[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 139 (Wednesday, October 7, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H9729-H9740]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 3694, INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR
FISCAL YEAR 1999
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the unanimous consent agreement of
October 6, 1998, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R.
3694) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1999 for intelligence
and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government,
the Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency
Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sessions). Pursuant to the order of the
House of Tuesday, October 6, 1998, the conference report is considered
as having been read.
(For conference report and statement, see proceedings of the House of
October 5, 1998, at page H9522.)
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) and
the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss).
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I know that the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) is on his way
to the Chamber at this time, and I am going to read from a prepared
opening statement, which I know the gentleman will have access to, so I
am going to proceed with my remarks.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report to accompany
H.R. 3694, the Intelligence Reauthorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999.
This has been a busy summer from an intelligence and national
security vantage point. Since House passage of H.R. 3694 in early May,
we have witnessed nuclear tests in Pakistan and India; terrorist
attacks on 2 of our embassies in Africa, and U.S. counterstrikes
against terrorist-linked targets; a worsening world financial crisis
that has spread from Asia to Russia and threatens now parts of Latin
America; the eviction of United Nations weapons inspectors from Iraq; a
deepening crisis in Kosovo that could embroil NATO troops before the
end of the year, if not the end of this speech; and numerous ballistic
missile tests by hostile and potentially hostile countries.
In addition, 2 major studies of our intelligence capabilities and
processes were conducted this summer. The Rumsfeld Commission study
brought to light the increasing pace of ballistic missile proliferation
and the shrinking warning times that we can expect given our current
intelligence collection posture. The Jeremiah Report, conducted in the
wake of India's nuclear tests, highlighted several gaps in our
analytical and reporting processes. Both reports expressed concern that
foreign governments are increasingly able to hide their activities from
us due, apparently, to their familiarity with our intelligence methods
and our capabilities.
The point of recapitulating these developments and reports is to
highlight the continuing critical need for good intelligence in the
post-Cold War world, in this era that we find ourselves today. This
after-Cold War era is an era that has seen a significant downsizing of
our armed forces.
What I have not spelled out is the successes the community has had as
well. All those bad things that did not happen and do not happen
because we do have good intelligence capability, even though we have
downsized that as well, and we need to reverse that trend.
Good intelligence enables policymakers in the government to head off
crises before they occur. It provides an advantage to our military
planners in everything from procurement to deployment and saves the
lives of citizens and soldiers, and saving the lives of citizens and
soldiers is certainly something we are about.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that this conference report incorporates
the lessons learned from this busy summer. It provides needed
investments in modernization of signals intelligence; revitalization of
human intelligence, or espionage, capabilities; strengthening all-
source analysis; and enhancement of covert action capabilities. It also
includes a significant increase in research and development funding to
ensure that we can stay one step ahead of the pack and compensate for
foreign denial and deception practices, which, as I said, have gotten
ever better.
This conference report provides new protections for ``whistle-
blowers,'' intelligence community employees who report on potential
problems within their agencies, even though it may involve classified
information. I believe we have struck an appropriate balance between
the need to preserve employees' rights and the unique retirement within
the intelligence arena to safeguard classified information and, of
[[Page H9730]]
course, national security. We have created a front door for rank and
file information-sharing with Congress. This is a good thing.
I know that this legislation is the product of a bipartisan,
bicameral effort. I am grateful for the hard work of all of our Members
and the entire committee staff. I know that it took many long hours and
a few sleepless nights to get this conference report completed.
I will call particular attention to the effort of my friend, the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), the ranking member of this
committee, for his dedication to intelligence and national security
matters. I am disappointed to say that this will be his last appearance
on the House floor managing an intelligence authorization bill, I am
told. The Rules of the House require the rotation of all members of our
committee. The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) has been a hard-
charging, ardent supporter of improving U.S. intelligence capabilities,
especially those in the advanced technical area. Indeed, his expertise
in that area is unrivaled, in my view, on Capitol Hill.
While I cannot say that we have always agreed on the substance of all
issues during my 2 years as chairman of the committee, I think it is
very fair to say that we have always agreed to sit down and do the
extra work necessary to resolve issues in a reasonable manner, and I
would add in a very pleasant way.
Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman that both the community and the
Committee on Intelligence have benefited from his 8 years of service
here and I know that we can continue to count on his input, wisdom and
judgment on crucial matters in the years to come on which he has so
much expertise.
I will also pay tribute to the others members who are rotating off
the committee or retiring next year. We have been extremely fortunate
to have the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on National
Security, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) as a senior member of
the Committee on Intelligence. Indeed, this has been his second tenure
on the committee for a total of 14 years. We have benefited from the
gentleman's wisdom and his willingness to find the resources necessary
for intelligence in some very lean years for overall defense spending,
and I thank him, particularly for his help in the committee this past
week when I could not be here and he substituted for me very ably. I
know I can count on him too for his advise and assistance.
The committee is further losing 2 valued democratic members to
retirement: the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), and the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Skaggs). We thank them for their service
and dedication and wish them luck in their new endeavors, and I
personally thank them for the commitment and time that they have given
on so many issues on the committee.
Finally I would be remiss if I did not mention the recent departures
of professional staff members Mary Engebreth and Susan Ouellete, 2
women who have worked on the committee since 1995. Susan was our expert
in the areas of analysis and defense intelligence, and Mary was our
resident rocket scientist. We are going to miss Mary, and we are going
to miss Susan as well.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this conference report.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
First, I want to thank the distinguished chairman and we want to
welcome him back, although this has been a difficult time for he and
his family. We are certainly glad to hear the positive news about his
wife, Mariel.
I want to say that I appreciate his kind remarks. It has been a great
pleasure to serve on this committee for eight years, and we have had
bipartisan cooperation. I do not think there has ever been a time when
we have not come to this floor unified behind the intelligence bill,
and I think that is good. This is one area where partisanship should
not be a part. It should be only how do we get the best intelligence
for the American people.
Mr. Speaker, the goal of any conference committee should be to
produce an agreement that improves the bills submitted to it. I believe
the conference on the intelligence authorization for fiscal year 1999
achieved that result, and I urge the adoption of the conference report.
I am especially pleased that the conferees were willing to reconsider
earlier legislative recommendations which I believe would have
negatively impacted the ability to collect reliable and timely
intelligence through our national technical means. Make no mistake
about it, had these recommendations gone forward, the consequences
would have been felt for years, primarily by those whose responsibility
it is to ensure that United States military forces operate with maximum
efficiency and minimum casualties.
The conferees did not, however, fully resist the temptation to unduly
encumber highly complex programs, particularly new ones, with
directives which I believe were unwise in terms of constraining the
flexibility of those who are supposed to manage these programs.
Congressional oversight should be vigorous and constant, but it should
be reasonable as well. I am concerned that we are prematurely forcing
technical programs into a budgetary straitjacket that will force them
to either satisfy fewer requirements, or to become operational much
later than necessary. We must never lose sight of the fact that
congressionally imposed restraints on the development of intelligence
collection programs can have real effects on the Nation's security.
The conference report contains a resolution of a matter on which the
House and Senate intelligence committees have worked for some time, the
means by which intelligence community employees can bring significant
information to the attention of the intelligence committees. In perhaps
no other aspect of the relationship between the executive and
legislative branches is the Congress as dependent on information from
the object of its oversight as it is in the area of intelligence.
{time} 1045
We can simply not do our job if the intelligence agencies are not
forthcoming with information, the bad as well as the good. We must know
that impediments do not exist which would prevent intelligence
community employees from bringing important information to the
attention of the Intelligence committees.
I want to commend our chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss)
for crafting an alternative means by which to assist and encourage
employees who have significant information in bringing it to Congress,
and the leadership of the Senate Intelligence Committee for raising an
important issue and insisting that it be addressed.
Mr. Speaker, we should be proud of the fact that even in the
chairman's absence we had a spirited debate on this subject, but the
chairman prevailed, so his deft hand and good work were felt, but were
felt properly. The job that the chairman did in crafting this
legislation and refining it was exemplary, and I commend him for it.
My service on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence saw the
successful prosecution of the Persian Gulf War and the collapse of the
Soviet Union. It also saw greater proliferation of technologies
associated with weapons of mass destruction, protracted ethnic
conflicts, the possibility of information warfare, and persistent
terrorist threats.
I have been continually impressed in my eight years on the committee
by the need of our policymakers and military commanders for reliable
and timely intelligence. I wish at times they had made better use of
the intelligence available to them. To stay ahead in the collection,
analysis, processing, and dissemination of actionable intelligence is
admitedly costly. The authorization levels in this conference report
exceed the President's request by less than one percent. The amount
authorized is substantial, but I am concerned it may not be enough. We
must insist that intelligence activities be pursued with efficiency,
that funds provided be used wisely and well. We would make a mistake,
in my judgment, however, if we did not invest enough in intelligence,
and thereby risked our Nation's preeminence in this area. I hope in the
years to come we will be able to devote more resources to this critical
underpinning of our security.
[[Page H9731]]
Mr. Speaker, I commend the conference agreement to the House, and
recommend its approval. I, too, want to compliment the staff of the
committee. I think the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has
been well served by having an outstanding staff. Mike Sheehy has been
the director on our side, and I want to thank him and all the members
of the Democratic staff for the outstanding work they have done,
especially for me over the last four years as the ranking member. I
also want to thank the majority staff; they have done an outstanding
job.
I think maybe our finest hour was on the question of encryption, an
issue which still has not been resolved, but I must say that I felt
very proud of the fact that we had a strong majority vote out of our
committee. I think we sent a very powerful message about the importance
of this technology, and of the challenge that law enforcement and our
intelligence agencies have in dealing with it, and why it is so
important for this Congress to be very, very careful how we proceed so
we do not undermine law enforcement and national security.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman again for his kind remarks.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I think Members and those watching the proceedings can
see the caliber of people in the ranking member, as exemplified by what
he said and the service he has provided.
People need to know that the way our system works with oversight is
that the most sensitive matters are shared with the ranking member, the
chairman of this body and the other body, and I cannot imagine a more
honorable man, a more efficient, capable professional than the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks). I mean what I say. We are sorely
going to miss him up there. I am sure the gentleman's shoes will be
properly filled, but it is going to be a tough deal.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague, the distinguished
gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), who is chairman of our
Subcommittee on Human Intelligence, Analysis, and Counterintelligence.
(Mr. McCOLLUM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. McCOLLUM. I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me, Mr.
Speaker. I wish to express my appreciation for this bill, for the
conference report, for all the work that has been done, and for
everybody who has put a lot of time in on it. It authorizes funding for
the intelligence and intelligence-related activities for this coming
year.
As the chairman of the Subcommittee on Human Intelligence, Analysis,
and Counterintelligence, I am pleased to say the report continues the
efforts of the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) and of my
subcommittee to put more eyes and ears on the streets around the world
to detect, penetrate, and disrupt the movement of drugs to our cities,
the planning of terrorists against our citizens, the shipment of
nuclear components to rogue states, and the actions of Nations against
our interests abroad.
What this country faced during the Cold War was fundamentally a
single military threat from the combined forces of the Warsaw Pact.
Today, standing on the rubble of the Berlin Wall, we face new
transnational threats that in many cases arise in smaller, poorer, and
more often obscure capitals and cities in Latin America, the Near East,
and Africa.
Drug cartels reach out from the coca fields of southern Colombia and
the poppy fields of Burma to poison our cities. Terrorist networks run
from rural Afghanistan to Nairobi, Dar es Salaam, the Balkans, and even
New York to kill our citizens and threaten our peace.
Decisions taken in Tehran, Baku, T'Blisi, and Ashgabat may affect the
exploitation of the vast oil fields of the Caspian Sea, and through
that, the world's economy.
It is not enough to know how badly our cities are being poisoned by
cocaine and heroin from Latin America and East Asia. It is not enough
to know how large a crater was left behind by terrorists in Africa. It
is not enough to document how adversely our interests might be affected
by the route of a pipeline through central Eurasia.
Rather, we must know the plans and intentions of those behind the
transnational threats and the concerns that touch our country, its
citizens, and its interests. We must know all of this before it is too
late for us to act. We need to know the who, the where, and the how of
drug shipments coming to Miami, New York and San Diego; of a truck bomb
to be left in the front of an embassy in Africa; of a plan for hostile
control of oil from the Caspian sea.
For that we must have the eyes and ears of our case officers, and
technology, on the streets where these threats originate. No amount of
logic or divination by our analysts back here in Washington can pick up
the launch of a drug boat in the Caribbean or the Eastern Pacific, or
the fusing of a bomb intended for a U.S. embassy. That must be done by
the brave men and women of the intelligence community, on the front
lines of this national endeavor. That Mr. Speaker is where they must be
if the U.S. is to move away from being reactive to the transnational
threats to becoming proactive in our efforts to frustrate and hinder as
best we can future catastrophes.
With that, I would like to speak to one particular portion of the
bill which has given pause to some of our Members this morning. That
concerns a very minor change but a very significant change in the law
dealing with wiretaps.
As the terrorist threat has grown, it has become apparent that we
have had a problem, as people decide to evade a wiretap that is ordered
by a court, and they decide to go to other phones than the stationary
phone in the single court order that is presented, where you have just
a single phone you are allowed to tap.
We have had a lot of debate about this issue. In this bill there is a
provision that I think is very refined that goes to the issue. We have
a provision in this bill that simply changes the law to say that a
court, when it goes about considering whether to order a wiretap that
allows, as it can now do, somebody to be followed and every phone they
use to be tapped, rather than simply a stationary phone in the order,
and the current law allows that, but instead of requiring the court to
find an intent, a specific criminal intent to evade the tap, that
instead we may reach the conclusion, the judge may reach the conclusion
that the person is evading the tap by the circumstances that are
presented, because the intent is very hard to prove a lot of times.
There is no expansion of more phones that can be tapped. In fact,
there is a narrowing of that. In fact, in our provision we narrow it so
now, if this becomes law, once somebody leaves an area where a phone
is, let's say he is on a street corner and walks away from a phone
booth and somebody is following him along, figuring out what he is
doing, that phone cannot be tapped anymore. We cannot tap a phone to
listen in on anybody's conversation except the person who is indeed the
person being suspected of whatever it is that we are tapping their
phone on.
This is a very minor change. No Member should mistake this as some
major addition to the wiretap laws. It is not. I would encourage
everybody to vote for this bill. It is a very important bill.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Dixon).
Mr. DIXON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding time
to me.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the conference report, H.R.
3694, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999. I also
want to recognize the hard and long hours of leadership that the
gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) has dedicated to producing a
bipartisan bill that provides the necessary resources to our Nation's
intelligence community.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) was joined in his efforts by
the ranking Democratic member, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Norm
Dicks), who is serving his final year on the Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence. The committee will certainly miss the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Dicks), his insights, and continued input that he has
had into
[[Page H9732]]
the areas of reconnaissance and other advanced technology problems we
have addressed.
I suspect that it will be difficult if not impossible to replace him
on the committee. I will miss his presence in the committee's hearing
room but I look forward to his continuing leadership on the
Subcommittee on National Security of the Committee on Appropriations.
Mr. Speaker, the conference report authorizes appropriate levels of
funding to support our country's cadre of human intelligence case
officers. These individuals toil in anonymity and often times perform
the most sensitive and dangerous operations in furtherance of our
national security. The duties and responsibilities of human
intelligence case officers are multiple, and the training needed to
produce an effective case officer is rigorous and intense.
The measure we are presently considering provides badly needed
resources to the Directorate of Operations of the Central Intelligence
Agency. It is within this directorate that CIA's case officers reside.
Additionally, resources are also provided for the Defense Human
Intelligence Service, which houses the Department of Defense's case
officers.
The resources authorized by this conference report provide for
additional training to ensure that case officers possess the necessary
skills to meet future intelligence challenges, such as terrorism,
proliferation, and narcotics trafficking.
Human intelligence is the one form of information that provides
policymakers a look at the plans and intentions of other countries,
foreign organizations, and terrorist groups. This bill also provides
for the necessary tools that case officers need to carry out operations
while providing for their personal security and that of their assets.
Technology and its uses can only take us so far, but it is the human
intelligence that often provides the critical degree of corroboration.
To ensure that these resources are put to the best possible uses, I
will continue to monitor these programs during the next Congress in an
effort to be certain that the initiatives designed to enhance our human
intelligence capabilities are implemented.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report that this conference report
authorizes resources for continuing undergraduate training programs at
CIA, NSA, and DIA. This program will be one of the many legacies of the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Louis Stokes), who is retiring after 30 years
of service to this Nation.
When the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stokes) served as chairman of the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, he was struck by the lack
of minorities in the intelligence community. Even today the fact is
that the intelligence community lags behind the Federal labor sector in
its representation of minorities and women.
The undergraduate training program identifies and recruits qualified
minorities out of high school who have demonstrated abilities in
disciplines essential to the effective performance of intelligence
missions. These students are provided a scholarship to colleges or
universities of their choosing, and in return agree to work for the
sponsoring agency for a specified length of time.
Last summer I attended the graduation ceremonies of students in NSA's
program. I was impressed by the quality and the caliber of the
students, and left with confidence that the future of our intelligence
community is in good hands. This report represents a continuing
commitment to the undergraduate training program and to the ideals of
equality of opportunity. I will continue to review the administration
of these important programs in succeeding years to ensure that they are
meeting their goals of providing equal employment opportunities to
women and minorities.
Mr. Speaker, the threat to our Nation posed by international
terrorism was made abundantly clear with the bombing of the embassies
in Kenya and Tanzania. The threat to our national security posed by
nuclear proliferation was underscored when India and Pakistan detonated
nuclear devices.
Finally, the devastation inflicted on our fellow Americans by
international narcotics traffickers is visible in every city, village,
and township. This conference report authorizes resources to enable the
intelligence community to mount operations against these transitional
threats. It will not be an easy chore to combat these threats, but this
conference report arms the men and women of the intelligence community
with the weapons they need to meet these challenges.
{time} 1100
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I must pay tribute to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Skaggs) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman)
who are both leaving the committee. They have certainly served the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence well.
I too would like to thank the staff on a bipartisan way for their
total cooperation, but would like to single out one member who is
leaving us and that is Mr. Humphrey, Democratic senior counsel, who is
moving on to another Federal Agency. I have had an opportunity to work
with him on an issue very, very closely. I appreciate his abilities and
admire him for moving out at the appropriate time and look forward to
our continued friendship.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) my colleague and friend, the
subcommittee Cardinal of extraordinary importance to the intelligence
effort.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida
for yielding me the time.
I want to say first that it has been a real honor to serve as a
Member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, this term for
8 years and in the previous term for 6 years, and to be entrusted with
some of the most critical secrets relative to our own national security
during that period of time.
I am real honored to work with people like the gentleman from Florida
(Chairman Goss), my distinguished colleague who before coming to
Congress even had his own outstanding record as a member of our
intelligence community, and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks),
our ranking member.
The gentleman from Washington and I have had a chance to work
together for a long time as members of the Subcommittee on National
Security of the Committee on Appropriations, which I have the privilege
to chair.
Mr. Speaker, I want to say that these two Members, and the other
members of our committee, have dedicated their lives to the security of
the United States of America without any sign of partisanship, without
any discussion or controversy, other than sometimes good honest
opinions on what might be right or what might be wrong.
As has been pointed out, the staff has been unusual in their
dedication to the members of the committee, and to the mission of the
committee.
This is a good bill. I wanted to start off by saying that this bill
meets the requirements of our intelligence community, but actually it
does not. There are a lot more things that we need to be doing that we
have not been able to do in this bill because of the financial
limitations.
But it does a good job and it is important that the United States of
America, as the leading Nation in the world, the leading military
Nation in the world, that our Nation have the ability to hear or see
what potential threat there might be to us, to our people, and to our
national interest. And that is what intelligence is all about.
Whether we are dealing with a military situation such as we dealt
with in Iraq with Saddam Hussein, or in Bosnia, or potentially in
Kosovo, wherever it might be, Korea is one of the most realistic
examples of where good intelligence is necessary, because military
operations could happen overnight. And especially in places like the
Mideast. We have to be aware of what a potential threat there is out
there.
After the Iron Curtain melted and the Berlin Wall came down, many of
us felt that we could breathe a sigh of relief. No more threats to our
interests, no more threats to our own security. And all of the sudden
up from the sands of the deserts of Iraq came Saddam Hussein.
We do not know who might be next to raise the ugly threat of a threat
against the United States militarily or one of the growing threats is
terrorism. The terrorists operate in the dark of the night with
stealth, sneaky tactics. We have to not only be aware of the military,
but also aware of the potential threat from terrorism.
[[Page H9733]]
Also another major subject is drug interdiction; to detect who the
drug movers are that are bringing the devastating drugs into our
country that are so devastating. This bill goes a long way towards
meeting those requirements.
But I must say there is more that needs to be done, Mr. Speaker. And
with the leadership of the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) and
the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) and the members of the
committee, I am satisfied that we will meet those obligations.
I am also proud to say that the Subcommittee on Appropriations that I
have the privilege to chair works extremely closely with the Members
and the staff of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
because we have the funding responsibility. We are obligated to find
the money that this legislation authorizes. We have had a tremendous
working relationship. We are all working together for what is in the
best interest of the United States of America.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report to accompany
House bill, H.R. 3694, that authorizes funds for intelligence and
intelligence-related activities for Fiscal Year 1999. This conference
report, Mr. Speaker, reflects a constant theme: That, in order to
protect our nation, we must provide for an Intelligence Community that
can be strategic, as well as a tactical; flexible, as well as resolute;
and worldwide, as well as specialized.
What do I mean?
Strategic as well as Tactical: Our conference report has paid close
attention to the needs of the Department of Defense for tactical
intelligence as reflected in the request for the Tactical Intelligence
and Related Activities program, or TIARA, and for the Joint Military
Intelligence Program, or JMIP. For both these programs, we have
invested in needed improvements and capabilities aimed at providing our
armed forces with the information that they need to operate effectively
in the myriad of situations that they are now asked to address. This
includes peacekeeping assignments, as well as direct military
confrontation. And whether that action might be with Iraq or in Kosovo,
we must work to make sure that the men and women that we are putting in
harm's way have the tactical edge. That edge is comprised of raw
information and analysis * * * in other words: Intelligence.
But tactical intelligence alone will not win the day. Prior to
deployment of our military forces, regardless of the mission, various
types of strategic intelligence collection and analysis are required in
order to ensure success. This strategic intelligence ranges from human
intelligence that protects our forces by warning of upcoming plans and
intentions of those who look for opportunities to hurt, sometimes
fatally, our troops, to indications and warnings of key, significant
activities that give us technical insight into the types of weaponry
and forces that our military will confront in the years to come.
Put simply, the military must have both strategic and tactical
intelligence to be successful in defending our interests and way of
life in this ear of worldwide turmoil. Mr. Speaker, in my capacity as
Chairman of the National Security Subcommittee for Appropriations, I
have the luxury to look across the broad spectrum of our nation's
defense. I can say, without reservation, that intelligence is the first
line of defense. Without it, without the investments being made through
this conference report, we do nothing less than risk our national
security. It is that simple. Let me provide a few examples.
Flexible as well as resolute: This legislation recognizes that
changes in technology will require changes that we cannot currently
anticipate. These technological advances will determine how we will
collect intelligence against the new translational threats and
challenges that now confront us. Drug cartels and terrorist networks
operate through fiber, on the net, and across continents. Our ``eyes
and ears'' must keep up with these complexities if they are to give us
warning on a shipment of heroin or a truckload of C4. For these
reasons, the Conference Report provides the means for the investments
in research and development that should enable our collectors to keep
up with our adversaries.
Finally, worldwide as well as specialized: For the Intelligence
Community, the Cold War was trench warfare. The enemy's command post--
the Kremlin--was fixed and its deployments were static. In contrast,
the war against narcotics traffickers, terrorists, and proliferators of
weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological weapons,
is guerrilla warfare. The command post of our current adversary could
be in southern Columbia, rural Afghanistan, or in a ship headed south
down the Bosphorus. They could be in Baghdad, in the Balkans, or in
Port-au-Prince. To detect and counter these new adversaries, we must
have the ``eyes and ears'' of our Intelligence Community in the fields,
on the streets, in the air, and over the waters where they operate. For
these reasons, our Conference Report provides the Community with the
means to deploy more officers, and more technology, where they must be
to meet these challenges: In the field.
Our conference report, Mr. Speaker, begins to provide the investment
that the Intelligence Community needs during fiscal year 1999: to
develop its capability to collect tactical, as well as strategic
intelligence, to meet and to exploit changes in technology, and to put
its ``eyes and ears'' where they are needed.
I am particularly proud of this report--and of the Committee that
produced it--because it will be my last as a Member of the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, or HPSCI. Over my 14 years
on this Committee, I have been proud to have represented not only the
people of this country, but also, in a very special way the Members of
this House, in the oversight of the unique, exciting, and sometimes
strange mix of espionage, technology, and plain old bureaucracy that is
our Intelligence Community. What I would like to end with today is a
reassurannce to my colleagues here, and our constituents everywhere,
that the Members of this Committee have worked hard to begin to rebuild
an Intelligence Community that will have the capability to collect
against whatever enemies and adversaries we will face tomorrow, and in
the next century.
Like most Americans, I doubted I would ever see a world in which
Moscow would not be the focus of our concern and our collection
efforts. Though, to be sure, it cannot be altogether ignored. Like most
today, I cannot imagine a world now without drug traffickers and
terrorists as our major adversaries and targets of collection.
But times change, and threats grow and recede. What we in HPSCI have
worked so hard to do is to have an Intelligence Community with the
capability to confront and to collect against any adversary that will
threaten our country, its interest and most importantly, its citizens.
For that, and for their steadfastness to this cause, I thank those on
the Committee staff, and my colleagues on HPSCI. In particular, I thank
Chairman Goss and Norm Dicks, the Ranking Democratic Member, for their
vision, as well as for their hard work in achieving these critical
goals. I would also extend a special thank you and congratulations to
Norm Dicks, who is rotating off the Committee with me, and to Ms.
Harman and Mr. Skaggs, both of whom are retiring from Congress. It has
been my pleasure to serve with all of you, and I believe that you leave
the Committee having served our nation's defense needs very well.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Bishop), my colleague and a distinguished member of the
committee.
Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the conference agreement on
H.R. 3694, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999.
First, let me take this opportunity to congratulate the gentleman
from Florida (Chairman Goss) for his efforts in producing a bipartisan
bill that addresses the needs of the United States intelligence
community.
Additionally, praise must also be extended to the ranking Democratic
member, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) for his work in
helping to craft this important piece of legislation and for his
service to the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. There is
perhaps no Member in this great institution who has dedicated more time
and energy to understanding the technology supporting our intelligence
community than the gentleman from Washington.
Due to the service limitations placed on members of the Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence, he will be leaving the committee in
the next Congress. I will personally miss his leadership on technical
and tactical issues that confront the committee, and the committee as a
whole will miss his innovative ideas and his commitment to maintaining
the best intelligence community in the world.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Skaggs) and the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) will also be leaving the
committee, and I want to take this opportunity to wish them well and to
say that these two defenders of democracy, freedom and justice will
also be sorely missed. Mr. Speaker, I say, ``Thank you, Mr. Skaggs and
Ms. Harman, for your friendship and for your commitment to
[[Page H9734]]
the men and the women of the national security and intelligence
communities.''
Also leaving the committee is Mr. Calvin Humphrey, as was mentioned
by the gentleman from California (Mr. Dixon), who was the first
minority, African-American, in our nation's history to hold a
professional staff position with the intelligence committee. He has
provided professional support to the committee for the last 11 years.
He served under six chairmen and has served in almost every official
senior staff position with the committee.
Mr. Speaker, he has certainly enhanced our national security, and the
efficiency of our country's intelligence community has been enhanced by
his service. We will certainly miss him very much.
We congratulate him, however, as he assumes a senior level position
with a Federal agency. I'm confident he will be successful and continue
to contribute to the setterment of our nation.
Mr. Speaker, the conference report before us today authorizes
resources to ensure that our intelligence capabilities are sufficient
to meet the contingencies of the next millennium. With each passing
day, our intelligence community is called upon to respond to more and
more contingencies within a restrained budget.
We all recall with horror the cowardly and ruthless attacks on our
embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. A number of
representatives of the intelligence community were on the ground in
both countries in a short period of time collecting and analyzing
information. The efforts of the intelligence community to date have
been indispensable to the leads that have been developed and the
arrests that have been made in these bombings.
Additionally, it has been widely reported in a number of our Nation's
periodicals that planned attacks on other embassies have been
interrupted and avoided as a result of the dedication and hard work of
intelligence community personnel.
This conference report provides resources for our intelligence
community's counterterrorism efforts. Additionally, funding is provided
to collect, process, analyze, and disseminate critical intelligence
that helps shield our sons and daughters serving in our Nation's armed
forces against the deadly force of terrorism.
In short, let me say that I am confident that this conference report
will assist in maintaining the intelligence capabilities necessary to
provide policymakers with the information they need to make key
decisions affecting our national security.
Mr. Speaker, just last week I met with individuals concerned with the
fate of Americans still unaccounted for as a result of wars that our
Nation has been involved in. Last January, I traveled to Southeast Asia
to review our intelligence activities and operations in that region of
the world. Specifically, I focused my attention on efforts aimed at
achieving a full accounting of Americans still unaccounted for as a
result of the Vietnam war.
Again, I want to ensure our Nation's veterans and the families of
those soldiers, airmen, sailors and marines still unaccounted for that
this conference report contains the necessary resources to permit the
intelligence community to continue its efforts to determine the fate of
those who have yet to come home.
Mr. Speaker, this conference report provides critical support to all
facets of our intelligence community. Resources are authorized to
sustain the intelligence community's efforts to assist in providing
force protection intelligence to our troops and to assist in the
collection and analysis of critical intelligence bearing on such
challenging issues as counterterrorism, counternarcotics, and
counterproliferation.
I am proud to support this conference agreement and I urge my
colleagues to support it as well.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle) my friend, former Governor of
Delaware, and a member of the committee.
Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I also join in support of the conference
report for H.R. 3694, the intelligence authorization bill, and give due
credit to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) and to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) who worked so very hard on this to do
such a wonderful job.
United States policymakers must have the most comprehensive,
responsive and timely strategic perspective on major global changes. To
help provide this perspective, we rely on our intelligence agencies to
collect, sort, and analyze information from all over the world.
When this bill was originally before the House in May, I expressed
concerns about the capability of the intelligence community to tackle
specialized financial issues like economic analysis and tracking
illicit money laundering. As global financial markets grow and
intertwine, timely economic intelligence in tracking the flow of
laundered money becomes increasingly important to the United States
national security.
Support for economic intelligence was downgraded earlier this decade,
but the need for stronger support in this area was driven home by the
degree to which the Asian financial crisis caught our government flat-
footed. If we are to rely on the United States intelligence community
to provide this kind of support, it is essential that we provide them
with the resources necessary to do the job.
Also essential to our efforts to fight increasingly sophisticated
international organized crime operations and narcotics traffickers is
our ability to track the flow of money. With the right tools and
support, the intelligence community can provide key insights into these
areas to support our law enforcement agencies. And I would add that an
ability to follow the money is vital to our efforts to unravel the
complex web of Usama Bin Ladin's international terrorist connections.
The members and staff of the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence have followed these issues closely this year, and I am
satisfied that this conference report makes some headway in addressing
these critical needs.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this conference report.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), who is also leaving the
committee. She has been one of the most outstanding Members I think of
the House, both on the Committee on National Security and the Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence, and she will be sorely missed in the
next Congress. She has done an outstanding job on the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence, she is a quick learner, and I am going to
miss her service.
Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Dicks) for yielding me this time, and for 26 years of friendship so
far. I thank our other colleagues for their very kind remarks about me
and my service on the committee.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report to accompany
H.R. 3694, the bill authorizing intelligence spending for fiscal year
1999. As we have heard, this is my last intelligence authorization.
Before commenting on the bill, I would like to commend the gentleman
from Florida (Chairman Goss) for generating an unusually collaborative
and bipartisan environment in which talented colleagues and a superb
staff can work productively. It was a special goal of mine to serve on
this committee and I have loved it.
As I have often said, intelligence spending is intelligent spending,
perhaps now more than ever. The U.S. no longer confronts a single,
well-known adversary, but a fluid international environment where
weapons of mass destruction can be had on the international market for
a price; where crime syndicates organize across national borders; where
terrorists, as we sadly experienced this summer, can strike with deadly
force.
Mr. Speaker, it is crucial that we be able to anticipate and meet
these new challenges.
{time} 1115
Despite our efforts to strengthen the nonproliferation regime, the
demand for weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery has
not waned, and neither has the supply.
This past year, after information indicated an increase in the in-
flow of missile technology and know-how to Iran, Congress directed the
administration to impose sanctions on entities involved in these
transfers. Congress' action will help curb efforts by Iran to
[[Page H9735]]
accelerate its missile programs and impede its capability to field
missiles that can strike Israel, our NATO ally Turkey, and targets in
Central Europe; missiles which could be armed with chemical, biological
and nuclear warheads.
We have also seen alarming developments elsewhere in Asia. Recently,
North Korea tested its first Taepo Dong 1 missile. We anticipated the
launch, monitored it, and now know more about this missile's
performance than the North Koreans. This new missile does not yet allow
North Korea to deliver a weapon to the United States, or reach
significant military targets it could not strike already, but it puts
it on that path. The launch also advertised North Korea's capabilities
to would-be buyers, a very disturbing development.
Mr. Speaker, these are just two examples of proliferation in already
unstable regions of the world. Intelligence resources will be crucial
not only in monitoring these developing weapon capabilities but also in
shaping policies to stem attempts to proliferate this technology.
Intelligence is also increasingly essential for success on the future
battlefield. As a member of both the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence and the Committee on National Security, I have witnessed
the incredible advantages that information technology provides to our
military forces. I have strongly supported improvements to our eyes and
ears in the sky so that commanders will have a complete understanding
of the battlefield, and the enemy's locations and intentions. Combined
with advances in precision weapon systems, we have vastly improved the
capabilities of our Nation's armed forces.
I am aware that some of our colleagues would prefer to reduce the
priority of satellite reconnaissance and its support to military
operations. My view, however, is that there is no more important
mission for our intelligence community than supporting our combatant
commanders. Our intelligence capabilities are the crux of our defense
modernization efforts, and we cannot shortchange intelligence without
significantly weakening our military.
Mr. Speaker, accurate and timely intelligence makes our Nation safer
and armed forces more effective. It is an investment we must protect
and nurture.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill and, on a
personal note, Mr. Speaker, to join me in sending bipartisan and
heartfelt get well wishes to Mariel Goss, a very important asset to our
committee.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
thank the gentlewoman for those very kind remarks, and for the other
remarks she has made. And I know that the gentlewoman will do well in
her next endeavor, and I certainly suspect that we will be talking in
the future.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Boehlert), a distinguished member of our committee who makes a very
valuable contribution and we are pleased to have him.
(Mr. BOEHLERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, it is important that our colleagues and
the American people understand that intelligence, as distasteful as it
sometimes may seem, is critical to the very survival of our Nation and
our way of life. This conference report focuses on those programs that
provide the best possibility of success for our Nation's first line of
defense: its intelligence community.
Specifically, this report puts a great deal of emphasis on the
future. We made some very difficult choices to cut funding for some
legacy programs so that we could add funding for critical technologies
and research and development necessary to ensure future capabilities.
The ability of our laboratories and scientists to develop new
techniques and ``leap-ahead'' technologies is critical for our
intelligence community to stay ahead of the threats that our country
faces.
This report is about the wise and prudent funding and oversight of
those intelligence collection, analysis and dissemination functions
necessary to ensure the security of our Nation, its interests and its
citizens around the world, now and into the future. So I urge my
colleagues to stand with our chairman and ranking member and support
the report.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to add to the remarks of my
colleagues and say farewell to the two distinguished gentlemen, the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Washington
(Mr. Dicks), both of whom are leaving this committee this year. They
have been great mentors for me, with respect to many intelligence
issues, and they remain great friends.
Also, to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Skaggs) and the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Harman), who are leaving not only the committee
but the Congress, I join with the other Members in wishing them well in
all of their future endeavors and thanking them most sincerely for
their very distinguished service not only in this committee but in the
Congress of the United States.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Skaggs), another one of our most distinguished
colleagues. He has been one of the hardest working members on the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. He has made an enormous
contribution in this House.
I have had the privilege of serving with him on the Committee on
Appropriations. I think of him as kind of the conscience of the House
of Representatives, and I am going to very much miss him next year, and
I want to wish him the very best in his future endeavors. I know he
will be a success wherever he goes.
Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank very much the gentleman from
Washington. I am grateful for those kind remarks, and let me return
them to him. His leadership on this committee has been extraordinary,
and the Nation is in his debt for the kind of care and attention that
he has paid to these many, many profoundly important issues.
I also extend my great thanks and admiration and respect to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), who really has conducted this
committee in an exemplary fashion.
Mr. Speaker, I arrived at the Capitol this morning for what may be my
third or fourth next to the last day of voting in this great body. It
is a cherished and awesome responsibility that we all enjoy as Members
of this House. But this committee, I think, has a special
responsibility that goes beyond that which we all share here.
Yes, we have a vital role in developing every year the spending
authorization bill for the next fiscal year. That is what is before the
House at the moment, and I urge the adoption of the 1999 bill.
But this committee has an especially critical role as proxy for our
many colleagues, in fulfilling our responsibility under that always
pertinent maxim from the days of the founding of the Republic, that,
``The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.''
On this committee that means not only vigilance with regard to the
threats posed by our enemies and adversaries abroad, and the effort to
fashion the capabilities of the intelligence community to meet those
threats, but also vigilance internally as well; vigilance against the
seductiveness of the intelligence business, the seductiveness of power,
the seductiveness of classified information, and the allure that the
chief executive can always bring through his principal assists to the
table upstairs where we debate these terribly difficult and important
issues.
We act in behalf of our colleagues in making sure that the executive
branch of government follows the law. And that is just as important a
responsibility as the one that we bear with regard to any external
threats that this country faces.
In that respect, I hope my colleagues understand how wonderful the
bipartisanship on this committee is in its service to the country in
this critical area.
It has been a real privilege to get to spend 5\1/2\ years working
with colleagues on my side and the other side of the aisle in behalf of
national security and that eternal vigilance. It has been an enormous
privilege to see the kind of dedicated staff work that goes in to
support the efforts of this committee, again motivated by an absolutely
remarkable level of patriotism and commitment to duty. I want our
colleagues and I want the country to
[[Page H9736]]
have some appreciation of that, because the vast bulk of the work that
we do is done in secret and, therefore, cannot be discussed in any
detail.
And on that point it is appropriate that on this occasion we
recognize as well the dedicated work of the thousands of intelligence
officers and workers in the intelligence business of this country, here
at home and around the world, who work extraordinarily long hours, in
very difficult circumstances, for modest compensation, because they
believe in the United States of America. Most of what they do we cannot
recognize publicly, but we can offer them, as I do, our thanks.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
say that I think we now understand what a loss the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Skaggs) is also going to be from the committee, after
those thoughtful remarks, which are consistent with all the thoughtful
work he has done for our committee all these years, and we appreciate
that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Hampshire
(Mr. Bass), who is the man who time and again seems to bail us out on
the budget matters that keep confronting us.
Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I also rise in support of the conference
report and to pay tribute to our distinguished chairman who, under some
recently difficult circumstances, has certainly led this committee with
great expertise and integrity.
I also want to pay tribute to our two ranking members who will not be
coming back with us next year, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bill
Young) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Norm Dicks). I cannot
think of two individuals who are more committed to a strong and capable
defense and an efficient and effective intelligence capability.
I came to the committee and I watched the gentleman from Washington
defend an issue that was particularly near and dear to him, and this
individual just would not take no for an answer. And I asked one of our
ever respectful staff people, what is the story with this guy? And they
said, ``Norm Dicks never has a bad day.''
Over the last 2 years, and after 38 or so hearings, and 30 formal
hearings, visits to Bosnia, to North Korea, to China, reports from
Central America and from Africa and other places all over the world, I
found, much to my surprise, that we live in a world that is far more
dangerous than I ever thought it was. Those dangers are more diffuse
and more difficult to identify and to contain. Indeed, I feel, as a
member of this committee now, like a Dutch boy at the dike as we seek
to protect Americans against threats both here and abroad.
This bill moves us forward in the direction of protecting our
strategic national defense and economic interests around the world. We
may never succeed, but the fact that we have a committee and a Congress
that is dedicated to addressing these issues and doing it in such a
fashion so that our scarce resources are expended in the most efficient
and productive fashion, is very commendable to this Congress.
So I rise in support of this conference committee report and urge its
passage.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time each side has?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sessions). The gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Goss) has 9\1/2\ minutes remaining, and the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Dicks) has 4\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Nevada (Mr. Gibbons), who is a decorated Air Force officer from Nevada
who we are proud to have on our committee.
(Mr. GIBBONS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman for
yielding me this time, and I rise today in strong support of the
conference report to accompany H.R. 3694, the intelligence
authorization bill for fiscal year 1999.
Mr. Speaker, I have the high honor and distinct pleasure of being
able to serve on both the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence and the House Committee on National Security. This allows
me the opportunity to look across the operational military and defense
issues, as well as the intelligence functions that not only support
but, in fact, participate in the various defense operations.
I can tell my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, that this is a very prudent
report. It is a conference report that not only sustains currently
required capabilities, this is a report that provides our military
forces with the informational resources necessary to build warfighter
confidence and perhaps even keep them out of harm's way. It also seeks
to provide them with the indications and warning intelligence that
allow them the advantage in a conflict.
Let there be no mistake, Mr. Speaker, this is not a more secure world
since the end of the Cold War. While it is true that we do not face the
imminent threat of nuclear annihilation from behind the Iron Curtain,
the events of the past few months regarding ballistic missiles and
nuclear weapons development and testing by nations seeking to have
arsenals that include weapons of mass destruction, strongly suggest
that we may well face that imminent threat once again on a broader
scale, and sooner than many think or may even want to believe.
{time} 1130
Add to that threats posed by international terrorism, transnational
threats such as narcotics trafficking, organized international crime,
the rampant proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and use of
chemical and biological weapons by rogue nations. Activities we have
witnessed recently tell us that these threats are more pressing and
considerably more dangerous than they have ever been. The problems
associated with collecting and understanding information about today's
risks are in many ways more difficult because formal government
boundaries are not limiting the threats to our peace and security.
This conference report begins to provide our intelligence community
and military forces the infrastructure necessary to give the U.S. that
information dominance to increase our security.
That is the bottom line, the security of the United States. The
Constitution of the United States places a responsibility on each of us
to act in the best interest of the U.S. and our fellow citizens. We
have done that here in this conference report.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) who has made a valuable contribution
to the particular conference report before us.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Portman).
Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for
yielding me the time and for his strong personal support from the
outset for the worthy effort to designate the CIA compound in Langley,
Virginia ``The George Bush Center for Intelligence.''
Earlier this year with the help of the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Goss), with the help of the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hamilton), the gentleman from California
(Mr. Dreier), the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) and others we
were able to get such legislation passed.
I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) and the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) as well as Senators Dick Shelby,
Bob Kerrey and others in the conference committee for including the
Bush legislation in this very important authorization bill today.
It is a very fitting tribute to George Bush, the only President to
have served as CIA Director. His tenure from 1976 to 1977 was a
difficult time when the agency was under fire from investigative
committees up here on the Hill, from the press and from the public. The
CIA was demoralized and in need of new leadership and direction. George
Bush turned the tide. He was key to developing an executive order to
prevent future violations of the agency's mandate and, most important,
he provided the steady hand of leadership at a turbulent time and in
doing so improved the mission and morale of the CIA.
When he resigned his post, Senator Daniel Inouye said, ``Bush was one
of the best CIA directors we had. The morale of the intelligence
community has been inspired by Bush's leadership.''
Mr. Speaker, as a decorated Navy pilot in World War II, a
distinguished
[[Page H9737]]
Congressman, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Liaison to China,
CIA Director, Vice President and President, he has ably served our
Nation for over 50 years and inspired many of us. He exemplifies the
highest values and principles of public service.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PORTMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I just want to commend the gentleman for
outstanding leadership on this issue. I am very pleased to have been a
cosponsor of his legislation. I think this is one of the best things
this Congress has done. I want to commend the gentleman for the great
leadership that he has demonstrated. George Bush was a great American
and I think this was an outstanding idea. I want to congratulate him on
his leadership.
Mr. PORTMAN. I thank the gentleman for his support, too, and for his
yielding time.
Mr. Speaker, again I want to thank the Members in this body for
helping make this possible, because George Bush does represent the
highest values and principles in public service, integrity, honesty,
and has set an example really for all of us. This is the appropriate
recognition of his remarkable and inspirational service to our Nation.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr).
Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida,
the distinguished chairman of the committee, for yielding me this time
for me to do something that I do not like to do and, that is, to rise
in opposition to this bill.
Comments were made earlier that there was a minor change to the
electronic surveillance or wiretapping legislation. The change that is
contained in this bill is neither minor nor inconsequential. It
represents a fundamental shift in wiretapping procedures in this
country.
Back in 1996, Mr. Speaker, we debated extensively provisions almost
identical to these that are found in section 604 of this conference
report. After extensive debate, this House defeated the expanded powers
that were sought by the executive branch.
Essentially, Mr. Speaker, this changes Federal wiretapping laws in a
way that allows the government to seek a court order in any case, not
limited to foreign intelligence surveillance, in any case that a
Federal wiretap order is sought to provide that the wiretap follow the
person no matter what phone that person uses. No longer would the
standard be if you have grounds to tap and grounds to obtain a court
order, you tap a particular person's phone, and if that person moves to
another phone, you either have to provide a showing that they are
deliberately trying to thwart or you have to then get another court
order.
This is a very important civil liberty and privacy right. The
government, however, under this legislation if this bill passes would
be able to ``issue an order authorizing the interception of all
communications made by a particular person regardless of what telephone
he may use.'' That is language from the conference report. To argue
with a straight face that that is a minor change to our electronic
surveillance or wiretap laws is disingenuous. This is a significant
change. It needs to be debated fully. I urge that this not be allowed
to stand.
I rise in opposition to this conference report, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), the author of the provision, but
I would also point out before I do that any Members who wish to read
the section in question, it is section 604, published yesterday in the
Congressional Record of the House on page H9530, and I think it is very
clear, and the safeguards that are necessary I think are equally clear.
Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I want to point out to the Members that
this is truly a minor change in the wiretap laws. It is designed to
combat terrorism. Current law does permit multipoint, or roving
wiretaps. Current law does permit this. Court approval is still
required under this bill. Probable cause of criminal activity is still
required for any wiretap.
Current law requires the court to find intent to evade wiretap before
allowing the tap of whatever phone is used by the suspect as opposed to
a specific phone. But you can have it if that intent is proven. The
bill simply changes this. It permits the court-ordered wiretap that
follows the criminal terrorist suspect to whatever phone he uses if the
court determines his actions show he is trying to evade the tap, not
requiring the specific criminal intent which has been very hard to do.
The bill also protects innocent people by limiting the tap of any phone
to only those times when the criminal or terrorist suspect actually is
using that phone.
This is a very minor change. It is a change allowing the court to
follow the suspect as it is doing now with the simple showing that
there is an evasion effort by the criminal suspect rather than having
to prove the technical intent which is almost impossible now to prove.
That is all that this does.
I urge a vote for the authorization bill.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) who has been one of our most
outstanding members.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for
his kind words and for the time that he has yielded me, and I thank the
distinguished chairman for his leadership in bringing this legislation
to the floor. It is good to see you here, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Speaker, one of the concerns that I wanted to address in my
remarks today is about the issue of whistle blowers. One of the major
issues of contention indeed between the House and Senate committees
over the past 2 years has been how to address the issue of employees of
the executive branch who face reprisals or threats of reprisals for
bringing information to the intelligence committees concerning serious
violations of law in intelligence activities of the United States.
I myself personally supported the Senate amendment which was very
clear about those employees who brought to the attention of Congress
issues of gross mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority
and specific danger to public health and safety. I thought that that
amendment should have been passed, but we did not prevail in
conference. But our chairman has made a valiant effort to protect those
who come forth with information. While I would have liked to have seen
the broader language, I am pleased that we have the report language
that specifically says that those who come forward with information who
have a right to have that information will not have reprisals against
them.
While it is not disputed that the Congress is entitled by law to
receive prompt reports of any illegal intelligence activities,
officials of the executive branch have asserted that the Constitution
does not permit Congress to vest in lower-level employees the right to
disclose classified information, even to Members of Congress. These
officials have asserted that any attempt to do so by Congress would
lead them to recommend the President veto such legislation.
The better constitutional view, of course, is that national security
is a shared responsibility of the legislative and executive branches
and that the Constitution does not deny Congress the power to direct
executive activities and gain access to information needed for the
performance of legislative duties.
The conferees have made very clear in the findings and the
legislative history of the legislation the following:
First, Congress, as a coequal branch of government, has a need to
know of allegations of wrongdoing within the intelligence community;
Second, no basis in law exists for requiring prior authorization of
disclosures to the intelligence committees of Congress by employees of
the executive branch of classified information about wrongdoing within
the intelligence community;
Third, the nondisclosure agreements signed by employees of the
Central Intelligence Agency stipulate that nothing contained in the
agreement prohibits the employee from reporting intelligence activities
the employee considers to be unlawful or improper directly to the
select committees on intelligence of the Congress; and,
Finally, separate and apart from the process established by the
legislation
[[Page H9738]]
through the inspector general, as proposed by our distinguished
chairman, an intelligence community employee should not be subject to
reprisals or threats of reprisals for making a report to appropriate
members or staff of the intelligence committees about wrongdoing within
the intelligence community.
Mr. Speaker, the conferees have thus agreed to legislation that
establishes a new and additional procedure for employees of
intelligence agencies to bring issues of urgent concern to the
attention of Congress through the offices of their inspector general.
This procedure provides the employee who uses it the protections of
confidentiality now found in the CIA and 1978 inspector general acts
and discourages reprisals and threat of reprisals through a new
reporting requirement on the heads of intelligence agencies.
I trust, Mr. Speaker, that these findings and admonitions will guide
the Director of the CIA and the heads of intelligence agencies in the
treatment of intelligence community employees who seek to bring
important information to the attention of Congress.
Again I repeat my support for the report language that says even if
you do not go this route, no reprisals.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
(Mr. SHUSTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this
legislation.
The Fiscal Year 1999 intelligence authorization addresses a wide
range of the intelligence community's current and future needs and it
remedies areas where Congress has felt that funding was insufficient.
Importantly, the conference report strengthens the ability of our
intelligence agencies to respond to rogue states such as Iraq, to
weapons proliferation by global competitor states such as China and
Russia, and to terrorism. Today, anti-American terrorism ranges from
the recent embassy bombings in Africa to murders and kidnappings in
Latin America. The terrorist of the 1990's can be found in loosely knit
groups motivated by anti-American hatreds, in groups such as the Usama
bin Laden organization or the Hisballah in Lebanon or in the FARC in
Colombia. In all cases, intelligence is called on repeatedly to track
the activities of these individuals and groups, to provide threat
warning, and to support the capture and prosecution of those
responsible for the deaths of U.S. citizens.
I wholeheartedly support the conference report because it also takes
steps to strengthen key areas of U.S. intelligence collection and
analytic capabilities. The conference report provides for more robust
recapitalization and modernization of our signal intelligence
capabilities. The conference report allocates increased funding to
strengthen Human Intelligence collection. The conference report also
provides additional funding to enhance the ability of intelligence
analysts to assess the information that has been gathered. The
intelligence committees recognize that increased and wiser investment
in information age technologies will be necessary to cope with the
large volumes of data. Finally, this conference report includes added
resources to strengthen the ability of the Intelligence Community to
perform force protection duties to protect our forces against terrorism
and defense acquisition programs and operational activities against
espionage.
As a Member who has long supported efforts to wage and win the war on
drugs, I applaud this conference report for what it does to enhance the
Intelligence Community's ability to combat major multinational
narcotics trafficking organizations. Although the Intelligence
Community's share is but a small percentage of the total National Drug
Control Strategy budget, intelligence counternarcotics programs have
inflicted substantial damage on a number of the world's leading
narcotics trafficking organizations in Latin America, and in Southeast
and Southwest Asia. The counternarcotics programs supported by this
conference report have and will continue to have a devastating impact
on some of the world's most sophisticated and dangerous criminal
organizations.
The conference report will strengthen intelligence support to
policymakers who must address growth in global organized crime
involving such entities as the Russian Mafia, the Chinese Triad
societies, and the Mexican drug cartels. The major Mexican, Colombian,
and Asian narcotics trafficking organizations represent a growing and
sophisticated national security threat to the United States. Only the
U.S. intelligence community has the people and the technology to
support policymaker response to this threat.
The narcotics traffickers have the wealth to purchase the newest
available encryption technology to communicate; they employ highly
competent bankers, lawyers, and accountants to conceal their financial
transactions on a global basis; their transport networks are highly
flexible and respond quickly to changes in U.S. interdiction strategy;
and the global supply of cocaine and heroin far exceeds demand in the
United States and elsewhere. Close coordination between U.S. law
enforcement agencies and intelligence is vital to U.S. efforts to
reduce the flow of cocaine and heroin into the United States. Among
those U.S. and foreign officials who are responsible for fighting drug
trafficking, I am always told that their first priority is on obtaining
accurate and timely intelligence on drug suppliers, transporters and
money launderers. The conference report will provide the needed funds
to enable the robust intelligence support that law enforcement needs.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this conference report and urge that
all Members of the House do the same.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I want to also add my congratulations to Calvin Humphrey who has been
one of our most outstanding staff people. I want to congratulate him on
the great job he has done for our committee. He has handled some of the
most difficult assignments. He had to travel with Congressman
Richardson all over the world. Together, they got many American
citizens out of tight spots around the world.
The only thing I have ever had a problem with Calvin on is his
devotion to the Cleveland Indians even when they kept my Seattle
Mariners out of the World Series. That I may not be able to forgive him
for, but I will never forget him. We wish him well in his new post.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would certainly like to use some of that time also to have my best
wishes to Calvin Humphrey's future. Let me tell you that even on the
Intelligence Committee, we are sometimes surprised. When I heard that
public statement made this morning, I would put it in the category of
surprise. It does not diminish in any way my good wishes for your
future success which I know are very well assured because of your
capabilities. I want to thank you very much not only for getting me out
of North Korea but for getting me into North Korea. That was a very
valuable experience. And all the other things you have done for our
committee.
I also need to say thank you to every member of our committee. Every
member brings something to the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence and is given an extraordinary trust on behalf of all
Members and all people of this country. It is a remarkable committee. I
hope people who have been watching this and other Members can see that
we are able to do our business well, in a bipartisan and professional
way, because there is good will to do it and there is an understanding
of the need to do it and get it done.
{time} 1145
Mr. Speaker, I have nothing but pride for all of the Members and the
way they work and the staff that so ably supports us.
I have mentioned some staff; I have to mention Mike Chi and the job
he does with all of what I will call not his staff but our staff
because I do not make a distinction between one party or the other and
the staff. John Mills, our chief of staff, has done a remarkable job, I
think, of trying to pull together in a harmony all the management needs
to discharge our responsibilities ably. Tim Sample has done an
extraordinary job managing numbers. I never will entirely understand,
but I am told they always add up, and I check the bottom line, and they
seem to.
These are important people that are doing important work far from the
madding crowd, far out of the visibility of the ``hoo-wah'' of the
Beltway and the media. The work is getting done, and it matters because
we are talking about national security. I want to thank everybody
involved.
As for the whistle-blower provisions, I want to thank everybody for
their understanding, the compromise that was worked out, and I assure
the gentlewoman from California, if we find that this is not working as
well as I hope it will, that we always will be able to revisit it in
the future. I believe this will work.
[[Page H9739]]
With regard to those concerned about the matter that was brought up
by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr) and the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. McCollum) I have read the safeguards that are in the bill; I think
they are adequate. Again, if something egregious comes out of this,
obviously we are prepared to resolve it.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Ohio (Mr. Oxley).
(Mr. OXLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report.
Mr. GOSS. I would also on a personal note thank everybody for a
difficult time while I have been away. It just goes to show that
everybody is expendable here, and I appreciate being reminded of that.
It keeps me humble.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remind the Members of this
body of the unfinished business we have regarding the dark, terrible,
still classified secrets of our intelligence agencies. The list of
misdeeds by our intelligence agencies is long and much of it still
remains shrouded in secrecy, in many cases acting to protect criminals
who have died and dictators who are no longer in power. We must end our
senseless protection of these terrible acts. Congress has the power to
do so, and must not shirk its duty.
I have focused my energies on investigating the allegations of
Contra-CIA drug dealing. But, there are many other sordid, terrible
tales of U.S. intelligence activities that remain a secret to the
American people. Some have been investigated, while the reports remain
classified. Others have yet to be investigated. The list includes the
CIA's involvement with the brutal Battalion 316 in Honduras, the
overthrow of Arbenz in Guatemala and Allende in Chile, the death squads
in El Salvador, Duvalier's drug dealing regime and the ton ton macout
death squads of Haiti, and of course, the many illegal assassination
attempts against Fidel Castro. We must release the information we have
about these affairs, investigate the others that remain unexamined and
bring those responsible to justice. We cannot exhort other nations to
follow the rule of law without ensuring that we likewise follow the
rule of law.
My investigation into the allegations of CIA-Contra drug dealing has
led me to an undeniable conclusion--that U.S. intelligence and law
enforcement agencies knew about drug trafficking in South Central Los
Angeles and throughout the U.S.--and they let the dealing go on without
taking any actions against it.
Robert Perry and Brian Barger first broke the shocking story of
Contra involvement in drug trafficking in 1985, at the height of the
Contra war against Nicaragua. As a result of this story's revelations,
Senator John Kerry conducted a two year Senate probe into the
allegations and published the sub-committee's devastating findings in
an 1,166-page report in 1989.
Remarkably, the Committee's findings went virtually unreported when
they were released.
Then in August 1996 Gary Webb published his explosive series in the
San Jose Mercury News. It resulted in a firestorm of anger and outrage
in the Black community and throughout the nation. Here was evidence
that, while the nation was being told of a national ``war on drugs'' by
the Reagan Administration, our anti-drug intelligence apparatus was
actually aiding the drug lords in getting their deadly product into the
U.S.
The resulting grassroots outrage put tremendous pressure on the CIA,
the Department of Justice and Congress to investigate the matter and
report the truth. The Inspectors General of the CIA and Department of
Justice were forced to conduct investigations and publish reports on
the allegations. The DOJ's Report and Volume I of the CIA's Report
published brief executive summaries that concluded that the allegations
made in the Mercury News could not be substantiated. However, both
Reports, and in particular the DOJ Report, are filled with evidence
that contradicts their own conclusions and confirms all of the basic
allegations.
Quite unexpectedly, on April 30, 1998, I obtained a secret 1982
Memorandum of Understanding between the CIA and the Department of
Justice, that allowed drug trafficking by CIA assets, agents, and
contractors to go unreported to federal law enforcement agencies. I
also received correspondence between then Attorney General William
French Smith and the head of the CIA, William Casey, that spelled out
their intent to protect drug traffickers on the CIA payroll from being
reported to federal law enforcement.
Then on July 17, 1998 the New York Times ran this amazing front page
CIA admission:
CIA Says It Used Nicaraguan Rebels Accused of Drug Tie
[T]he Central Intelligence Agency continued to work with
about two dozen Nicaraguan rebels and their supporters during
the 1980s despite allegations that they were trafficking in
drugs . . . [T]he agency's decision to keep those paid
agents, or to continue dealing with them in some less formal
relationship, was made by top [CIA] officials at headquarters
in Langley, Va. (emphasis added)
This front page confirmation of CIA involvement with Contra drug
traffickers came from a leak of the still classified CIA Volume II
internal review, described by sources as full of devastating
revelations of CIA involvement with known Contra drug traffickers.
The CIA had always vehemently denied any connection to drug
traffickers and the massive global drug trade, despite over ten years
of documented reports. But in a shocking reversal, the CIA finally
admitted that it was CIA policy to keep Contra drug traffickers on the
CIA payroll.
The Committee has yet to release Volume II of the CIA Inspector
General's investigation into the CIA-Contra drug network. But this body
is moving ahead with reauthorizing the Central Intelligence Agency. I
call on Members of the Committee and this body to end our policy of
protecting criminal conduct by intelligence assets. Declassify and
release these reports so that the many who have suffered can seek
justice and we can bring the many still protected criminals to justice.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the conference report.
The previous question was ordered.
Motion to Recommit Offered By Mr. Barr of Georgia
Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit with
instructions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sessions). Is the gentleman opposed to
the conference report?
Mr. BARR of Georgia. He is, Mr. Speaker.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. DICKS. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will please state his
parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. DICKS. It is my understanding that this bill was taken up in the
Senate yesterday. If that is true, can there be a motion to recommit?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. One moment. The Chair will examine the
official papers.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I have now been informed by staff that the
bill was not taken up yesterday, so I withdraw my objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Barr of Georgia moves to recommit the Intelligence Authorization
Conference bill to the Committee on Conference with instructions to the
managers on the part of the House to remove section 604.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground
that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum
is not present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule XV, the Chair announces
the he will reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the period of time within
a vote by electronic device, if ordered, will be taken on the question
of passage.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 148,
nays 267, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 486]
YEAS--148
Abercrombie
Aderholt
Bachus
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Becerra
Bonilla
Bonior
Bryant
Burton
Camp
Campbell
Cannon
Cardin
Carson
Chabot
Chenoweth
Christensen
Clayton
Clyburn
Coburn
Conyers
Cooksey
Cox
Coyne
Crapo
Cubin
Cummings
Davis (IL)
Deal
DeFazio
Delahunt
DeLay
Doggett
Doolittle
Duncan
[[Page H9740]]
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Ensign
Everett
Filner
Ford
Fossella
Furse
Gillmor
Goode
Goodlatte
Gutknecht
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hostettler
Inglis
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (WI)
Jones
Kanjorski
Kilpatrick
Kingston
Klink
Largent
Lee
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Lofgren
Lucas
Maloney (CT)
Manzullo
Matsui
McDade
McGovern
McInnis
McIntosh
McKinney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Metcalf
Mica
Mink
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Myrick
Neal
Neumann
Ney
Norwood
Owens
Pappas
Parker
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Pombo
Radanovich
Rangel
Redmond
Riley
Rivers
Rohrabacher
Royce
Ryun
Salmon
Sanders
Sanford
Scarborough
Schaffer, Bob
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Smith (MI)
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Stark
Stearns
Stokes
Sununu
Talent
Thompson
Thornberry
Thurman
Tiahrt
Torres
Towns
Traficant
Velazquez
Wamp
Waters
Watkins
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Weller
Whitfield
Wilson
Yates
NAYS--267
Ackerman
Allen
Archer
Armey
Baesler
Baker
Baldacci
Barrett (NE)
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berman
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bunning
Burr
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Canady
Capps
Castle
Chambliss
Clement
Coble
Collins
Combest
Condit
Cook
Costello
Cramer
Crane
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (VA)
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Dooley
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Ewing
Farr
Fawell
Fazio
Foley
Forbes
Fowler
Fox
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gilman
Gonzalez
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Green
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Hansen
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hefner
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Hooley
Horn
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Jefferson
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E.B.
Johnson, Sam
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kim
King (NY)
Kleczka
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lipinski
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lowey
Luther
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Markey
Mascara
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McHale
McHugh
McIntyre
McNulty
Meehan
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller (CA)
Miller (FL)
Minge
Moakley
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Nadler
Nethercutt
Northup
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pascrell
Paxon
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pickett
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Quinn
Rahall
Ramstad
Regula
Reyes
Riggs
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Schaefer, Dan
Schumer
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (OR)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Adam
Snyder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thune
Tierney
Turner
Upton
Vento
Visclosky
Walsh
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Wexler
Weygand
Wicker
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--19
Andrews
Clay
Fattah
Goodling
Graham
Kennedy (MA)
Kennelly
Kind (WI)
LaFalce
Martinez
McCrery
McKeon
Peterson (PA)
Poshard
Pryce (OH)
Roukema
Solomon
Souder
White
{time} 1215
Messrs. COMBEST, KOLBE, FORBES, HUTCHINSON, SHADEGG, TAYLOR of
Mississippi, NADLER, MILLER of California, REYES and OBEY and Ms.
KAPTUR changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. KINGSTON, REDMOND, WELLER, ADERHOLT BRYANT, SALMON, BOB
SCHAFFER of Colorado, HILLIARD, DELAHUNT, CRAPO, THOMPSON, JACKSON of
Illinois, SERRANO, FOSSELLA, DOGGETT, PICKERING, YATES, FORD and
McGOVERN and Mrs. THURMAN, Ms. KILPATRICK, Ms. VELAZQUEZ, Mrs. CLAYTON,
and Mrs. MEEK of Florida changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the motion was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
____________________