Posted on 12/10/2004 5:57:34 AM PST by mountaineer
Two West Virginia lawmakers this week voted against historic legislation that overhauled the nation’s spy network in order to beef up the country’s counterterrorism network. The legislation passed overwhelmingly in both the U.S. House and the Senate. The vote in the Senate was 89-2, with U.S. Sens. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., and James Inhofe, R-Okla., voting against the legislation.
In the House, U.S. Rep. Alan B. Mollohan, D-W.Va., voted against the bill.
Mollohan, in an interview Thursday, cited four major concerns with the legislation. ...
“Does it adequately address the problems that have been identified with our intelligence gathering, storage and management purposes?” Mollohan asked. “No. It has some real deficiencies, which is why I voted against it.”
Among other things, the bill, if signed by President Bush, sets up the office of director of National Intelligence, which is charged with overseeing the nation’s 15 military and civilian spy agencies. It also establishes a National Counterterrorism Center. In Mollohan’s view, the authority of the director of National Intelligence is undermined because he or she, as well as the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, report directly to the president.
“In fact, that new director of National Intelligence has no operational control and cannot command the various spy agencies in their operational activities,” Mollohan said. “That institutionalizes the undermining of the director’s authority.”
The second issue Mollohan cites as deficient in the bill is one of protecting civil liberties. He pointed out the bill creates an oversight board to look into potential abuses of U.S. spy agencies but the president has control over the board and it lacks the independence to function adequately.
The oversight board “is appointed by the president and it is not independent of the president,” Mollohan said. “It has no subpoena power and it cannot command the various spy agencies to provide any information on their activities.”
The third weakness Mollohan noted was that the bill blurs the distinction between foreign and domestic intelligence operations. He said under current laws, domestic intelligence gathering by agencies such as the FBI is done in strict accordance with laws protecting citizens’ civil rights. He noted foreign intelligence gathering is not subject to these same laws but with the enactment of the bill the distinction between domestic and foreign intelligence operations will be blurred.
“There is concern that this legislation carries no prohibition on foreign intelligence services collecting information on U.S. citizens,” Mollohan said.
The fourth and final reservation Mollohan has with the bill is that, in his view, it weakens the oversight ability Congress has over intelligence operations conducted by the administrative branch of government. Mollohan said a “provision in the bill requires any testimony by the national intelligence director to be submitted to the White House Office of Management and Budget before it is submitted to Congress.”
“Oversight is something that Congress is supposed to do ... and we need unfiltered information,” Mollohan added.
....
Byrd, like Mollohan, objected to the provision requiring the National Intelligence director to submit any testimony to the White House for approval. “When the elected representatives of the people allow themselves to be coerced into a process that encourages the abdication of our responsibility to understand and thoroughly review legislation, the people are robbed of their voice in their government,” he said.
Byrd also objected to the fact that the intelligence bill failed to address the unfolding prison abuse scandals in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. “How can Congress claim to fix what is wrong with our intelligence agencies if this major piece of legislation doesn’t even address such colossal intelligence failures?” Byrd said.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 9 - An intense secret debate about a previously unknown, enormously expensive technical intelligence program has burst into light in the form of scathing criticism from members of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
For two years, the senators have disclosed, Republicans and Democrats on the panel have voted to block the secret program, which is believed to be a system of new spy satellites. But it continues to be financed at a cost that former Congressional officials put at hundreds of millions of dollars a year with support from the House, the Bush administration and Congressional appropriations committees.
Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, the ranking Democrat on the panel, denounced the program on Wednesday on the Senate floor as "totally unjustified and very, very wasteful." rest of story, NY Times.
bump
Oh joy. It's not bad enough that the CIA keeps revealing classified information but now we have Rockefeller revealing a secret satellite program?
If I were to reveal classified information, I could be arrested and sent to jail.
If a Congress Critter or someone at the CIA reveals classified information, it just gets them a bigger headline at the WaPo.
Where's the justice?
It's not only a tragedy but an oxymoron of epic proportions that an idiot like Rockefeller is on the "Intelligence" committee.
BTTT! Rush is talking about this right now. He mentioned some sort of "criminal papers" have been served to Rockefeller and two others over this.
Some of this "serving papers" should apply to "leaky" Leahy - known for revealing classified information, most important among them that we knew where Bin Laden was because we had intercepted his cellphone transmissions! Binnie hasn't used any electronic transmission method since. Thanks, Leahy. You're too sweet.
Even though a system I worked on, among many, is now "open source", I am still under classified restrictions because of the information that it handled at the time that I worked on it. If I started telling anyone what that system did and how it was used, I'd expect a knock on my door within a day or two and I am not joking.
Yet here we are with Rockefeller and others revealing classified information. About darn time someone got around to serving papers for breaking the rules on classified information.
The WaPo is the worst - they just love to publish anything classified they can get their hands on. Bill Gertz, of the Washington Times, is also particularly dangerous in some of his revelations from "inside the Pentagon".
You know what I think someone should do? Some General or Rummy should call Gertz in, brief him for a security clearance and then have him read the penalties for revealing any future information. After that, I'm sure Gerta wouldn't so handily repeat information given to him.
See #6.
You don't know what you're talking about.
No, Rush said they SHOULD be served on them, but they aren't. Rush specifically addressed the fact that the Republicans in Congress don't have the gonads to do it, instead, they start piling on with the Democrats and their outrageous criticism of Rumsfeld, the Iraq War, and President Bush.
Here are his exact words excerpted below:
Gutless Republican Wonders in the U.S. Senate Don't Get It: The Democrats LOST / December 16, 2004
Excerpt:
Rush: ".....This is the place, Senator Lott, where three Democrat senators blew up and committed a potential criminal felony by releasing the details of a covert, super-secret satellite spy plan.
This is a criminal felony. Criminal referrals have been handed out to these three, Jay Rockefeller, Durbin, and Ron Wyden.
Now, if the Republicans in the Senate had any gonads they would be on the prowl here trying to get these guys strung up for what they did, because you want to talk about defense and you want to talk about security, take a look at what's coming out of the U.S. Senate on the Democrat side.
Instead of piling on Rumsfeld, why don't you and the Senate leadership get together and realize it's the Democrats in the Senate who are the enemy, and not Rumsfeld. That it's Al-Qaeda who is the enemy, and not Rumsfeld. And just because McCain decides to fly off the cliff for personal reasons doesn't mean you have to follow him. ...."
It was his best opening monologue to date. Rush was on fire today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.