Posted on 01/03/2002 9:50:13 AM PST by 74dodgedart
Edited on 07/19/2004 2:09:20 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Crawford, Texas, Dec. 28 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush said he'll use presidential authority to sidestep a rule requiring his administration to provide Congress with written notice of U.S. intelligence activities.
Bush made the announcement in signing the intelligence authorization act for fiscal year 2002, which includes an amendment stating that reports to Congress should ``always be in written form.''
(Excerpt) Read more at quote.bloomberg.com ...
..."No need to waste further time here. Every agency in the federal government reports to the President. EVERY ONE. And that is not because Congress says so, but because the Constitution mandates such. I won't bother with your posts any more, rant away at me all you want"....
Wouldn't it be much better to read the Constitution before getting upset and closing or going off on rants?
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18: To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department, or fficer thereof".
The last 7 words speak volumes...."or officer" includes the President of the United States!
What I am reading here is that they want details on the particulars of the operations.
Maybe next year, they'll decide that they get oversight on military maneuvers and military actions, that will be a very efficient way to run things. Have the Generals etc, send written proposals to Congress as to how they plan to defeat the enemy.
We have Congress demanding information as to how decisions to prosecute, or not prosecute, were reached at the DoJ, now they want oversight over the wartime powers of the President. They are creating a super majority rule where none exists. Next, they will demand oversight on the Judicial Branch, and demand to be included in the deliberations of the SCOTUS.
Wow! Daschle is re-inventing the Parliament! With more muscle.
Why the heck should I, when every little jerk-water comes around every five minutes to re-interpret what I just read for me?
The reporting requirements were not in the House bill, but the Senate Bill was reported unaimously by the Intelligence Committee, and the House agreed to the requirement (IOW: I don't see any strange political game going on- like a Dem attempt to embarasss Bush).
Icouldn't find any debate of this reporting requirement.
I did find this statement of Levin's after the Senate precursor bill (S. 1428)was reported out by Armed Services:
"S. 1428, with its associated report (S. Rept. 107-63) and classified annex, contains numerous provisions requiring the preparation and submission of various reports, reviews, studies and plans concerning all facets of U.S. intelligence activities. Many of these reporting requirements include all, or elements of, Department of Defense intelligence-related activities over which the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and Armed Services Committee share oversight. The committee believes that all relevant oversight committees should receive these important reports, and that the Department of Defense should be consulted in the conduct and preparation of such reports, reviews, studies and plans that involve Department of Defense intelligence-related activities. The committee proposes an amendment to S. 1428, as reported by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, that would clarify the requirement for consultation with appropriate defense officials and ensure that all relevant oversight committees are recipients of information on activities within their respective jurisdictions. "
Maybe, maybe not; that's irrelevant. They're not asking for any more info than they already receive. They're simply asking for it in written form. The provision in question originated in the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. I have no idea who actually wrote it or why. In the Senate Committee report, the analysis/discussion of section 305 is as follows:
Section 305 amends the National Security Act of 1947 to require that notifications to Congress of intelligence activities and intelligence failures be made in writing and contain a concise statement of facts pertinent to the report and an explanation of the significance of the intelligence activity or failure covered by the report. This section also requires the Director of Central Intelligence to establish standards and procedures applicable to such reports. This section is designed to bring clarity and uniformity to an essential element of congressional oversight of the Intelligence Community. While not intended to increase or change reporting requirements, it is designed to ensure that reports made pursuant to the National Security Act are properly memorialized and consistent in form and content. The Committee notes that this provision is not intended to discourage prompt oral notifications, but requires that they be followed immediately by a written report fulfilling the requirements of this section.
Me neither. This looks like much ado about nothing to me.
As if Congress actually does any useful oversight anyway...
This sounds like business as usual amongst the separated powers, not the long-awaited but somehow perpetually postponed coup d'etat establishing the Bushid Dynasty (as prophesied in the Oracles of Paeleodamus).
The idea that only the Supreme Court has the authority to have an opinion on the constitutionality of acts of Congress is a liberal nostrum that has helped turn the Court into a danger to the republic; it has only held sway for half a century or so, and conservatives ought to be ashamed to have any truck with it. Here is a scholarly sort of First Things article with the relevant information:
How the Court Became Supreme
Bush is entirely right, indeed obligated, to resist any form of compliance with this rule that would, in his best judgment, interfere with his performance of his duties as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief.
Luis, good point about Daschle and creeping Parliamentary supremacy, even if this isn't exactly a case of it. There is the threat to the separation of powers, not Bush. But I suppose the Congressional supremists on this thread must welcome his initiatives to turn back the insidious King George and his drive to reinstate the Divine Right of Kings.
I've been sick about half of this year and haven't even had the energy to lurk much. Nice to see that war and world upheaval haven't changed the basic structure of life and argument on FR.
You have been sorely missed my friend, hope all is well with your health now.
Luis
Or perhaps, what is the most likely case, Bush is trying to protect the concept of separation of powers, and stave back an ever encroaching congress.
Congress should spend more time concerning itself with its own piss poor performance, and less about everyone else's. But then again, that would mean having to face up to their unbelieveable shortcomings.
What a way to start a New Year!
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.