director John McLaughlin testimony that he gave before the Senate Armed Services Committee which parallels conversations that Senator Lieberman and I had with him privately. It goes directly to this point of the need for a more agile system.
Yes, the DCI has some reprogramming authority now. But let us look at the way it works. Listen to what John McLaughlin says:
Typically you require the approval of the agency that is surrendering the funds. Then you require the approval of the department head who overseas the agency. Usually that is the Secretary of Defense. Then you require the approval of OMB.
Then you require the approval of six congressional committees. Typically that takes 5 months.
I want to repeat that. That reprogramming takes 5 months, on average.
John McLaughlin goes on to say:
So you can see that is not very agile to meet the needs of today. My view is that the national intelligence director ought to
have the authority to move those funds.
We are facing an agile enemy, and what are we putting up against him? A system where it takes 5 months to move funds from one category to another.
I wish to address the issue of the accounts under the bill, which both Senator Byrd and Senator Dorgan have addressed.
These are simply accounts that allow the NID to receive the appropriations. That is all they are. The accounts set up under our bill do not give the NID any additional authority. These are just regular Treasury accounts.
Why are they needed? They are needed because the money now is funneled through the Department of Defense.
If you are going to allow the NID to receive the appropriations from Congress from a mechanics standpoint, you have to have
a mechanism whereby the Treasury Department sets up the accounts for him. That is all this is. In fact, I refer to page 24, line 12, of our legislation. These accounts are set up explicitly "for the purpose of carrying out the responsibilities and authorities of the director under this act."
The accounts themselves do not allow or authorize the NID to transfer funds. There is transfer authority. It is on page 27 of the bill. These authorities include a number of important safeguards.
First of all, transfers will still require congressional approval just as they do now. We are not changing the balance of power between this new position and the Congress. The transfers are subject to the applicable ceilings established in law to the appropriation ceilings. The transfers cannot be made unilaterally by the NID. They require the approval of the Director of Management and Budget.
Finally, the NID must consult with the affected agency heads, but no longer will he have to get the approval of the agency head and then the department head and then Office of Management and Budget and then Congress-that whole intricate system. We would allow consultation. Then the NID can move the money with the approval of OMB and subject to the same congressional review we have now. This is not a radical new concept. It is an essential authority. We cannot afford to have a process that takes 5 months for money to be moved from one account to another.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. I appreciate the leadership of the distinguished Senator from Missouri to allow greater flexibility for State and
local officials in spending homeland security grant funds. I agree that greater flexibility is needed to use homeland security funds to meet special security needs. I am pleased to include in my amendment language Senator TALENT and I have crafted over the past 18-months which last week he made the subject of a sense of the senate resolution granting authority to the Director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness to approve the reallocation of funds available to State homeland security officials in unspent homeland security funds. I am confident that this language would allow State and local officials to reallocate homeland security grant funds to provide greater safety for special security events like the Maccabi Games. Senator TALENT has been tireless in his efforts to pass his measure and achieve this flexibility to help local first responders and I am proud that we could include it in this amendment. I look forward to continuing to work with the Senator from Missouri on this important issue.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am pleased to give the assurances the Senator from Missouri is seeking. He and I, as he mentioned, along with my friend from Connecticut, serve on the Armed Services Committee and have a deep commitment to making sure that our men and women in the military receive the real-time, actionable intelligence they need to be effective.
Nothing in this bill would in any way hinder the flow of intelligence from NSA to the combatant commanders to the troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan-nothing.
In fact, as the Senator from Missouri knows, we opposed an amendment last week which would have undermined the relationship between those defense agencies and the Secretary of Defense by essentially moving them out of the Pentagon-not physically but from an authority standpoint-and having them only report to the national intelligence director. We recognized that we need a dual reporting, that these agencies are providing critical intelligence to our troops and to Pentagon officials as well as to the rest of the intelligence community.
I agree with the Senator that vigilant oversight is going to be necessary to make sure this is implemented in the manner we intend. But I must say, given the clear language of the bill, given the fact that tactical intelligence assets are completely exempted from the NID's control, and given the fact that any NID is going to be committed to providing excellent intelligence to our troops, I can't imagine the bill having the negative impact that he might feel.
Mr. TALENT. I have been much reassured by the debate, by your comments, and by my further thinking on the subject. I do think it is unlikely that any national intelligence director would not be sensitive to this. And given the congressional concern that has been expressed, if he or she were insensitive, we certainly could do something about it.
To give an example-and I shared this with the Senate-on procurement, you know the extent to which we are trying to procure network-centric type platforms for the Army. And since now the various satellite agencies would be under the procurement authority of the NID, it would be important early in this process to get some kind of memorandum of understanding or protocol so there would be a joint type procurement process to make certain that what the Army was doing to get network-centric receivers was compatible with whatever the NID was procuring for satellite.
I expect there will be a number of instances in practice where it will be useful for all of us to be aware on a continuing basis of this concern and trying to make certain that they work together, as we did with Goldwater-Nichols. There is an example of a congressional enactment and oversight that has increased the joint process.
I don't offer these remarks in hostility to the bill but to put on the record again the importance of this, to make clear your intent and the intent of the Senator from Connecticut in this regard. I would be happy to have the Senator comment further.
Ms. COLLINS. Let me indicate to the Senator from Missouri that I very much appreciate his concern in this area. There is no greater advocate for our troops than he. I join with him in an assurance that we are going to watch this very carefully. The language of the bill is very tightly and carefully drafted. The commitment to our troops is there. There is nothing in this bill that would in any way hinder military operations, readiness, or the flow of real-time, actionable intelligence to our troops. That is essential. The Senator has my commitment to continue to monitor this very closely.
Mr. TALENT. I am grateful. I don't know if the Senator from Connecticut wanted to say something now or later. I am not
inviting you to admit a concern that you don't think is in the language of the bill, that would suggest a weakness in the bill that you don't believe is there. It is just that any change in structure like this has the potential, if we are not careful, to interrupt that flow. I am pleased about your reassurances. I won't make you say it for the 15th time. I will just reclaim my time and close briefly. It has been a pleasure to participate in this debate and to watch how my friends from Connecticut and Maine have handled it. I do think it is time to do something. I had concerns. I had concerns about the speed with which we were acting. I think we can all concede the honesty of those concerns. I do believe, however, for the reasons I have indicated, that we ought to move forward. I think we can, while guarding against the dangers that are present whenever you have a major change like this. There is a lot about our intelligence system that is working. We do want to be careful that in trying to fix the parts that aren't, we don't cause problems for the parts that are working.
The Senators from Maine and Connecticut have done a good job in guarding against that. I congratulate them on their work. Again, I am pleased the Senate has adopted an amendment which finally takes a first step toward allowing our first responders, our State and local officials on whom we depend, to have discretion in where they are going to use these homeland security grants the country is giving them.
I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I am very pleased to see the Senator from Minnesota is on the floor. Senator Coleman has been one of the most diligent members of the Governmental Affairs Committee on this issue. He came to virtually every hearing
we had throughout the August recess, starting on the very first hearing on July 30. He is a cosponsor of the bill. He helped to write many of its provisions. I am very grateful for his leadership and support, and I look forward to hearing his comments.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I thank the Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Rockefeller, for talking about this amendment at this point. I know he has not officially offered it yet.
We are talking to him about it. I think this amendment responds to many of the recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission to strengthen aviation security. I very much appreciate the provisions of this amendment. We are trying to work out the authorization level that is included in the bill, but my overall reaction to his proposal is very favorable.
I know it has been reported by the Commerce Committee and cleared by the chairman and the ranking member of that committee. As usual, it reflects the Senator's thoughtful consideration of homeland security issues.
I very much have appreciated his advice throughout this debate, and I am hopeful that shortly we will be able to have him
officially offer his amendment, perhaps with a modification, and we would be able to accept it.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I thank the Senator from West Virginia for his very eloquent presentation.
As the Senator indicated, the intelligence budget's aggregate number has been made public twice by the DCI. So this is not
unprecedented. But if the amendment offered by the Senator from Alaska were adopted, let there be no mistake of what the effect would be. The effect would be that the funding for the National Intelligence Program would still be funded through Department of Defense.
The whole purpose of this bill is to create a national intelligence director with significant authority, and the first and perhaps most significant of those authorities is the control of the budget. The only way you can give the NID true control over the budget is if you have a separate account that the NID controls. And we need to do that by declassifying the top level number.
We did not go as far as the 9/11 Commission recommended. The 9/11 Commission recommended declassifying the top lines of all the agencies' budgets within the National Intelligence Program. We did not adopt that approach. Instead, we are only declassifying the aggregate number for the entire national intelligence budget, a number I note is often estimated and reported in the newspapers today.
But the point I want to make to supplement the remarks of the Senator from West Virginia is if we do not do this, if we adopt the amendment offered by the Senator from Alaska, we will undermine a key reform in the bill because the intelligence budget is so big that if it is not going to be declassified, it has to go through the Department of Defense. There is no other agency or department that is big enough to conceal the total amount of the budget.
This is going to be an important vote which is coming up this afternoon.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I want to explain to our colleagues what is going to happen before we proceed. There will be a motion to table the Byrd amendment. There will be 2 minutes equally divided and then a motion to table the Byrd amendment.
We have been able to work out an agreement on Senator Warner's amendment. That will be the second matter we deal with.
He will send a modification to the desk, and it is my hope to be able to adopt that amendment by a voice vote and vitiate the rollcall request.
Then there will be consideration of an amendment from Senator Stevens having to do with the effective date. Again, we have worked out a compromise on that, working very hard throughout the weekend. I expect Senator Stevens will propose a modification to his amendment, and that will allow us to clear that amendment by a voice vote.
We then will proceed to the Stevens amendment dealing with classification, which has been debated extensively. That will require a rollcall vote, and I will be moving to table it.
We then will move to another Stevens amendment where, again, I am pleased to report there is another compromise. It has to do with the interagency counterterrorism plans. Again, an amendment will be sent to the desk incorporating the compromise. I believe Senator Stevens will be offering that. I anticipate being able to accept that on a voice vote.
So I want my colleagues to know that we have made considerable progress in accommodating concerns expressed by the Senator from Virginia and the Senator from Alaska. As a result, I see the need for two rollcall votes out of the five that were ordered. I hope that is how it will unfold.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time with regard to the amendment?
Mr. BURNS. Madam President, I say to the managers of the bill, I would like to respond to the ranking member's assessment of
why the funds should be disclosed. I ask permission to do that.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator yield time?
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I am wondering if perhaps that could be done in the 2 minutes on the Stevens amendment,
since we have an awful lot of amendments to get through. I am very hesitant to cut off the Senator from Montana, but would that be acceptable?
Mr. BURNS. That will be fine. We might ask for a little more time.
Ms. COLLINS. OK. Madam President, we would now proceed to 2 minutes of debate equally divided on Senator Byrd's
amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, seeing the absence of Senator Byrd, I ask the Senator, would you like to proceed to my amendment to take a little time while he comes to the floor?
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I think that would be a good idea. I ask unanimous consent that we proceed to Senator
Warner's amendment first while we are waiting for Senator Byrd.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee for working with Senator Lieberman and me on the appointment authority. This is a very important issue. We have struck the right balance in the modification. I urge acceptance of the modification which embodies the compromise we worked on over the weekend.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. WARNER. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
AMENDMENT NO. 3845
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question now occurs on the amendment of the Senator from West Virginia.
The Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, the amendment of the Senator from West Virginia would considerably limit the authority of the
national intelligence director to move money and people. It would undermine a key reform that is included in this bill, a reform that the 9/11 Commission says is absolutely necessary to empower the NID. Otherwise we are just creating another layer of bureaucracy. We need to make sure that the NID has the authority to marshal the resources, the people, and the funding to counter the biggest threats we face.
The Byrd amendment would actually give the new national intelligence director less authority than the DCI has under current law to move around money and personnel to address urgent needs. Under the Byrd amendment, aggregate transfers from a department or an agency would be limited by a dollar and a percentage amount. There is no such limitation in current law. This amendment represents a step backward from current law. It would severely undermine the reforms. I am going to move that it be tabled. I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia has 1 minute.
Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent for 2 minutes. I would like to yield to the distinguished Senator, chairman of the Appropriations Committee and President pro tempore of the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent for an additional minute on our side, then, as well.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, testimony from former DCIs as well as other experts confirmed the need for stronger authority to transfer and reprogram funds and told us this is key to reform of the intelligence community. The Acting Director of the CIA said it best. He talked about how cumbersome the current system is. He told us you first have to acquire the approval of the agency head, then you have to go to the department secretary, then you have to go to OMB, and then you have to go to Congress. We are keeping the OMB and congressional steps. I want to make that clear. But that process, he told us, typically takes 5 months, and, as he said-and I quote John McLaughlin:
So you can see that's not very agile to meet the needs of today. My view is that the national intelligence director ought to have the authority to move those funds.
I would also note that other provisions in the bill are opposed by the White House, and the amendment is opposed by the chairman of the Intelligence Committee.
I move to table the amendment and ask for the yeas and nays.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am very pleased to inform our colleagues that, after working very closely with Senator Stevens, Senator Lieberman and I have agreed to a modification of his amendment that is acceptable to us.
The bill originally called for an effective date after enactment of 180 days. The amendment of Senator Stevens would retain that date but give the President the ability to extend for another 6 months for certain provisions of the bill. That is an acceptable compromise.
I thank the Senator from Alaska for working with the Senator from Connecticut and myself to reach this agreement. I want my
colleagues to take note that we have accommodated the Senator's concern in this regard.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I would also point out that if we do not disclose the top line, the result is the intelligence budget is still funded through the Department of Defense. So if we are trying to give the national intelligence director real budget authority, we have to disclose that top line. We are not disclosing the top line of the CIA, the DIA, the NSA; it is only the aggregate figure for the entire national intelligence budget. Otherwise we are not reforming the process. The funding will have to go through the Department of Defense.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
AMENDMENT NO. 3826, AS MODIFIED
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will now be 2 minutes of debate equally divided on the Stevens amendment No. 3826, according to the previous order.
The Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I believe we have worked out an agreement on Senator Stevens' amendment No. 3826, as modified, that is acceptable to both sides. I am pleased we have been able to reach a compromise. This amendment would clarify the NCTC Director's role in advising the President and the national intelligence director. It uses language that we worked out carefully during the committee markup with Senator Levin and others.
Specifically, the NCTC Director would advise the President and the NID on interagency counterterrorism planning and activities which is consistent with the NCTC Director's responsibility to conduct interagency coun ter ter ror ism planning.
I urge adoption of the amendment, as modified.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Intelligence Committee for working very closely with us in proposing this amendment which combines portions of several other amendments that he has introduced. It clarifies that the mission of the national intelligence authority includes eliminating barriers to the coordination of all intelligence activities, including but not limited to counterterrorism. It appropriately ensures that the congressional intelligence committees will receive reports relating to the acquisition authorities of NSA and NGA. It provides that the NID may directly modify budget proposals made by agencies as part of the national intelligence program. I appreciate how closely the chairman has worked with Senator Lieberman and me. I am pleased to support the amendment, and I urge its adoption.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I again thank the distinguished chairman for working very closely with the floor managers on this amendment.
It provides thoughtful clarifications to the establishment of an analytic review unit under the Collins-Lieberman bill. I believe the changes made by this amendment would strengthen the bill. I urge its adoption.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I very much appreciate the courtesy of the Senator from Virginia. I would like to suggest that we have a brief quorum call so we can try to have some order. We have several requests on both sides of the aisle to proceed on amendments. I need to compare notes with the Democratic manager of the bill.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I certainly want to be cooperative. I hope the Senator will take into consideration that I now have the floor.
Ms. COLLINS. I certainly will. If the Senator wants to proceed-
Mr. WARNER. No. I want to be cooperative. I am perfectly willing to yield the floor for the purpose of a quorum. It is my hope that I will be recognized at such time as the quorum call is to be withdrawn at the discretion of the managers.
Ms. COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. President. That is my intent.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WARNER. I have heard reference made to the fact that this bill leaves intact the manner in which we deal with the TIARA programs and the JMIP; that is, the Joint Military Intelligence Program. I would like to read from page 412 of the 9/11 Commission. The Commission states as follows:
The Defense Departments's military intelligence programs-the joint military intelligence program (JMIP) and the tactical intelligence and related activities program (TIARA)-would remain part of that department's responsibility.
My question to the distinguished managers, if they desire to reply, is, Is it their position-and I believe they have so stated, but I wish to give them this opportunity-that the recommendation of the Commission that they remain at the Department of Defense, is it the understanding of Senators in their bill that is now before the Senate that that comports with that objective?
May I read it again?
Ms. COLLINS. Yes, please do.
Mr. WARNER. Yes, I thank the Senator. Page 412 of the Commission report:
The Defense Department's military intelligence program-the joint military intelligence program (JMIP) and the tactical intelligence
and related activities program (TIARA)-would remain part of that department's responsibility.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, if I could respond through the Chair to the inquiry of the Senator from Virginia, the bill makes very
clear that any intelligence assets that are principally for joint military operations or for tactical intelligence stay within the
Department of Defense.
Now, there may be national intelligence assets that are now included within the Joint Military Intelligence Program that could be transferred to the national intelligence program. The tactical assets are clearly just under the control of the Secretary of Defense, but some of the JMIP assets are national, so that is why the bill is worded as it is with the word "principally."
Mr. WARNER. I thank my distinguished colleague.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I would point out that the amendment of the distinguished Senator would require that the Secretary of Defense agree to the movement of any asset from the JMIP or TIARA budget to the National Intelligence Program budget.
I want to make sure my colleagues realize that the White House opposes giving the Secretary of Defense a veto over what can be moved from JMIP or TIARA to the new National Intelligence Program. I apologize for talking in acronyms in describing this.
As you know, the tactical intelligence programs are the TIARA programs that are run by the various services within the Department of Defense. The JMIP is the Joint Military Intelligence Programs.
I note we have tried to strike a delicate balance in this bill. We decided, and so I joined the Senator from Virginia, to defeat an amendment that would have moved the NSA, the NGA, the NRO out of the purview and daily supervision of the Secretary of Defense. We were cognizant that the NSA and the NGA provide direct support to the warfighter.
The underlying legislation, however, does strike a delicate balance. We give the national intelligence director control over the budgets, the tasking of national assets, and certain personnel authorities, while leaving those agencies under the day-to-day supervision of the Secretary of Defense. I think that is the right balance.
Keep in mind, when we talked to the head of the NSA, the three-star General who runs that agency, he told us that he has more contact with the CIA than he does the Secretary of Defense; that he is providing national intelligence everyday beyond the needs of the Pentagon. That is not in any way to lessen the important role he is providing to our warfighters, to the combat commanders, to the Secretary of Defense. But these are national assets. Indeed, while I can't disclose the amounts of the budgets or the exact percentages because they are classified, the majority of the budgets for these agencies are already in the National Foreign Intelligence Program budget.
I understand the point of the Senator from Virginia. As always, I am happy to try to work with him. I know Senator Levin has some amendments in this area that may bring further clarity. But I am concerned about the scope of his amendments.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, first let me clarify that we did what the 9/11 Commission recommended with regard to these agencies. We did not sever their connection to the Secretary of Defense. The Senator from Virginia is well aware of that. He is well aware that I opposed attempts to sever the connection with the Secretary of Defense. The Senator from Virginia is well aware that the Secretary of Defense would continue to have day-to-day line authority supervision over these agencies.
The second point I make is there is nothing in this bill that would in any way hinder the ability of the NGA to provide much needed maps for our troops. That is just not going to happen. The satellites that are used to produce these maps for the military are also used for surveillance of international terrorism or compliance with proliferation treaties. They are used to look at camps in Afghanistan. These are national assets that are used by multiple agencies, and the bill reflects that.
That is why the majority of the budgets for these agencies are already part of the National Foreign Intelligence Program-what we would rename as the National Intelligence Program. The majority of the budget finances are already part of not JMIP, not TIARA, but what is known as NFIP. That would not in any way hinder the ability of these agencies to meet their obligations to the Department of Defense and to our warfighters.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the managers will allow the setting aside of the pending amendments and allow me to call up three amendments that are at the desk that Senator Leahy has asked me to offer on his behalf.
Ms. COLLINS. Reserving the right to object, I am unaware of what these three amendments are. We have a lot of requests for other amendments to be brought up. I wonder if the Senator would withhold so that I could talk with him about what the three amendments are. Senator Durbin was actually next in line.
Mr. REID. Well, that is fine. But I thought we were going to allow amendments to be offered. If we are going to pick and choose what amendments are going to be offered, I will object to all of them, because Senator Leahy has the right to offer his amendments if anybody else does. I will be happy to withhold for a short time. I withdraw my request.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Alabama. I do have two brief matters to deal with and then I would be glad to figure out where our order is.
I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain, be added as a cosponsor to the underlying bill, S. 2845.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendments be set aside so I may call up two amendments on behalf of the majority leader.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
AMENDMENTS NOS. 3895, AS MODIFIED, AND 3896, EN BLOC
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I call up amendments Nos. 3895 and 3896, and further I send a modification to No. 3895 to the
desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is modified. Both amendments will now be
pending.
The amendments are as follows:
AMENDMENT NO. 3985
On page 94, strike line 5 and insert the following:
SEC. 144. NATIONAL COUNTERPROLIFERATION CENTER.
(a) NATIONAL COUNTERPROLIFERATION CENTER.-(1) Not later than one year after enactment of this Act there shall be established within the National Intelligence Authority a National Counterproliferation Center.
(2) The purpose of the Center is to develop, direct, and coordinate the efforts and activities of the United States Government to deter, prevent, halt, and rollback the pursuit, acquisition, development, and trafficking of weapons of mass destruction, related materials and technologies, and their delivery systems to terrorists, terrorist organizations, other non-state actors of concern, and state actors of concern.
(b) DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL COUNTER proliferation Center.-(1) There is a Director of the National Counterproliferation Center, who shall be the head of the National Counterproliferation Center, and who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(2) Any individual nominated for appointment as the Director of the National Counterproliferation Center shall have significant expertise in matters relating to the national security of the United States and matters relating to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, their delivery systems, and related materials and technologies that threaten the national security of the United States, its interests, and allies.
(3) The individual serving as the Director of the National Counterproliferation Center may not, while so serving, serve in any capacity in any other element of the intelligence community, except to the extent that the individual serving as Director of the National Counterproliferation Center is doing so in an acting capacity.
© SUPERVISION.-(1) The Director of the National Counterproliferation Center shall report to the National Intelligence Director on the budget, personnel, activities, and programs of the National Counterproliferation Center.
(2) The Director of the National Counterproliferation Center shall report to the National Intelligence Director on the activities of the Directorate of Intelligence of the National Counterproliferation Center under subsection (g).
(3) The Director of the National Counterproliferation Center shall report to the President and the National Intelligence Director on the planning and progress of counterproliferation programs, operations, and activities.
(d) PRIMARY MISSIONS.-The primary missions of the National Counterproliferation Center shall be as follows:
(1) To develop and unify strategy for the counterproliferation efforts (including law enforcement, economic, diplomatic, intelligence, and military efforts) of the United States Government.
(2) To make recommendations to the National Intelligence Director with regard to the collection and analysis requirements and priorities of the National Counterproliferation Center.
(3) To integrate counterproliferation intelligence activities of the United States Government, both inside and outside the United States, and with other governments.
(4) To develop multilateral and United States Government counterproliferation plans, which plans shall-
(A) involve more than one department, agency, or element of the executive branch (unless otherwise directed by the President) of the United States Government; and
(B) include the mission, objectives to be achieved, courses of action, parameters for such courses of action, coordination of agency operational activities, recommendations for operational plans, and assignment of national, departmental, or agency responsibilities.
(5) To ensure that the collection, analysis, and utilization of counterproliferation intelligence, and the conduct of counterproliferation operations, by the United States Government are informed by the analysis of all-source intelligence.
(e) DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL COUNTERPROLIFERATION CENTER.-Notwithstanding any other provision of law, at the direction of the President, the National Security Council, and the National Intelligence Director, the Director of the National Counterproliferation Center shall-
(1) serve as the principal adviser to the President and the National Intelligence Director on intelligence and operations relating to counterproliferation;
(2) provide unified strategic direction for the counterproliferation efforts of the United States Government and for the effective integration and deconfliction of counterproliferation intelligence collection, analysis, and operations across agency boundaries, both inside and outside the United States, and with foreign governments;
(3) advise the President and the National Intelligence Director on the extent to which the counterproliferation program recommendations and budget proposals of the departments, agencies, and elements of the United States Government conform to the policies and priorities established by the President and the National Security Council;
(4) in accordance with subsection (f), concur in, or advise the President on, the selections of personnel to head the nonmilitary operating entities of the United States Government with principal missions relating to counterproliferation;
(5) serve as the principal representative of the United States Government to multilateral and bilateral organizations, forums, events, and activities related to counterproliferation;
(6) advise the President and the National Intelligence Director on the science and technology research and development requirements and priorities of the counterproliferation programs and activities of the United States Government; and
(7) perform such other duties as the National Intelligence Director may prescribe or are prescribed by law;
(f) ROLE OF DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL COUNTERPROLIFERATION CENTER IN CERTAIN APPOINTMENTS.-(1) In the event of a vacancy in the most senior position of such nonmilitary operating entities of the United States Government having principal missions relating to counterproliferation as the President may designate, the head of the department or agency having jurisdiction over the position shall obtain the concurrence of the Director of the National Counterproliferation Center before appointing an individual to fill the vacancy or recommending to the President an individual for nomination to fill the vacancy. If the Director does not concur in the recommendation, the head of the department or agency concerned may fill the vacancy or make the recommendation to the President (as the case may be) without the concurrence of the Director, but shall notify the President that the Director does not concur in the appointment or recommendation (as the case may be).
(2) The President shall notify Congress of the designation of an operating entity of the United States Government under paragraph (1) not later than 30 days after the date of such designation.
(g) DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE.-(1) The Director of the National Counterproliferation Center shall establish and maintain within the National Counterproliferation Center a Directorate of Intelligence.
(2) The Directorate shall have primary responsibility within the United States Government for the collection and analysis of information regarding proliferators (including individuals, entities, organizations, companies, and states) and their networks, from all sources of intelligence, whether collected inside or outside the United States, or by foreign governments.
(3) The Directorate shall-
(A) be the principal repository within the United States Government for all-source information on suspected proliferators, their networks, their activities, and their capabilities;
(B) propose intelligence collection and analysis requirements and priorities for action by elements of the intelligence community inside and outside the United States, and by friendly foreign governments;
© have primary responsibility within the United States Government for net assessments and warnings about weapons of mass destruction proliferation threats, which assessments and warnings shall be based on a comparison of the intentions and capabilities of proliferators with assessed national vulnerabilities and countermeasures;
(D) conduct through a separate, independent office independent analyses (commonly referred to as "red teaming") of intelligence collected and analyzed with respect to proliferation; and
(E) perform such other duties and functions as the Director of the National Counterproliferation Center may prescribe.
(h) DIRECTORATE OF PLANNING.-(1) The Director of the National Counterproliferation Center shall establish and maintain
within the National Counterproliferation Center a Directorate of Planning.
(2) The Directorate shall have primary responsibility for developing counter proliferation plans, as described in subsection (d)(3).
(3) The Directorate shall-
(A) provide guidance, and develop strategy and interagency plans, to counter proliferation activities based on
policy objectives and priorities established by the National Security Council;
(B) develop plans under subparagraph (A) utilizing input from personnel in other departments, agencies, and elements of the United States Government who have expertise in the priorities, functions, assets, programs, capabilities, and operations of such departments, agencies, and elements with respect to counterproliferation;
© assign responsibilities for counter proliferation operations to the departments and agencies of the United States Government (including the Department of Defense, the Department of State, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Homeland Security, and other departments and agencies of the United States Government), consistent with the authorities of such departments and agencies;
(D) monitor the implementation of operations assigned under subparagraph © and update interagency plans for such operations as necessary;
(E) report to the President and the National Intelligence Director on the performance of the departments, agencies, and elements of the United States with the plans developed under subparagraph (A); and
(F) perform such other duties and functions as the Director of the National Counterproliferation Center may prescribe.
(4) The Directorate may not direct the execution of operations assigned under paragraph (3).
(i) STAFF.-(1) The National Intelligence Director may appoint deputy directors of the National Counterproliferation Center to oversee such portions of the operations of the Center as the National Intelligence Director considers appropriate.
(2) To assist the Director of the National Counterproliferation Center in fulfilling the duties and responsibilities of the Director of
the National Counterproliferation Center under this section, the National Intelligence Director shall employ in the National Counterproliferation Center a professional staff having an expertise in matters relating to such duties and responsibilities.
(3) In providing for a professional staff for the National Counterproliferation Center under paragraph (2), the National Intelligence Director may establish as positions in the excepted service such positions in the Center as the National Intelligence Director considers appropriate.
(4) The National Intelligence Director shall ensure that the analytical staff of the National Counterproliferation Center is comprised primarily of experts from elements in the intelligence community and from such other personnel in the United States Government as the National Intelligence Director considers appropriate.
(5)(A) In order to meet the requirements in paragraph (4), the National Intelligence Director shall, from time to time-
(i) specify the transfers, assignments, and details of personnel funded within the National Intelligence Program to the National Counterproliferation Center from any other non-Department of Defense element of the intelligence community that the National Intelligence Director considers appropriate; and
(ii) in the case of personnel from a department, agency, or element of the United States Government and not funded within the National Intelligence Program, request the transfer, assignment, or detail of such personnel from the department, agency, or other element concerned.
(B)(i) The head of an element of the intelligence community shall promptly effect any transfer, assignment, or detail of personnel specified by the National Intelligence Director under subparagraph (A)(i).
(ii) The head of a department, agency, or element of the United States Government receiving a request for transfer, assignment, or detail of personnel under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall, to the extent practicable, approve the request.
(6) Personnel employed in or assigned or detailed to the National Counter proliferation Center under this subsection shall be
under the authority, direction, and control of the Director of the National Counterproliferation Center on all matters for which the Center has been assigned responsibility and for all matters related to the accomplishment of the missions of the Center.
(7) Performance evaluations of personnel assigned or detailed to the National Counter proliferation Center under this subsection shall be undertaken by the supervisors of such personnel at the Center.
(8) The supervisors of the staff of the National Counterproliferation Center may, with the approval of the National Intelligence Director, reward the staff of the Center for meritorious performance by the provision of such performance awards
as the National Intelligence Director shall prescribe.
(9) The National Intelligence Director may delegate to the Director of the National Counterproliferation Center any responsibility, power, or authority of the National Intelligence Director under paragraphs (1) through (8).
(10) The National Intelligence Director shall ensure that the staff of the National Counterproliferation Center has access to all databases and information maintained by the elements of the intelligence community that are relevant to the duties of the Center.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT