[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 171 (Saturday, November 22, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2399]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page E2399]]
            H.R. 2417, INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION AGREEMENT

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. MARK UDALL

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, November 20, 2003

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 
2417. I voted for this bill earlier this year, but I cannot support it 
today.
  I have concerns about a provision in the conference report that would 
expand financial surveillance authority of our intelligence agencies. I 
also had concerns about this provision in the first version of the bill 
that passed the House, but I supported the bill then in the hope that 
the language would be further clarified in the final conference report. 
It has not been.
  Whereas currently banks, credit unions, and other financial 
institutions are required to provide certain financial data to 
authorized intelligence agencies and the Treasury Department, this 
legislation would expand the list of institutions to include car 
dealers, pawnbrokers, travel agents, casinos, and other businesses.
  This expanded definition of ``financial institution'' may indeed be 
necessary for effective counterintelligence, foreign intelligence, and 
international operations of the United States. But since this will 
represent such a significant expansion of the powers of our 
intelligence agencies, I believe it is important that it be clear and 
not go further than necessary.
  In particular, I am concerned that the language in the conference 
report only vaguely limits this expanded definition to financial 
information. I understand that report language makes this distinction 
more explicit, but that bill conferees objected to including this 
clarifying language in the conference report itself. The legislative 
intent of this provision is to expand surveillance in the area of 
financial--not other--information, but there are no assurances that 
this intent will be observed when the legislation is implemented.
  Mr. Speaker, this provision in the conference report involves the 
privacy rights of Americans--rights that I believe strongly we must 
protect even as we work to combat terrorism. Because I'm concerned that 
this conference report does not strike the right balance, I am voting 
against it today.

                          ____________________