[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 13444-13462]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006

  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 331, I call 
up the bill (H.R. 2475) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 
2006 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 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 331, the bill 
is considered read for amendment.
  The text of H.R. 2475 is as follows:

                               H. R. 2475

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Intelligence Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2006''.

                    TITLE I--INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES

     SEC. 101. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2006 for the conduct of the intelligence and 
     intelligence-related activities of the following elements of 
     the United States Government:
       (1) The Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
       (2) The Central Intelligence Agency.
       (3) The Department of Defense.
       (4) The Defense Intelligence Agency.
       (5) The National Security Agency.
       (6) The Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy, 
     and the Department of the Air Force.
       (7) The Department of State.
       (8) The Department of the Treasury.
       (9) The Department of Energy.
       (10) The Department of Justice.
       (11) The Federal Bureau of Investigation.
       (12) The National Reconnaissance Office.
       (13) The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.
       (14) The Coast Guard.
       (15) The Department of Homeland Security.

     SEC. 102. CLASSIFIED SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZATIONS.

       (a) Specifications of Amounts and Personnel Ceilings.--The 
     amounts authorized to be appropriated under section 101, and 
     the authorized personnel ceilings as of September 30, 2006, 
     for the conduct of the intelligence and intelligence-related 
     activities of the elements listed in such section, are those 
     specified in the classified Schedule of Authorizations 
     prepared to accompany the bill H.R. ____ of the One Hundred 
     Ninth Congress.
       (b) Availability of Classified Schedule of 
     Authorizations.--The Schedule of Authorizations shall be made 
     available to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate 
     and House of Representatives and to the President. The 
     President shall provide for suitable distribution of the 
     Schedule, or of appropriate portions of the Schedule, within 
     the executive branch.

     SEC. 103. PERSONNEL CEILING ADJUSTMENTS.

       (a) Authority for Adjustments.--With the approval of the 
     Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the Director 
     of National Intelligence may authorize employment of civilian 
     personnel in excess of the number authorized for fiscal year 
     2006 under section 102 when the Director of National 
     Intelligence determines that such action is necessary to the 
     performance of important intelligence functions.
       (b) Notice to Intelligence Committees.--The Director of 
     National Intelligence shall notify promptly the Select 
     Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Permanent 
     Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of 
     Representatives whenever the Director exercises the authority 
     granted by this section.

     SEC. 104. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated for the Intelligence Community Management 
     Account of the Director of National Intelligence for fiscal 
     year 2006 the sum of $_____. Within such amount, funds 
     identified in the classified Schedule of Authorizations 
     referred to in section 102(a) for advanced research and 
     development shall remain available until September 30, 2007.
       (b) Authorized Personnel Levels.--The elements within the 
     Intelligence Community Management Account of the Director of 
     National Intelligence are authorized __ full-time personnel 
     as of September 30, 2006. Personnel serving in such elements 
     may be permanent employees of the Intelligence Community 
     Management Account or personnel detailed from other elements 
     of the United States Government.
       (c) Classified Authorizations.--
       (1) Authorization of appropriations.--In addition to 
     amounts authorized to be appropriated for the Intelligence 
     Community Management Account by subsection (a), there are 
     also authorized to be appropriated for the Intelligence 
     Community Management Account for fiscal year 2006 such 
     additional amounts as are specified in the classified 
     Schedule of Authorizations referred to in section 102(a). 
     Such additional amounts for advanced research and development 
     shall remain available until September 30, 2007.
       (2) Authorization of personnel.--In addition to the 
     personnel authorized by subsection (b) for elements of the 
     Intelligence Community Management Account as of September 30, 
     2006, there are also authorized such additional personnel for 
     such elements as of that date as are specified in the 
     classified Schedule of Authorizations.
       (d) Reimbursement.--Except as provided in section 113 of 
     the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404h), during 
     fiscal year 2006 any officer or employee of the United States 
     or a member of the Armed Forces who is detailed to the staff 
     of the Intelligence Community Management Account from another 
     element of the United States Government shall be detailed on 
     a reimbursable basis, except that any such officer, employee, 
     or member may be detailed on a nonreimbursable basis for a 
     period of less than one year for the performance of temporary 
     functions as required by the Director of National 
     Intelligence.

 TITLE II--CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM

     SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated for the Central 
     Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability Fund for fiscal 
     year 2006 the sum of $_____.

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. INCREASE IN EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS 
                   AUTHORIZED BY LAW.

       Appropriations authorized by this Act for salary, pay, 
     retirement, and other benefits for Federal employees may be 
     increased by such additional or supplemental amounts as may 
     be necessary for increases in such compensation or benefits 
     authorized by law.

     SEC. 302. RESTRICTION ON CONDUCT OF INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES.

       The authorization of appropriations by this Act shall not 
     be deemed to constitute authority for the conduct of any 
     intelligence activity which is not otherwise authorized by 
     the Constitution or the laws of the United States.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in 
Part A of House Report 109-141, is adopted.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as 
modified, is as follows:

                               H. R. 2475

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the 
     ``Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

       Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

                    TITLE I--INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES

       Sec. 101. Authorization of appropriations.
       Sec. 102. Classified Schedule of Authorizations.
       Sec. 103. Personnel ceiling adjustments.
       Sec. 104. Intelligence Community Management Account.

 TITLE II--CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM

       Sec. 201. Authorization of appropriations.

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 301. Increase in employee compensation and benefits 
           authorized by law.
       Sec. 302. Restriction on conduct of intelligence 
           activities.
       Sec. 303. Authority of the Director of National 
           Intelligence to assign individuals to United States 
           missions in foreign countries to coordinate and direct 
           intelligence and intelligence-related activities 
           conducted in that country.
       Sec. 304. Clarification of delegation of transfer or 
           reprogramming authority.
       Sec. 305. Approval of personnel transfer for new national 
           intelligence centers.
       Sec. 306. Additional duties for the Director of Science and 
           Technology.
       Sec. 307. Comprehensive inventory of special access 
           programs.
       Sec. 308. Sense of Congress on budget execution authority 
           procedures.
       Sec. 309. Sense of Congress with respect to multi-level 
           security clearances.

                 TITLE IV--CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

       Sec. 401. Clarification of role of the Director of Central 
           Intelligence Agency as head of human intelligence 
           collection.

                    TITLE I--INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES

     SEC. 101. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2006 for the conduct of the intelligence and 
     intelligence-related activities of the following elements of 
     the United States Government:
       (1) The Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

[[Page 13445]]

       (2) The Central Intelligence Agency.
       (3) The Department of Defense.
       (4) The Defense Intelligence Agency.
       (5) The National Security Agency.
       (6) The Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy, 
     and the Department of the Air Force.
       (7) The Department of State.
       (8) The Department of the Treasury.
       (9) The Department of Energy.
       (10) The Department of Justice.
       (11) The Federal Bureau of Investigation.
       (12) The National Reconnaissance Office.
       (13) The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.
       (14) The Coast Guard.
       (15) The Department of Homeland Security.

     SEC. 102. CLASSIFIED SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZATIONS.

       (a) Specifications of Amounts and Personnel Ceilings.--The 
     amounts authorized to be appropriated under section 101, and 
     the authorized personnel ceilings as of September 30, 2006, 
     for the conduct of the intelligence and intelligence-related 
     activities of the elements listed in such section, are those 
     specified in the classified Schedule of Authorizations 
     prepared to accompany the bill H.R. 2475 of the One Hundred 
     Ninth Congress.
       (b) Availability of Classified Schedule of 
     Authorizations.--The Schedule of Authorizations shall be made 
     available to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate 
     and House of Representatives and to the President. The 
     President shall provide for suitable distribution of the 
     Schedule, or of appropriate portions of the Schedule, within 
     the executive branch.

     SEC. 103. PERSONNEL CEILING ADJUSTMENTS.

       (a) Authority for Adjustments.--With the approval of the 
     Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the Director 
     of National Intelligence may authorize employment of civilian 
     personnel in excess of the number authorized for fiscal year 
     2006 under section 102 when the Director of National 
     Intelligence determines that such action is necessary to the 
     performance of important intelligence functions.
       (b) Notice to Intelligence Committees.--The Director of 
     National Intelligence shall notify promptly the Select 
     Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Permanent 
     Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of 
     Representatives whenever the Director exercises the authority 
     granted by this section.

     SEC. 104. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated for the Intelligence Community Management 
     Account of the Director of National Intelligence for fiscal 
     year 2006 the sum of $446,144,000. Within such amount, funds 
     identified in the classified Schedule of Authorizations 
     referred to in section 102(a) for advanced research and 
     development shall remain available until September 30, 2007.
       (b) Authorized Personnel Levels.--The elements within the 
     Intelligence Community Management Account of the Director of 
     National Intelligence are authorized 817 full-time personnel 
     as of September 30, 2006. Personnel serving in such elements 
     may be permanent employees of the Intelligence Community 
     Management Account or personnel detailed from other elements 
     of the United States Government.
       (c) Classified Authorizations.--
       (1) Authorization of appropriations.--In addition to 
     amounts authorized to be appropriated for the Intelligence 
     Community Management Account by subsection (a), there are 
     also authorized to be appropriated for the Intelligence 
     Community Management Account for fiscal year 2006 such 
     additional amounts as are specified in the classified 
     Schedule of Authorizations referred to in section 102(a). 
     Such additional amounts for advanced research and development 
     shall remain available until September 30, 2007.
       (2) Authorization of personnel.--In addition to the 
     personnel authorized by subsection (b) for elements of the 
     Intelligence Community Management Account as of September 30, 
     2006, there are also authorized such additional personnel for 
     such elements as of that date as are specified in the 
     classified Schedule of Authorizations.
       (d) Reimbursement.--Except as provided in section 113 of 
     the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404h), during 
     fiscal year 2006 any officer or employee of the United States 
     or a member of the Armed Forces who is detailed to the staff 
     of the Intelligence Community Management Account from another 
     element of the United States Government shall be detailed on 
     a reimbursable basis, except that any such officer, employee, 
     or member may be detailed on a nonreimbursable basis for a 
     period of less than one year for the performance of temporary 
     functions as required by the Director of National 
     Intelligence.

 TITLE II--CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM

     SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated for the Central 
     Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability Fund for fiscal 
     year 2006 the sum of $244,600,000.

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. INCREASE IN EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS 
                   AUTHORIZED BY LAW.

       Appropriations authorized by this Act for salary, pay, 
     retirement, and other benefits for Federal employees may be 
     increased by such additional or supplemental amounts as may 
     be necessary for increases in such compensation or benefits 
     authorized by law.

     SEC. 302. RESTRICTION ON CONDUCT OF INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES.

       The authorization of appropriations by this Act shall not 
     be deemed to constitute authority for the conduct of any 
     intelligence activity which is not otherwise authorized by 
     the Constitution or the laws of the United States.

     SEC. 304. CLARIFICATION OF DELEGATION OF TRANSFER OR 
                   REPROGRAMMING AUTHORITY.

       Paragraph (5)(B) of section 102A(d) of the National 
     Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 403-1(d)), as added by 
     section 1011(a) of the National Security Intelligence Reform 
     Act of 2004 (title I of Public Law 108-458; 118 Stat. 3643), 
     is amended by striking ``or agency involved'' in the second 
     sentence and inserting ``involved or the Director of the 
     Central Intelligence Agency (in the case of the Central 
     Intelligence Agency)''.

     SEC. 306. ADDITIONAL DUTIES FOR THE DIRECTOR OF SCIENCE AND 
                   TECHNOLOGY.

       (a) Coordination and Prioritization of Research Conducted 
     by Elements of the Intelligence Community.--Subsection (d) of 
     section 103E of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 
     403-3e), as added by section 1011(a) of the National Security 
     Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 (title I of Public Law 108-
     458; 118 Stat. 3643), is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``and prioritize'' after ``coordinate'' in 
     paragraph (3)(A); and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(4) In carrying out paragraph (3)(A), the Committee shall 
     identify basic, advanced, and applied research programs to be 
     carried out by elements of the intelligence community.''.
       (b) Development of Technology Goals.--Section 103E of such 
     Act (50 U.S.C. 403-3e), as so added, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4);
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(5) assist the Director in establishing goals for the 
     elements of the intelligence community to meet the technology 
     needs of the community; and''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Goals for Technology Needs of the Intelligence 
     Community.--In carrying out subsection (c)(5), the Director 
     of Science and Technology shall--
       ``(1) perform systematic identification and assessment of 
     the most significant intelligence challenges that require 
     technical solutions; and
       ``(2) examine options to enhance the responsiveness of 
     research and design programs to meet the requirements of the 
     intelligence community for timely support.''.
       (c) Report.--Not later than June 30, 2006, the Director of 
     National Intelligence shall submit to Congress a report 
     containing a strategy for the development and use of 
     technology in the intelligence community through 2021. Such 
     report may be submitted in classified form and shall 
     include--
       (1) an assessment of the highest priority intelligence gaps 
     across the intelligence community that may be resolved by the 
     use of technology;
       (2) goals for advanced research and development and a 
     strategy to achieve such goals;
       (3) an explanation of how each advanced research and 
     development project funded under the National Intelligence 
     Program addresses an identified intelligence gap;
       (4) a list of all current and projected research and 
     development projects by research type (basic, advanced, or 
     applied) with estimated funding levels, estimated initiation 
     dates, and estimated completion dates; and
       (5) a plan to incorporate technology from research and 
     development projects into National Intelligence Program 
     acquisition programs.

     SEC. 307. COMPREHENSIVE INVENTORY OF SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAMS.

       Not later than January 15, 2006, the Director of National 
     Intelligence shall submit to the congressional intelligence 
     committees (as defined in section 3(7) of the National 
     Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(7))) a classified report 
     providing a comprehensive inventory of all special access 
     programs under the National Intelligence Program (as defined 
     in section 3(6) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 
     U.S.C. 401a(6))).

     SEC. 308. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON BUDGET EXECUTION AUTHORITY 
                   PROCEDURES.

       It is the sense of Congress that the Director of National 
     Intelligence should expeditiously establish the necessary 
     budgetary processes and procedures with the heads of the 
     departments containing agencies or organizations within the 
     intelligence community, and the heads of such agencies and 
     organizations, in order to--
       (1) implement the budget execution authorities provided 
     under, and submit the reports to Congress required by, 
     subsection (c) of section 102A of the National Security Act 
     of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 403-1), as amended by section 1011(a) of 
     the National Security Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 (title 
     I of Public Law 108-458; 118 Stat. 3643); and
       (2) carry out the duties and authorities of the Director of 
     National Intelligence with respect to the transfer and 
     reprogramming of funds under the National Intelligence 
     Program under subsection (d) of such section, as so amended.

     SEC. 309. SENSE OF CONGRESS WITH RESPECT TO MULTI-LEVEL 
                   SECURITY CLEARANCES.

       It is the sense of Congress that the Director of National 
     Intelligence should promptly establish

[[Page 13446]]

     and oversee the implementation of a multi-level security 
     clearance system across the intelligence community to 
     leverage the cultural and linguistic skills of subject matter 
     experts and individuals proficient in foreign languages 
     critical to national security.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. After 1 hour of debate on the bill, as 
amended, it shall be in order to consider the further amendment printed 
in the report, if offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. 
Maloney), or her designee, which shall be considered read, and shall be 
debatable for 30 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the 
proponent and an opponent.
  The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) and the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Harman) each will control 30 minutes of debate on the 
bill.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra).
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2475, the Intelligence 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006. This is a very good bill, a 
bill we can be very proud of, and a bill that every Member of the House 
can and should support.
  Before I talk about some of the details in the bill, I would like to 
recognize the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman). We have worked 
hard on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to keep this 
committee focused on the job that needs to be done and to do so on a 
bipartisan basis, and I thank the gentlewoman for working with us in 
that process and being able to maintain that spirit as we bring this 
bill to the floor on a bipartisan basis. I also thank her staff and our 
staff for helping us through this process in bringing this bill here 
today.
  Mr. Speaker, 3 years ago when he was chairman of the Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence, Porter Goss, now director of the Central 
Intelligence Agency, asked me to take a strategic look at the technical 
capabilities within the United States intelligence community. He wanted 
me to see how the technical intelligence collection systems all work 
together, evaluate their individual contributions to national security, 
and see if there were redundancies to understand the affordability of 
the many systems and, most importantly, understand the impacts on the 
rest of the intelligence community.
  What Mr. Goss really asked us to do was to go back, and we have 
expanded that in the committee over the past 8 or 9 months, to take a 
look at the strategic framework that we face in the world today and how 
we should respond to the threats. So we spent a considerable amount of 
time looking at the threats that America faces: What is the threat 
environment that is out there today; what do we expect it to be in 3, 5 
and 7 years, so we can shape the proper intelligence community to give 
our policymakers and our military the right information to make good 
decisions and keep our soldiers safe?
  We have then taken that to take a look at the feedback we have gotten 
from the 9/11 Commission, the feedback we have gotten from the WMD 
Commission as to the particular strengths within the intelligence 
community and also some of the particular weaknesses.
  So as we put this bill together, we really focused on making sure 
that we had a good balance between our human capabilities, the 
investment we were making in our human capabilities for the long term, 
and the investment we were making in our technical capabilities. This 
bill does that by investing more in our human capabilities.
  On the technical capabilities, it takes a very, very hard look at the 
different programs that we have in place there. It makes sure that what 
we do is put in place programs that will complement each other, give us 
the information that we need, and hopefully put us on a framework and 
on a pathway to balancing human capabilities with our technical 
capabilities.
  Also in that area, this bill moves forward and holds some of our 
contractors accountable for their performance. This is an area where 
tactically we may disagree on some of the points on how to make that 
happen, but we are very much in sync on a bipartisan basis that we need 
a strategic plan and we need to have our contractors perform. It will 
also lay the framework for a discussion we will have throughout this 
year about how to make sure that in a time where we have limited 
budgets and limited programs underway, that we maintain the industrial 
base here in the United States.
  So there are a lot of things that we do in this bill to make sure 
that we have got the balance and are moving in the right direction on 
our technical capabilities.
  Another key element of this bill is we have heard consistently from 
our field personnel and others within the intelligence community, 
especially those involved in the counterterrorism effort, that we 
cannot fund counterterrorism on an ad hoc basis. So what we did in this 
bill is we have authorized the majority of the dollars that we believe 
will be needed to build our intelligence capability and to fund the war 
on terrorism.
  We think it is important to send to the intelligence community a 
clear signal of how much money they are going to have so they can do 
the appropriate planning and the ramping up of resources in the waging 
of this global war on terrorism.
  As I said at the beginning of my statement, we have done this on a 
bipartisan basis. We have taken a strategic look at what the 
intelligence community, where it needs to be and where it needs to go. 
We are going to continue working in that effort. I think as Members see 
through the debate, we have made a lot of progress and there is more 
work to do.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2475, the strongest 
intelligence authorization bill to emerge from the Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence in recent memory. Without the funding 
authorized in this bill, the brave men and women of the intelligence 
community would not be able to do their jobs which are so vital to the 
defense of our country. I and many other members of the committee have 
visited these intelligence professionals in some of the most austere 
places of the world, and they deserve our gratitude and support.
  I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Hoekstra) and thank him and all of the members and staff of our 
hardworking committee for their bipartisanship and patriotism. As one 
of our members, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Rup-
persberger) often says, we put America first.
  Our members have made a difference. In April 2004, all nine Democrats 
on the Intelligence Committee introduced legislation that became the 
basis for the
9/11 Commission's Report and the intelligence reform legislation passed 
by Congress last fall. That reform dramatically reshaped our 
intelligence community, unifying 15 agencies under the leadership of a 
director of National Intelligence.
  This year's intelligence authorization bill authorizes funds for that 
new office. The DNI must succeed in his job and he deserves our 
support. He is responsible for ensuring that intelligence is timely, 
accurate and actionable. To do this, he needs authority to build and 
execute budgets and move personnel. So I am pleased that we removed a 
provision in this bill that would have severely eroded the DNI's 
authority to move personnel around the intelligence community.
  Mr. Speaker, in the fight against terrorists, intelligence is the tip 
of the spear. Some see this fight as a traditional war, requiring 
wartime emergency budgets and wartime authorities for the President. 
That may have been the right approach immediately after 9/11. We fought 
a war in Afghanistan and achieved an impressive victory.
  But the terrorist threat has changed. Today we no longer face a 
centralized top-down terrorist organization operating out of one 
country. We face a network of loosely affiliated terrorist groups which 
operate as franchises around the world, and that is why I believe we 
are living in an era of terror.
  This legislation does some good things to help us achieve victory in 
an era of terror.
  First, it ends our reliance on emergency supplemental budgets for 
counterterrorism. The budget the President

[[Page 13447]]

sent to Congress this year funded less than 40 percent of the 
intelligence community counterterrorism requirements, leaving the rest 
for emergency supplementals. This bill changes that on a bipartisan 
basis, and we fund 100 percent of CT requirements.
  Second, this legislation incorporates a resolution introduced by all 
nine Democrats, urging the new DNI to establish a multi-tiered security 
clearance system to allow patriotic Americans with relatives in foreign 
countries to obtain security clearances and serve our Nation. It is 
high time we do this. This will help with field officers who can speak 
the languages and blend in with terrorist groups, penetrate 
proliferation networks, and recruit spies against the toughest targets.

                              {time}  1445

  Victory in an era of terror will not be achieved by military might 
alone, Mr. Speaker. Victory will require America to win the argument 
for the hearts and minds of the next generation in the Arab and Muslim 
world. I fear that we are presently losing that argument.
  The ongoing revelations about abuses at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere 
undermine our ability to maintain the moral high ground and be seen as 
a beacon of democracy and human rights. I am encouraged that our 
committee's new oversight subcommittee is investigating abuses that 
have occurred in our interrogation and detention programs within the 
intelligence community. This is a serious bipartisan investigation. But 
I also support a broader public bipartisan inquiry into detention 
policies across the government so that our efforts to fight the 
terrorists do not become a moral black eye for America that undermines 
our security.
  One area where this legislation can be improved, Mr. Speaker, is in 
its approach to technical systems. The details of these systems are 
classified and cannot be discussed openly. But I am concerned that we 
have made sudden, drastic cuts to certain programs that may lead to a 
gap in our intelligence capabilities and erode the industrial base 
needed to develop critical capabilities in the future. I am pleased 
that the chairman is committed to addressing this problem with me as 
the bill moves to conference.
  Overall, Mr. Speaker, this is strong legislation that puts us on the 
right track to achieve victory in an era of terror. There is more, much 
more, we must do and we will. The brave men and women of the 
intelligence community deserve nothing less.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Renzi), a member of the committee.
  Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2475. As a member 
of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence from Arizona, 
securing our borders has become one of our top priorities. Intelligence 
and border security go hand in hand as America strengthens and secures 
its borders, particularly in the Southwest. This bill funds activities 
necessary to keep America safe and, under the gentleman from Michigan's 
leadership, for the first time this bill helps to provide our Nation 
with actionable intelligence when it comes to border security.
  This legislation addresses the critical need for enhanced 
counternarcotics and counterterrorism collection and analysis 
throughout Mexico and Central and South America. It provides full 
funding to the director of National Intelligence to develop and 
implement a comprehensive intelligence collection strategy to help stem 
the illegal flow of drugs, contraband and special interest aliens. In 
addition, this bill authorizes the necessary funds to provide the 
intelligence community the resources required to fulfill the 
intelligence operations in Iraq and other pressing intelligence 
missions around the globe. The bill increases the funding over last 
year that provides additional personnel billets for linguists, analysts 
and human collection, invests in new facilities and training 
opportunities, and develops innovative technical tools.
  In line with the President's priorities, this legislation 
significantly enhances our global human intelligence collection 
capabilities. Human intelligence requires boots on the ground across 
the globe and those boots need linguistic skills, in-depth cultural and 
tradecraft training, technical tools and a dedicated support staff to 
be successful. H.R. 2475 provides both the people and the 
infrastructure to expand and improve U.S. human intelligence collection 
in regions around the world.
  Experts estimate that almost 100 foreign entities, including both 
state and nonstate actors, actively engage in espionage against the 
United States. H.R. 2475 significantly reduces these threats and 
improves our counterintelligence activities. Intelligence is our first 
line of defense. Actionable intelligence saves lives and determines 
battlefield victory. I ask my colleagues to support this bipartisan 
bill and help reduce the threat and make America more secure.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell) who is ranking member of the 
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Human Intelligence, Analysis and 
Counterintelligence, a mouthful that we call HACI.
  Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Speaker, I do rise in support of H.R. 2475. It may 
not be a perfect bill, but there are many, many good things in it. I am 
very pleased that the bill before us today no longer includes a 
provision that would have undermined the authorities of Ambassador 
Negroponte, the newly appointed director of National Intelligence. My 
colleagues and I put a lot of effort into passing an intelligence 
reform bill last year as was just discussed. We worked hard on giving 
the director of National Intelligence all the authorities he needed to 
make the intelligence community function as a community, including the 
authority to transfer people to new intelligence centers if and as 
needed. To tie Ambassador Negropon-
te's hands before his organization has been stood up, it did not seem 
like a smart thing to do. I would not have supported this bill had the 
provision limiting the DNI's personnel transfer authorities not been 
taken out of the bill.
  I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) and the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) for their efforts to remove 
this provision and I thank 9/11 Commission chairmen, Governor Tom Kean 
and Congressman Lee Hamilton, for clearly stating their opposition to 
it. I look forward to us addressing the other recommendations by the 
Commission. It is also my belief that the DNI has to control the money 
to be able to fulfill his charge of responsibility.
  I am pleased that this year's authorization bill also fixes the 
number one issue my colleagues and I raised last year, full funding for 
counterterrorism operations. H.R. 2475 authorizes full funding for the 
intelligence community's counterterrorism operations this year. That 
should remove impediments to the intelligence community's ability to 
plan their operations. Maybe this will be the year we are able to hunt 
down Osama bin Laden. I certainly hope so, and I know we all feel that 
way. The world will be better off once he is taken care of.
  Again, I thank the gentleman from Michigan and the gentlewoman from 
California for leading the Intelligence Committee in a bipartisan 
fashion. National security must be a bipartisan issue and that is the 
direction the committee is returning to.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson), the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on 
Technical and Tactical Intelligence.
  Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
bringing forward this bill and I want to thank the ranking member as 
well for making this a bipartisan bill and working together. I think a 
lot of credit also goes to our very capable staff who have worked very 
hard and very professionally to pull together a very good piece of 
work.
  The technical and tactical subcommittee has been very active over the 
last 5 months looking at our intelligence systems as they relate to the 
military and also the high-cost technical collection programs that our 
Nation relies on. The members of that

[[Page 13448]]

committee have given their personal time and traveled in many instances 
across the country, and I wanted to thank the members of the 
subcommittee and particularly the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Eshoo) for working very hard in this area. We have tried to understand 
what works, what is not working, do a detailed review of some of these 
very expensive programs, looking at what complements each other, where 
the gaps are, where the overlaps are, so that we can improve our 
intelligence capability and make sure that we are using every dollar 
wisely.
  This bill makes several very important changes in direction in our 
intelligence community. We have found that research and development is 
underfunded pretty much across the entire intelligence community and it 
is poorly coordinated, both in pathfinding research and in incremental 
research in our current capabilities.
  There are several large programs that are significantly off track 
which causes a draining of funds away from other intelligence 
priorities. We will not give contractors blank checks to cover cost, 
schedule, and performance problems that they have failed to manage. We 
have to control this budget because cost overruns compromise other 
intelligence programs and put us as Members of Congress in the 
difficult position of managing different risks.
  This bill strengthens human intelligence. It strengthens our 
analytical capability. It strengthens translation and language 
capability. And we insist that systems have to include plans to task 
sensors, exploit the bits and bytes that come out of sensors, and 
disseminate information to people who need it. If you do not have that, 
what you really have is a science experiment, not an intelligence 
capability. In short, we have come forward with an integrated strategic 
approach to the purchase of high-cost technologies.
  We have much work yet to do to win the war on terrorism. When we win 
it, it will be because of two things: the bravery of our soldiers and 
the superiority of American intelligence. I thank the gentleman for 
bringing this bill forward. I look forward to voting for it.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, the new news on our committee is that we 
have stood up an oversight subcommittee. Much discussion has been made 
about this already today.
  It is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama 
(Mr. Cramer) who is ranking member of the intelligence oversight 
subcommittee.
  Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member, I thank the 
chairman, I thank the staff of both sides of the aisle. I stand in 
enthusiastic and strong support of H.R. 2475. This bill addresses 
several issues of great concern to the members of the committee and, in 
fact, to all Americans. These issues were first raised or detailed by 
several blue ribbon commissions that reviewed the performance of the 
intelligence community after 9/11 and by the Congress in the 
intelligence reform bill that was passed last year.
  This bill invests in an analytical initiative that draws on expertise 
resident at three centers: the Missile and Space Intelligence Center in 
Huntsville, Alabama; the National Air and Space Intelligence Center in 
Dayton, Ohio; and at the National Ground Intelligence Center in 
Charlottesville, Virginia. These centers will collaboratively assess 
the vulnerabilities of aircraft to foreign missiles and other airborne 
threats and will develop countermeasures to protect commercial aircraft 
at home and protect military aircraft for our troops in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. The bill provides for much needed upgrades to information 
networks in these centers, allowing them to eliminate possible 
information gaps and to integrate stovepiped information. As 
recommended by the WMD Commission, this will ensure that analysts and 
operators have the information they need when they need it.
  Last year's intelligence legislation significantly reformed the 
intelligence community. Real reform, however, requires accountability 
and oversight. I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member. 
This year, we have set up, and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Thornberry) is here and I assume is going to speak in a few minutes as 
well, this oversight subcommittee. This oversight subcommittee has been 
working just as it should work. I am encouraged by our efforts to date 
to provide meaningful congressional oversight of the entire 
intelligence community. We have initiated in-depth reviews of 
intelligence community interrogation and detention operations, and we 
are actively pursuing answers to tough questions. We are also 
monitoring the standup of the new DNI, ensuring that the intelligence 
community implements the changes specified in the legislation.
  Again, I thank the chairman, I thank the ranking member. We are off 
to a fine start and this is an excellent bill. The Members should 
support it.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Thornberry), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight 
who has been working very effectively with the gentleman from Alabama 
(Mr. Cramer) to do the work that an oversight subcommittee is expected 
to do.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time, and I rise in support of this bill. I also rise in 
appreciation for the work that the chairman and the ranking member have 
done in this bill and in fulfilling Congress' role vis-a-vis the 
intelligence agencies in general. Further, I appreciate my partner on 
the oversight subcommittee, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer), 
and all that he means to this joint effort.
  Mr. Speaker, the members of this committee are serious, hardworking, 
knowledgeable, committed members. So much of what we do on the 
Intelligence Committee is done behind closed doors. That can be an 
advantage and a disadvantage. It is an advantage, in a sense, not to do 
work in front of the television cameras and without press releases and 
without all the partisanship that sometimes attends some of what we do 
in Congress. It can be a disadvantage because we cannot talk with our 
constituents or even many of our colleagues about what we do. The only 
reason to be on this committee is to contribute to the national 
security of the country, and I believe that all members on both sides 
of the aisle in fact do that.
  At the beginning of this Congress, the chairman and the ranking 
member decided to create an oversight subcommittee. It became clear 
from the report of the 9/11 Commission, from the Rob Silverman 
Commission on Weapons of Mass Destruction, in fact, a host of other 
studies and reports, some even before the attacks of September 11, 
2001, that Congress has to do its job.

                              {time}  1500

  It is not enough just to say that the executive branch needs to 
change the way it does its work in the post-Cold War world. We have to 
do our job as well, and we should expect more of ourselves.
  One of the things we have done differently is to create this 
oversight subcommittee to, as I mentioned a few moments ago, have 
greater depth but also greater persistence in our oversight of key 
intelligence issues. The rules of the full Permanent Select Committee 
on Intelligence give us our mandate this year, which include oversight 
of the intelligence reform bill that Congress passed last fall. It 
gives specific emphasis on items for oversight that include community-
wide information-sharing, leaks of classified information, analysis and 
information-assuring technologies, as well as audits and investigation 
and tracking congressionally directed actions.
  That is our mandate and it is a full plate, but members on both sides 
of the aisle are going about that agenda working in not just a 
bipartisan but really nonpartisan way.
  And, in addition, I think Members on both sides agree with the Robb-
Silberman panel when they suggest that we should have these oversight 
subcommittees, but we should not just hop around following newspaper 
articles and doing our efforts, that we ought to have strategic 
oversight. In fact, they say on page 338 of their commission report: 
``We suggest that . . . the oversight committees limit their activities

[[Page 13449]]

to `strategic oversight,' meaning they would set an agenda at the start 
of the year or session of Congress, based on top priorities, such as 
information sharing, and stick to that agenda.''
  That is exactly what the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer) and I 
are attempting to do: to be tough but fair, to not be apologists for 
the administration but not to be bashers of the administration, to try 
to pursue the national security interests of the country as it relates 
to intelligence oversight. That is the way serious oversight is done, 
and I look forward to continuing to work from that perspective.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, my home State of California produces many 
of the platforms and systems that give us the technical edge in 
intelligence, and I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Eshoo), my California friend, ranking member of the 
Technical and Tactical Intelligence Subcommittee of the Permanent 
Select Committee on Intelligence.
  Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, first I would like to thank the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Harman), our distinguished ranking member, for her 
exceptional leadership on the committee; certainly to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Chairman Hoekstra) for the tone that he has brought to 
the committee. I think it is much improved, and I think it is a result 
of the bipartisanship that we have enjoyed since the chairman has 
arrived that we see it in this piece of legislation which I am proud to 
support.
  I am especially pleased to see the multilevel security clearance 
legislation introduced in March by committee Democrats, my colleagues 
that I am so proud of, that is in this bill. This provision will help 
the intelligence community leverage the cultural and linguistic skills 
of a broader candidate pool, which is so important to our intelligence 
community.
  During the markup of this bill, I offered an amendment requiring 
inspectors general at the Defense and State Departments, the CIA, and 
the DNI inspector general to establish telephone hotlines for 
intelligence professionals to report complaints if they believe 
policymakers are attempting to unduly or improperly influence them. I 
think that it is an important effort because there is a question mark 
in the mind of the American people on this very subject.
  As a result, the chairman agreed to include language in this bill 
about the need to ensure ombudsmen in these agencies to fulfill their 
role to protect analysts and other professionals within the 
intelligence community. The committee made a commitment to perform 
effective oversight in this matter; so I withdraw my amendment, and I 
thank the chairman for that effort.
  As the ranking member of the Technical and Tactical Intelligence 
Subcommittee, I am concerned that this bill reduces or eliminates 
funding for several key programs in the administration's request 
without full justification. Missing is an in-depth consideration of the 
effect that funding reductions will have on the overall intelligence 
architecture, the viability of our industrial base, which is essential. 
Once that disassembles, we cannot put Humpty Dumpty back together 
again, as well as overarching national security requirements. I hope 
the DNI and the Secretary of Defense will conduct a comprehensive 
review and explain the strategic linkages between collection 
requirements, capabilities, and developing programs. This review would 
better support future funding deliberations and decisions by the 
committee. It is very important that that be done.
  In closing, I want to express one of my deep concerns, and I know 
that it is the concern that many of my colleagues share, and that is 
the continuing reports of torture and other abuses of detainees. From 
Abu Ghraib to Guantanamo Bay, the mounting revelations have become more 
than an embarrassment to our country. They are a liability to our 
deployed servicemembers. If, in fact, the Congress and its committees 
of jurisdiction fail to fully investigate, I support a special 
commission to do so. We have to have a full accounting for the American 
people and have the determination to seek that.
  So, in closing, I want to thank my colleagues, the chairman, 
certainly our ranking member, all of my colleagues on the committee, 
and most especially a superb and dedicated staff. I salute them. I 
respect them for the work that they have done certainly on both sides 
of the aisle.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. McHugh), a new member of the committee, a very valuable 
member, and also a member of the House Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. McHUGH. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this 
time.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation, H.R. 
2475. As the distinguished chairman so graciously recognized, I am one 
of the newer members of this committee; and I must say in that respect, 
I am enormously impressed by the bipartisan attitude that all the 
members bring to this very important issue, that of national security 
and its interface with our intelligence communities. That is a tribute 
to all of the members, Democrat and Republican alike, but I think it is 
a particular tribute to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan 
(Chairman Hoekstra) and also the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Harman), ranking member, who have worked so well together and provided 
that leadership of bipartisanship.
  The chairman noted, Madam Speaker, that I am a member of the House 
Committee on Armed Services, and in that capacity I have the honor of 
serving as chairman of the Military Personnel Subcommittee; and as 
such, I have been particularly interested in programs that aid the 
warfighter, those brave men and women who are putting their lives on 
the line each and every day for our freedoms and for our interests. And 
I am pleased to report that this legislation contains very important 
increases in funding for military intelligence programs.
  In particular, H.R. 2475 includes significant increases in funding 
for operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, for the global war on terrorism, 
and thereby decreases the reliance on supplemental budgeting. Budgeting 
by supplemental, at least in my opinion, Madam Speaker, is inefficient; 
and it hinders the effective planning of our intelligence operations. 
And this bill very importantly takes a major step away from reliance on 
those supplementals and seeks to provide full funding to fight 
terrorism and for intelligence operations in Iraq.
  There is also increased funding for critical initiatives such as 
foreign language training for our troops in the field and for greater 
numbers of defense intelligence analysts. This intelligence 
authorization bill builds upon actions already taken by the House 
Committee on Armed Services dictating a career path for military 
linguists, and we should be very proud of this initiative in these 
regards.
  The net result, Madam Speaker, is that our intelligence personnel and 
our military will be better trained and equipped to perform their 
invaluable missions. These are important steps, and they have been 
taken with the necessary consultation with the Committee on Armed 
Services. And I am happy to report that the Permanent Select Committee 
on Intelligence has worked very closely with the gentleman from 
California (Chairman Hunter), with the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton), distinguished ranking member, with respect to our 
authorizations. And I would certainly argue that they complement one 
another very closely. To the extent that there are differences, and I 
think differences are and will continue to be inevitable, I know all of 
us on both sides of the aisle and in both committees will work to 
constructively breach those differences and bring about agreements on 
remaining issues as the authorization process continues.
  So I urge unanimous support of this very fine piece of legislation.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), ranking member on the Intelligence Policy 
Subcommittee.
  Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California for

[[Page 13450]]

yielding me this time, and I also thank the chairman and the staff for 
putting together in a congenial atmosphere a good bill.
  There are some good features to the bill, and I am pleased that it 
gives the new Director of National Intelligence the authority and 
resources necessary for him to succeed, and I am also satisfied that 
the bill gives the intelligence community 100 percent of the funds that 
it needs for counterterrorism programs. I am encouraged by the bill's 
emphasis on human intelligence and the recommendation to create a 
multilevel security clearance system that will allow the intelligence 
community to harness the power of America's diversity.
  More must be done, however, to encourage the use of open source, or 
public, information. Last year we gave the intelligence community an 
urging to increase its collection, analysis, and use of open-source 
information. And I look forward to working with the DNI to move these 
efforts forward.
  I am also pleased that the bill advances our foreign language 
training efforts within the intelligence community, and I will continue 
to work with my colleagues to strengthen our language capabilities 
throughout the Federal Government.
  I do want to express serious concern about a couple of matters. 
First, the administration's recommendations to close or realign 
military bases has the potential to disrupt vital intelligence 
expertise. Bases like Fort Monmouth, in my home State of New Jersey, 
play critical intelligence roles that have not been taken fully into 
account in the process. I would like to thank the chairman and ranking 
member for urging the Director of National Intelligence to evaluate the 
effect of base realignment on our Nation's intelligence capabilities, 
and I will include their letter at this point in the Record.

         House of Representatives, Permanent Select Committee on 
           Intelligence,
                                     Washington, DC, May 26, 2005.
     Ambassador John Negroponte,
     Director of National Intelligence, New Executive Office 
         Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Ambassador Negroponte: During the markup of the Fiscal 
     Year 2006 Intelligence Authorization bill, Members of the 
     Committee raised questions about the potential impacts that 
     the Defense Department's Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 
     Commission recommendations could have on the nation's 
     intelligence capabilities. The Members believe strongly that 
     such impacts should be factored into the final decision 
     process.
       Many intelligence programs, for example, are dependent on 
     subject matter experts made up of military personnel, 
     government civilians, and contractors. These people form the 
     analytic depth and breadth of the Intelligence Community, as 
     well as much of the core of its engineering, scientific and 
     technical expertise. Based on past BRAC experiences, we can 
     logically assume that many of the intelligence personnel that 
     would be affected by the latest recommendations could refuse 
     to uproot their families and relocate. The Intelligence 
     Community depends on this intellectual capital, and we should 
     well understand how the resulting loss of these people would 
     affect intelligence activities and, thereby, the nation's 
     security.
       The BRAC recommendations could affect the nation's 
     intelligence capabilities in many other ways. Accordingly, we 
     want to ensure that these intelligence-related impacts be 
     considered in the deliberations that result in the final BRAC 
     decisions. We believe that your position as the Director of 
     National Intelligence puts you in a unique position to best 
     understand and, accordingly, respond to these potential 
     impacts.
       Therefore, we ask you to evaluate the affects of base 
     realignment and closure on the nation's intelligence 
     capabilities. We further ask that you provide the Committee 
     with the results of your review no later than the date that 
     the President provides his final approval and certification 
     of the BRAC report to the Congress.
           Sincerely,
     Peter Hoekstra,
       Chairman.
     Jane Harman,
       Ranking Member.

  Madam Speaker, I also express my deep disappointment with the 
decision of the Committee on Rules to disallow a moderate and 
reasonable amendment by the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) that 
would have mandated the creation of a 9/11-style commission to 
investigate how the executive branch has handled detainees. We need 
that investigation, and we can do some of it within the committee; but 
we do need a public 9/11-style commission.
  Madam Speaker, I support this bill, and I urge my colleagues to 
support it as well.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I served for 6 years on the Committee on 
Armed Services and came to admire greatly our next speaker.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton), ranking member.
  Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, I certainly thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding me this time. She is doing such a superb job on the Permanent 
Select Committee on Intelligence. We thank her for her efforts, along 
with the chairman as well.
  Let me say I rise in support of this intelligence authorization bill. 
In doing so, I want to make a few observations about the state of our 
national intelligence capabilities, as well as some comments about the 
bill.
  Within the span of 2 years, the United States had two very obvious 
and public examples of intelligence failures: the September 11, 2001, 
terrorist attacks; and the completely incorrect conclusions reached 
about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. These and other 
failures have been recognized by both the 9/11 Commission and the Robb-
Silberman Commission on Weapons of Mass Destruction.
  Last year's intelligence reform bill was an important first step in 
rectifying deficiencies in our intelligence capabilities. I believe 
intelligence is the tip of the spear. It is the tip of the spear in 
helping our warfighters. The new Director of National Intelligence 
represents an important benchmark in the creation of a Goldwater-
Nichols-like structure for our intelligence community.
  The Goldwater-Nichols law, as we all know, altered command 
relationships among our military services in such a way that has 
fostered joint operations and enabled our military to become the very 
best in the world.

                              {time}  1515

  I am optimistic that the new director of Intelligence will be able to 
unify the group of disparate intelligence organizations that comprise 
the intelligence community to produce better capability, communication, 
and inoperability than has been the case in the past. I am also pleased 
that the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) and the gentleman 
from Michigan (Chairman Hoekstra) have been able to resolve their 
differences over the transfer of personnel who perform intelligence 
functions.
  While the establishment of the director of National Intelligence is 
an important step, I believe much more remains to be done if we are to 
really improve our intelligence capability. First, I think Congress 
needs to do a better job of overseeing our intelligence operations than 
it has in the past. My own view is that some of our intelligence 
failures could have been avoided with vigorous congressional oversight.
  Second, we need to aggressively follow up on the 9/11 Commission's 
recommendations.
  We need to expand our efforts to secure international stores of 
nuclear materials, particularly in the nations ofthe former Soviet 
Union. Governor Kean, co-chair of the 9/11 Commission, recently said 
there is no greater danger to our country than a terrorist group 
acquiring these materials. I want to echo his concern that we must be 
sensitive to the fact that intelligence activities can sometimes 
intrude upon the lives of Americans. In a free society, we must have 
checks and balances. I think we need to appoint a Federal civil 
liberties board to prevent and redress constitutional abuses by 
intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Although last year's law 
created a civil liberties board, the administration has yet to name any 
members to the board, something that is long overdue.
  Madam Speaker, this is a good bill I believe members should support. 
I commend the gentleman from Michigan, Chairman Hoekstra, and the 
gentlewoman from California, Ranking Member Harman, for a job well 
done.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from

[[Page 13451]]

California (Mr. Hunter), the chairman of the House Committee on Armed 
Services, and our partner in making sure that we have a solid and 
strong intelligence community as well as the best fighting forces, the 
best military in the world.
  Mr. HUNTER. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for his kind 
words. It is appropriate that I follow the ranking member of the 
Committee on Armed Services, the distinguished gentleman from Missouri 
and his remarks, because he talked about Goldwater-Nichols, and 
Goldwater-Nichols did drive jointness in the military.
  Another thing that Goldwater-Nichols did, and it was primarily as a 
result of the debacle in Lebanon with the marines, is to drive what was 
known as the chain of command rule, meaning that when you had a 
combatant commander, formerly known as a CINC, that combatant commander 
was in charge of everything in that warfight-
ing theater, whether it was a rivet joint aircraft or a soldier or a 
marine, special operator, or a tactical intelligence gatherer in that 
area. That was a major issue that we had to work on, and we had to 
build a seam and a protection for the chain of command and, at the same 
time, afford to the national intelligence gatherers the resources and 
the opportunity to carry out their mission.
  I think that the bill, the 9/11 bill did a pretty good job of that, 
and I want to commend the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Hoekstra) 
and the gentlewoman from California (Ranking Member Harman) for their 
participation in working that. My good colleague, the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and I really look forward to Mr. Negroponte 
getting off to the right start. He is a guy with a lot of good 
judgment, great experience in very difficult and inconvenient and 
dangerous missions, in my estimation, and I think that is probably a 
requisite for this job.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) also, 
because there were a couple of provisions in this bill that we thought 
had a chain of command problem, and he looked at those and worked on 
them and took them out in the rule, and I want to let him know I 
appreciate that. That was important to us. We are working together, and 
we both want to see this new apparatus, this intelligence apparatus 
that has to work so well with the defense apparatus moving off to a 
good new start in this war against terror.
  So my thanks to the chairman and thanks to the ranking member. We 
have a lot of work to do, but we have a good bill here, and I hope 
every Member supports it.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds to say to the 
last speaker that I applaud his comments about the need for this new 
legislation to succeed. It is critical, in my view, to move from a 1947 
business model, which is the one we were operating under, to this one.
  I also would point out to our colleagues, as the last speaker knows, 
that battlefield intelligence is not included in the DNI construct that 
we built.
  Madam Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppers-
berger), a recent addition to our committee, who is a very active 
member of our new Subcommittee on Oversight.
  Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Madam Speaker, as my colleagues have pointed out, 
a lot of good, hard, work has been put into this bill, which places our 
committee and the intelligence community on the path of success for 
achieving the goals set forth in the recommendations of the 9/11 
Commission and the WMD Commissions. The turf battles are ending and we 
now have a director of National Intelligence to oversee and coordinate 
efforts, but we all must work together in order to make sure that the 
DNI can succeed.
  I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Hoekstra) and the 
gentlewoman from California (Ranking Member Harman) for leading by 
example and promoting bipartisan efforts in our oversight role. I also 
want to thank our staff for their hard work.
  Our newly established Subcommittee on Oversight has already taken the 
reins of leadership and is investigating the abuses that have occurred 
in our interrogation and detention programs. These abuses only serve to 
embolden terrorist actions against us and it increases risk to our 
military forces and American citizens abroad. These abuses also hurt 
our reputation abroad and allow the insurgents to recruit people to 
attack us.
  I also look forward to continuing work with my colleagues on 
solutions to the security clearance challenges faced by the 
intelligence community and State and local governments who need to 
access information to protect our homeland. This bill's endorsement of 
a multilevel security clearance system will enhance flexibility in 
hiring practices and access to information. Current clearance wait 
times sometimes exceed a year. Terrorists will not wait a year, and 
neither can we.
  Let me close by praising the excellent work of the Armed Forces 
Medical Intelligence Center and the National Security Agency, NSA, 
based in my district. Our committee recognizes their challenges, and we 
fully support their efforts in the global war on terrorism and in Iraq 
and Afghanistan. I urge my Democratic colleagues to join me in 
supporting this bill.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Madam Speaker, as we take a look at the technical programs and we 
take a look at the structure of the intelligence community, at the end 
of the day it is about the people in the intelligence community. As we 
have conducted our oversight responsibilities in developing this bill, 
we have had the opportunity to meet and work with many of the 
intelligence professionals throughout the community and around the 
world. I believe I can speak for the rest of my colleagues when I say 
that we hold in the highest regard the work accomplished by these 
dedicated U.S. intelligence community personnel.
  At great sacrifice, often under extreme and intense conditions, and 
at great personal risk, the men and women of the intelligence community 
continue to perform their missions with great energy, professionalism, 
and devotion to the national security mission. I commend these patriots 
for their heroism, their integrity, and their perseverance. These 
honorable people form the first line of defense for our Nation. Our 
freedoms and the very security of our country rely on their successes. 
Those successes are things we cannot and do not often have the 
opportunity to talk about.
  Unfortunately, and quite wrongly, it is the rare but overlooked 
publicized failures that they are credited with. I stand here today and 
say thank you to these tremendous people. They deserve our support, and 
that is what we are doing with this legislation today.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I associate myself totally with the 
comments that our chairman just made.
  Madam Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 2\1/4\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney), our rookie on our side.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time.
  I rise to discuss H.R. 2475. It is a bill that, as people have said, 
takes a number of steps to strengthen our intelligence capabilities 
and, for those reasons, is supportable. Nevertheless, like most bills, 
it has parts that need to be moved on and worked on still.
  As was mentioned, I am new to this committee, so first I want to 
recognize the efforts of all of my colleagues on the committee and the 
staff who did incredible work on this. I also want to acknowledge the 
fact that my minority colleagues have been outspoken during the past 
couple of years on a number of issues, and I want to thank them and my 
majority colleagues for incorporating those issues in this bill and, of 
course, the majority adding their own approval.
  On the plus side, as has been mentioned, 100 percent funding for 
counterterrorism in the base budget is a huge step forward. We need to 
make sure we build on that. The White House proposal to fund 60 percent 
of that in a

[[Page 13452]]

supplemental budget would have undermined our plans and operations, so 
100 percent is a big step in the right direction. The bipartisan 
willingness to keenly scrutinize architectural programs for the 
quality, for the program management, for the budget responsibility, for 
cost is also important. It is helpful to allow for investments in human 
intelligence, and it can bring more public confidence to the work we do 
in this area.
  I think it would be well-placed to put that kind of scrutiny on the 
whole budget at large, and I think we should consider making more of 
the Select Committee on Intelligence budget process public, to the 
extent possible, including at least the aggregate amount of money being 
spent so that the public will be able to focus on that and have more 
confidence.
  The best intelligence oversight begins with looking at the 9/11 
Commission's recommendations for reform of Congress's intelligence 
committees. We still need to do a considerable amount of work there 
concerning how those committees will be formulated and what budgetary 
appropriation aspect will be within what body. We need renewed 
oversight, and the Subcommittee on Oversight that has been formed and 
mentioned earlier is an improvement. Its time would be well spent if we 
ensure that the DNI and the DNI office is set up largely in line with 
Commission recommendations. We do not need another sprawling 
bureaucracy. It will be well-served to have a streamlined executive 
staff that utilizes existing agencies and moves forward on that basis. 
And it has to have the authority to ensure that the network agencies 
are reformed, coordinated, and effective. It also needs the authority 
to make sure that we have the appropriate budgetary and personnel 
powers within the DNI to work.
  The DNI should follow the recommendation of the blue ribbon 
commission to establish a Civil Liberties Board and ensure that it 
effectively protects the civil liberties, even as we make sure 
aggressive intelligence measures are pursued. This too is essential to 
maintain public trust. It is as important as it is to require that we 
use taxpayer money wisely, and it is every bit as essential that our 
intelligence operate within the law.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Madam Speaker, I would like to get to some of the specifics of the 
legislation. I want to make an observation about the overall position 
we have taken. It is my belief, and we have seen it today, that we may 
be harshly criticized by some for being too bold or aggressive with 
some of our actions. Indeed, we have already been told that we were not 
incremental enough. I want to take head-on those who take such 
positions.
  There is no question that what is being proposed today is bold and 
sweeping in some areas. Without getting into the classified specifics, 
based on our strategic review, we are cutting back dramatically in some 
cases, on some technical programs that have had poor performance or 
could be modified for better utility for the Nation's intelligence 
efforts.
  We are terminating some programs that we do not believe fit in the 
overall architecture for the intelligence community. We have analyzed 
these programs extensively, asked the tough questions, and focused on 
the resulting intelligence output. To paraphrase from a Hollywood movie 
line, these programs have been weighed, they have been measured, and 
they have been found wanting.
  We are then taking the resulting savings and applying that to 
historically underfunded areas in the human intelligence and human 
capital areas. Specifically, we are focusing needed emphasis on adding 
human intelligence specialists, improving the training of analysts, 
improving the training of case officers, and making more robust the 
infrastructure necessary to gain their expertise, and then better 
employ that expertise.
  We have quite simply in the past paid too much lip service to those 
basic needs, while continuing to fund expensive technical programs 
that, although important, do not make up for the lack of analysts, lack 
of worldwide coverage, lack of training, and lack of basic 
infrastructure. In sum, we are doing the heavy lifting that should have 
been done long ago. We are acting boldly and positively on the task our 
former chairman gave us.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute to comment on the 
remarks the chairman just made.
  Madam Speaker, it is not a zero-sum game, it is not a trade-off 
between what we call HUMINT, that is, human intelligence, which is 
primarily the use of spies to tell us the plans and intention of the 
bad guys, and technology. It is a positive-sum game, or we hope it is a 
positive-sum game, that balances correctly our investments in HUMINT 
and our investments in technology.
  I said earlier that my home State of California makes many of the 
technical platforms that we use effectively to gather intelligence. I 
agree with our chairman that we should take a clear-eyed look at what 
works and what does not work and what capabilities we need to defeat 
present and future threats. But some of us, I would say a majority on 
the minority side, believe that the weighing, measuring, and finding 
wanting that has gone on in this bill needs further review, that the 
balance can be better struck.
  I look forward to working with the chairman on a better balance as 
this bill comes to conference, keeping in mind that we want a positive-
sum outcome.
  Madam Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), a very serious Member of this 
body, not on our committee.
  Mr. CROWLEY. Madam Speaker, I thank my gentle friend and colleague 
from California for yielding me this time.
  I rise in strong support of the national intelligence bill. I want to 
thank the committee for its great work. I especially want to focus my 
praise on the gentlewoman from California (Ranking Member Harman) for 
her great work in leading on this issue. It was Democrats, led by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) and the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Hastings), that pushed the 9/11 Commission to be started last 
year, as the Republicans and the White House blocked their work and 
opposed their mission. I believe the Republicans fear the truth that 
may come from that Commission.
  Later, when the 9/11 Commission issued its recommendations and the 
Speaker said he would not implement any legislative changes without a 
majority of the majority, it was again Democrats and the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Harman) who led the fight for a real intelligence 
shakeup and for the creation of a director of National Intelligence.

                              {time}  1530

  Democrats fixed those problems and fought back changes this year to 
bring us back to the bad old days of intelligence turf wars.
  This bill reflects the new world we live in, a dangerous world that 
has gotten more dangerous since September 11; and we need to be 
involved, and more heavily involved, to protect all Americans, no 
matter where they are on this planet and the bill does that.
  Representing one of the most diverse congressional districts in the 
U.S., I interact with a number of immigrants and their families who are 
from every corner of the globe. And the one thing that unifies them all 
is their love of this great country. And they can and will be helpful 
in helping this country infiltrate terror networks that threaten our 
country.
  This bill will help them do that.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague, the 
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
  Mr. SHAYS. Madam Speaker, I want to just first compliment the 
chairman and ranking member for their excellent work on this 
legislation, their excellent work in general, and frankly the work that 
they have done in helping to create such a strong structure for 
intelligence.
  The Cold War is over. The world is a more dangerous place. We need to 
be

[[Page 13453]]

able to not contain and react to an event; we need to be able to detect 
and prevent it. It means that we need very good intelligence, both 
intelligence directed with technology and intelligence that occurs from 
very good human capital.
  I think the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) and our incredible 
ranking member, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), have done 
an excellent job in drafting this legislation. My compliments to both 
of them. They give credit to the full Congress and the work that they 
have done.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I thank the last speaker for his generous 
words and ask how much time remains on each side.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Miller of Michigan). The gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Harman) has 8 minutes remaining. The gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) has 8\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, we at the moment have no other speakers on 
the floor. And I reserve the right to close for our side.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, we have no additional speakers at this 
time either, so I believe I have the right to close. The gentlewoman 
will close on her side, and we will have no additional speakers. I will 
close on our side.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of our time.
  Madam Speaker, the last 4 years have witnessed two of the worst 
intelligence failures in our Nation's history. Congress passed 
intelligence reform and created the DNI position to give the brave 
women and men of the intelligence community the tools they need to 
collect and analyze accurate and timely intelligence.
  We cannot have any more catastrophic failures where we fail to 
connect the dots or believe too fervently in the claims of bogus 
sources. This legislation, the authorization bill we are considering 
today, is the first funding bill under our new intelligence 
organization.
  It is a strong bill that deserves our support. As we said earlier, 
for the first time we fully funded counterterrorism in the base budget 
so we can plan CT operations against our enemies. For the first time we 
have urged the DNI to create multitier security clearances so we can 
field a diverse group of intelligence officers who speak the languages 
and understand the cultures of our adversaries.
  I am proud to say these were two ideas offered by the committee 
Democrats that gained bipartisan support in our committee. As I have 
said, there are ways this bill can be improved further. And I look 
forward to working on this as we move to conference. But this is a 
bipartisan product that deserves bipartisan support.
  And before I close, I do want to thank again the hard-working members 
on both sides of the committee who put so much effort into it day after 
day, and moreover the hard-working staff on a bipartisan basis.
  And let me just identify those on the minority side who are sitting 
on the floor with me today: David Buckley, staff director; Chuck Gault, 
deputy staff director; Jeremy Bash, general counsel; Mike DeLaney; 
Larry Hanauer; John Keefe; Pam Moore; Wyndee Parker, special counsel; 
and Christine York. They make us look good, and I urge passage of this 
legislation before us.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  (Mr. HOEKSTRA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks, and include extraneous material.)
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, today before closing general debate, I would like to 
briefly offer congratulations and recognition to Mr. Charles G. Allen, 
as many of us know him, Charlie, as he completes his tour of duty as 
the assistant director of the Central Intelligence Agency for 
collection.
  He has served the intelligence community with great distinction, and 
I will later seek consent in the House to submit a more lengthy tribute 
into the Record.
  But just briefly, he is a native of North Carolina. Mr. Allen has 
served the Central Intelligence Agency and the Nation with distinction 
since 1958, holding a variety of positions of increasing 
responsibility, both in analytical and managerial capacity. He served 
overseas in an intelligence liaison capacity from 1974 to 1977, and 
from 1977 to 1980 he held management positions of increasing 
responsibility and importance in the Directorate of Intelligence.
  I think that all of the Members in the House, and all of the Members 
and the staff on the committee who have gotten to know Mr. Allen over 
the last number of years, number one, we are glad that he is still 
working on special assignment with Mr. Goss; but we really want to 
extend our congratulations to him for almost slightly over 45 years of 
service to this country within the intelligence community, a real 
national asset in the intelligence business.
  Madam Speaker, I include for the Record a statement on Assistant 
Director Allen.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today to offer congratulations and recognition 
to Mr. Charles E. Allen as he completes his tour of duty as the 
Assistant Director of Central Intelligence for Collection. Since its 
creation by the Congress 7 years ago, he has served in this position 
with distinction.
  Mr. Allen was appointed as the first Assistant Director of Central 
Intelligence for Collection. As such, he was responsible for 
Intelligence Community collection management, and specifications for 
our next generation of collection systems. During these past 7 years he 
has come to personify the position, personalize the management of this 
nation's scarce intelligence collection assets, confound his early 
critics, and overall achieve positive results beyond even the 
expectations of his supporters, who are legion. His service has been a 
great asset, and Congress has regularly drawn upon his experience and 
judgment.
  A native of North Carolina, Mr. Allen has served the Central 
Intelligence Agency and the Nation with distinction since 1958, holding 
a variety of positions of increasing responsibility both in analytic 
and managerial capacities. He served overseas in an intelligence 
liaison capacity from 1974 to 1977, and from 1977 to 1980 he held 
management positions of increasing responsibility and importance in the 
Directorate of Intelligence.
  Mr. Allen served as program manager of a major classified project, 
from 1980 to 1982 in the Office of the Director of Central 
Intelligence, and was subsequently detailed to the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense where he held a senior position in strategic 
mobilization planning.
  In 1985 the Director of Central Intelligence requested Mr. Allen's 
return from the Secretary of Defense's office to serve as the National 
Intelligence Officer for Counterterrorism, and later as Chief of 
Intelligence in the CIA's newly established Counterterrorist Center. 
Many of Mr. Allen's successes have and shall continue to remain secret, 
but two that have become more publicly known illustrate his 
contributions; he played a key role in apprehending the hijackers who 
killed an American citizen on the cruise ship Achille Lauro, and he 
correctly brought to the DCI's attention certain matters which served 
to stimulate the Iran-Contra investigation.
  Mr. Allen served as the National Intelligence Officer for Warning 
from 1988 to 1994 and chaired the Intelligence Community's Warning 
Committee. From these positions he issued timely warnings of events of 
momentous importance, confounding most intelligence officers who did 
not share his prescience.
  Mr. Allen was awarded the National Intelligence Medal for Achievement 
in 1983 by DCI Casey and the President's Award for Distinguished 
Federal Civilian Service in 1986 by President Reagan. In 1991, he was 
presented the CIA Commendation Medal for provision of warning 
intelligence in Desert Shield/Desert Storm.
  He and his wife, Kay, reside in Herndon, Virginia, where they raised 
four children.
  Madam Speaker, Mr. Allen has already enjoyed a long and luminous 
career in intelligence, and as he steps down from his current position 
I hope all my colleagues will recognize the extraordinary contributions 
Mr. Charles E. Allen has made to our National Security as a lifelong 
professional intelligence officer. I hope my colleagues will honor him 
as a great American and pioneer in the management of intelligence 
collection inter alia.

[[Page 13454]]

  Finally, Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing 
our confidence in his continued ability and willingness to serve the 
Nation as she shall call upon him.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. HARMAN. I thank the chairman for yielding to me. Charlie Allen is 
as close as you can come to a legend in the intelligence community. 
Before the intelligence reform bill passed last year, he was one of the 
few senior intelligence officers who could get 15 disparate agencies to 
function as a community. He did that mainly through sheer force of 
personality.
  Our Nation collects intelligence through a variety of means, from 
spies on the ground to satellites overhead, and everything in between. 
In his capacity as the assistant director for collection, Charlie got 
the collectors to understand that they were most effective when they 
worked together as a team against the hardest targets.
  He got them to understand that integrated collection strategies 
yielded the best outcomes. Under Charlie's leadership, the collectors 
in the intelligence community have scored some truly impressive 
victories, and it is unfortunate that these cannot be recounted in 
public.
  I will just tell you that Charlie's service to the Nation was made 
clear to me the day he told the committee that he had been with the CIA 
for nearly 50 years. That is an astounding record, and it is certainly 
appropriate as we close debate on what I think is one of the best 
authorization bills ever, that we recognize Charlie's service to our 
Nation.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, in closing, again I would like to thank 
my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, the staff on both sides 
of the aisle who have worked to put together a very, very good bill, my 
colleagues on my side of the aisle.
  We have put together, I think, a very, very strong bill. I think it 
deserves broad bipartisan support. It sets us in the right direction. 
As my colleague has indicated, there is more work to do. We do need to 
take a look at the technical programs. These are critical to the long-
term success of our intelligence community, to make sure that public 
policymakers have the information that we need to make the right 
decisions.
  I appreciate the gentlewoman from California's (Ms. Harman) support 
as we have gone through this process and recognizing that there are 
issues and concerns about the performance of some of these programs and 
so that we have the agreement on that.
  Where we are disagreeing and having some discussions right now is 
what is the most effective way to respond to those problems and issues. 
We want accountability. We want performance. We want to spend the 
taxpayer dollars wisely. And I am sure that as we continue to go 
through this process, work with our colleagues on the other side of 
this building, and work with the administration, we will come to a 
conclusion, hopefully, that we can all agree to.
  I applaud the committee and our work in taking some of these steps 
that I think we all recognize needed to be taken and that we are 
committed to addressing those problems.
  With that, Madam Speaker, I would encourage my colleagues to support 
this bill.
  Ms. PELOSI. Madam Speaker, the preamble to the Constitution tells us 
that one of the first responsibilities of the Federal government is to 
``provide for the common defense.''
  My 10 years on the House Intelligence Committee have given me an 
appreciation for the vital role the men and women in our intelligence 
agencies play in doing just that.
  Many of them take extraordinary risks on a daily basis in an effort 
to gather the information policy makers and military commanders need to 
make sound decisions. They are deeply dedicated to preserving our 
country's security, and each of us is grateful for their hard work and 
sacrifice.
  They need an intelligence system that is as strong, smart, and 
competent as they are, and this bill takes several strong steps towards 
making sure we have that system.
  I want to commend Chairman Hoekstra and Ranking Member Harman for 
their leadership and hard work in making sure that this legislation 
addresses not only the immediate needs of the intelligence community, 
but helps plan for the future as well.
  However, it would be a mistake for us to pass this bill and declare 
that our work is done and that we have fulfilled our responsibility to 
the intelligence community and the American people.
  It has now been more than 1,700 days since the September 11th 
terrorist attacks changed our Nation, and laid bare the holes in our 
intelligence gathering system.
  It has been 11 months since the independent 9/11 Commission issued 
its findings and made its recommendations about how to close those 
gaps.
  It has been nearly a year since the Senate Intelligence Committee 
concluded that our intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction 
capabilities was fundamentally flawed--a conclusion that was recently 
confirmed by the Presidential Commission on the Intelligence 
Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass 
Destruction.
  In part, this bill provides the resources the intelligence community 
needs to prepare for the future by learning from mistakes made in the 
past. However, these recent reports--notably those of the 9/11 
Commission and the Robb-Silberman Commission--point to the need to do 
far more than simply fund the intelligence community.
  These two commissions made many recommendations for significant 
change in the way the intelligence agencies operate and are overseen by 
Congress, the way the intelligence community is managed, and in other 
matters associated with better protecting the American people from the 
threats posed by terrorists, particularly terrorists armed with weapons 
of mass destruction.
  It was an intelligence authorization bill that established the 9/11 
Commission, and it is therefore appropriate that in the context of the 
debate on this authorization measure, and with the first anniversary of 
the release of the Commission's report and recommendations fast 
approaching, we reflect on the recommendations that have been 
implemented, and on those that have not.
  The Commission concluded that more centralized management of the 
intelligence community was needed, and that the manager had to have 
considerable power over people and money. The first Director of 
National Intelligence, Ambassador Negroponte is now in office. He faces 
a daunting task. We all hope he is successful in it.
  That is why it was so surprising and regrettable that the 
Intelligence Committee, over the objections of Congresswoman Harman and 
the other Democratic Members, chose to welcome him with an effort to 
restrict his power. What a terribly negative message that provision 
sent about the commitment of the majority to intelligence reform. This 
bill is much improved with that provision removed, as the rule has 
done.
  The impetus for this ill-advised action reportedly came from 
officials in the Department of Defense. We created the position of DNI 
to help address the interagency squabbling that leads to intelligence 
failures. This is simply no place for power grabs or bureaucratic self-
protection and preservation on the part of the Pentagon.
  Just as it was an intelligence authorization bill that created the 9/
11 commission, I had hoped that this intelligence authorization would 
include Mr. Waxman's proposal to create a commission to investigate the 
prisoner abuses in Afghanistan, at Abu Ghraib, and at Guantanamo.
  That will not occur as a result of actions taken by the Republican 
majority on the Rules Committee. For our international standing, our 
sense of fairness and decency, and to establish more effective means of 
intelligence gathering, these abuses must be examined.
  As former Ambassador Thomas Pickering, attorney Floyd Abrams, and our 
former colleague Bob Barr wrote in The Washington Post on June 7: 
``This is a time when we should be making extra efforts to reach out to 
Muslims and to ask them to work with us in the war against terrorism. 
Instead, our failure to undertake a thorough and credible investigation 
has caused severe resentment of the United States.''
  Some of those who opposed most strongly an independent investigation 
of the 9/11 attacks also oppose an independent investigation of the 
prisoner abuse scandal. That is unacceptable.
  But just as the American people would not accept the initial refusal 
to establish a 9/11 Commission, so too will demands continue for an 
independent commission to investigate the prisoner abuses in Iraq, 
Guantanamo Bay, and elsewhere.
  Our country's standing in the eyes of the world depends on getting to 
the bottom of the

[[Page 13455]]

prisoner abuse matter--a fact that will ultimately force the majority 
of this House to stop placing obstacles in the path of a full and 
independent inquiry.
  Unfortunately this is not the only initiative this Congress has 
failed to act on. Despite the unanimity with which they were adopted 
and the near universal acclaim they have produced, some critical 
recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission have gone unfulfilled. For 
example, Chairman Kean pointed earlier this month to the failure to 
allocate more of the broadcast spectrum to first responder 
communications as ``almost a scandal.'' Congresswoman Harman has been a 
leader in trying to resolve this problem and I congratulate her for her 
efforts.
  Chairman Kean also emphasized what has long been known to Members of 
the Intelligence Committee: the greatest danger facing the United 
States is a terrorist attack involving weapons of mass destruction, and 
the best way to address that is to safeguard or destroy WMD components, 
especially nuclear material, at its source.
  Intelligence plays a huge role in efforts to combat proliferation of 
nuclear material and technology, but money is needed to better protect 
or acquire these materials in the countries where they were developed. 
We are simply not providing enough resources to this effort.
  Finally, the 9/11 Commissioners have been clear in their assessment 
that, unless Congress overhauls the procedures by which it oversees the 
work of the intelligence agencies, intelligence reform will not be 
successful.
  The House has not undertaken the kind of comprehensive review of the 
oversight process that the Commission believes to be necessary. I have 
let the Speaker know, repeatedly, that Democrats are prepared to work 
cooperatively on this review. It is imperative that we begin this task 
soon--we have already waited far too long.
  This bill enjoys broad bipartisan support from members of the 
Committee, and I intend to support it. In doing so, however, I urge 
that the House dedicate itself to finishing the job begun last fall 
with the adoption of the 9/11 intelligence reform bill and address 
completely all of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.
  Mr. EVERETT. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 
2475, the Intelligence Authorization Bill for fiscal year 2006.
  As one of several ``cross-over'' members who serve on both the 
Intelligence and Armed Services Committees, this legislation strikes a 
reasonable balance between our national intelligence needs, and the 
needs of our warfighters. As we know from our work on the Intelligence 
Reform Act last fall, this is not an easy task.
  Madam Speaker, it would be disingenuous to state that all is well 
within the Intelligence Community. For a number of years, the Select 
Committee on Intelligence has been systematically identifying major 
shortfalls in providing for our foreign intelligence needs. These 
include: funding shortfalls, major limitations in human intelligence, 
limited capabilities in foreign language specialists, aging information 
technology systems, and the lack of strategic planning with regard to 
the Intelligence Community's overhead intelligence collection programs.
  Madam Speaker, this bill represents a major step forward in 
correcting many of these problems by funding programs, operations, and 
personnel that are vital to the security of the United States. The 
policies and programs in this bill will enable us to strengthen our 
intelligence capabilities to ensure that we are providing the best 
foreign intelligence efforts possible.
  In particular, this bill begins to balance the resources applied to 
technical collection programs with those applied to human source 
collection. In years past, funding cuts greatly reduced the 
Intelligence Community's ability to provide global collection and 
analytic coverage. The global war on terrorism has led to increased 
funding, but there is still only limited capability to focus on other 
issues around the world. This bill reinvigorates capabilities that have 
long been ignored.
  I have a personal concern about the Intelligence Community's 
capabilities against foreign missile systems. Therefore, at my 
direction the bill includes specific funding increases to allow for 
expanded modeling and simulation of foreign systems, exploitation of 
foreign missile systems, and all-source missile event analysis.
  Madam Speaker, this bill puts a great deal of emphasis on getting the 
Intelligence Community ``back to the basics.'' In short, this bill 
continues to correct the systemic problems that left us underprepared 
for warning against terrorist attacks on America, and begins the 
process of returning human intelligence collection to a worldwide 
endeavor.
  I feel that this is a good bill that balances the increased 
investment against critical priorities with procedures for effectively 
monitoring the wise investment of the taxpayers' money. Madam Speaker, 
I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2475.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2475, ``The 
Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006''. I thank my 
friend and colleague from Michigan for yielding me this time.
  For almost 4 years, the U.S. Intelligence Community has been at the 
forefront of the Global War on Terror. Working long hours, under often 
primitive conditions, the men and women of the Intelligence Community 
have performed spectacularly under the most stressing of operational 
tempos. The legislation before us today authorizes the funding 
necessary to support the men and women of the Intelligence Community 
and to keep our country safe. However, a sufficient balance must be 
maintained between fighting terror and maintaining global awareness of 
emerging threats. Therefore, the legislation before us lays the 
budgetary and programmatic groundwork that will ensure that the U.S. 
Intelligence Community is prepared and able to face the challenges and 
national security threats of the future.
  First and foremost, this legislation provides the appropriate balance 
between technical, human and open source collection.
  This bill provides sufficient funds to ensure that the U.S. retains 
its technical collection edge for the next 20 years. It also increases 
the resources necessary to provide a strong, global human and open 
source intelligence collection capability. Achieving this balance 
required some hard choices on several highly regarded technical 
collection systems, however, the Committee was able to reach bipartisan 
consensus on the need to eliminate some redundant or outdated systems.
  Second, this legislation strengthens innovation across the 
Intelligence Community.
  The legislation includes a significant increase in the resources 
devoted to advanced research and technology development including 
increased funding for new sensors and platforms, data mining and 
information assurance technologies. To ensure that these resources are 
used wisely, this legislation also strengthens the authorities and 
responsibilities of the Intelligence Community's Chief Scientist.
  Third, this legislation revitalizes our intelligence analysis and 
production capabilities.
  Our intelligence community analysts are frequently asked to turn 
fragmentary and seemingly random puzzle pieces into a coherent picture. 
To help bring the picture into focus, this legislation provides for 
improved training opportunities (particularly for languages), new 
analytic tools, increased personnel and better tools to enable 
information sharing.
  Fourth and finally, this legislation continues the efforts begun in 
the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 to 
strengthen and define the authorities and responsibilities of the 
Director of National Intelligence.
  The Intelligence Community is our first-line of defense against an 
elusive and unstructured threat that has shown willingness to harm 
America. It is vital that this community has the resources and 
authorities necessary to effectively target both the terrorist threats 
of today as well as new threats of tomorrow. H.R. 2475 provides those 
resources.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to support this legislation in the 
bipartisan manner that our national security efforts demand.
  Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong 
support of H.R. 2475, the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2006. I 
congratulate Chairman Hoekstra for presenting a strong bill that 
addresses our major intelligence requirements.
  Madam Speaker, as chair of the Intelligence Policy Subcommittee, I 
have been tasked to look at the vast range of threats faced by the 
United States, and work to ensure that the intelligence services devote 
the necessary resources to respond to those threats.
  As we consider this bill, we are in the midst of a war with a vicious 
enemy--a war on terrorism that must be won. Our troops are also engaged 
in a bloody effort to stabilize Iraq.
  Our war-fighters must have timely, accurate information about the 
enemy, and this bill makes every effort to guarantee that intelligence 
is provided. Thus, there is an essential force protection component to 
this authorization.
  But we cannot focus solely on the collection of near-term, tactical 
battlefield intelligence. We must also ensure that our political 
leaders have good information about big picture threats to U.S. 
interests globally.
  The Intelligence Community must focus its resources on the nuclear 
programs in Iran,

[[Page 13456]]

North Korea, and other major proliferators of weapons of mass 
destruction.
  We must fully understand the ongoing military modernization of China, 
and know how Beijing intends to use its emerging capabilities. Russia 
remains a nuclear superpower with thousands of nuclear warheads, and 
prudence dictates we have good intelligence regarding Russia's 
intentions.
  The behavior of these important nations can have a deep impact on our 
national security, and the United States must not become the victim of 
a ``strategic surprise''.
  To protect our people and inform our political leaders, we must have 
the capability to collect good, accurate information. It is 
increasingly difficult to predict where the next crisis may erupt, but 
our leaders must have the ability to anticipate significant events.
  H.R. 2475 places much needed emphasis on our collection and analysis 
capabilities. I am pleased that this bill increases the investment in 
human intelligence and the capabilities they provide for us.
  It provides additional resources for professional training and 
language education for intelligence officers being deployed overseas.
  The legislation also authorizes powerful new tools that will assist 
our intelligence analysts to sort through and properly understand the 
information that has been gathered.
  At a time when the threats to u.s. national security are so great, 
H.R. 2475 supports the effort to provide our leaders with focused, 
timely intelligence. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation 
and once again, I congratulate my chairman on his outstanding effort.
  Mr. MURTHA. Madam Speaker, the Intelligence Authorization Bill 
provides resources vital to the continuing effort to improve our 
nation's intelligence capabilities and to transform the intelligence 
community to ensure that we do everything possible to prevent another 
event like September 11, 2001. As such, I support this legislation.
  In particular, I am gratified that this bill provides resources above 
the President's request to increase our human intelligence 
capabilities. This is an issue that has concerned me for many years and 
one that I have worked to correct. The House-passed FY 2006 Defense 
Appropriations bill includes substantial, new HUMINT resources, which I 
will make every effort to protect as we go into conference with the 
Senate later this year.
  Additionally, the authorization bill includes provisions to 
strengthen Ambassador Negroponte's hand as he undertakes the tremendous 
responsibility of defining the role of the Office of the Director of 
National Intelligence and transforming the intelligence community. I am 
hopeful that the authorizers and the appropriators can work together to 
support the DNI in this critical first year.
  Certainly, there are areas of the bill, particularly some of the 
technical programs, where I am a little disappointed in the resource 
levels recommended by the Intelligence Committee. I look forward to 
working with my colleagues on the committee to find a mutually 
acceptable approach to meet the nation's space platform requirements. 
However, overall, I believe that this is a good bill that goes a long 
way to meeting the needs of the intelligence community.
  Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2475.
  I commend the leadership of the Chairman and Ranking Member, and 
thank them for supporting the amendment I offered at mark-up to align 
the authorization for an important technical program with the level set 
by the Armed Services Committee.
  H.R. 2475 also underscores the importance the Committee places on 
providing full-funding of intelligence requirements related to the 
global war on terrorism. For years, Intelligence Committee Democrats 
have fought hard for this. If fact, some of us voted against the 
intelligence bill last year because it contained less than one-third of 
the funding needed for counterterrorism. This year, I'm pleased the 
Committee has finally brought a bill before the House that provides 
full intelligence funding for our dedicated men and women on the front 
lines.
  This bill also includes House Resolution 173, a measure which 
encourages the DNI to establish a uniform, multi-tiered security 
clearance system. Such a system is needed to ensure all intelligence 
agencies fully-leverage the cultural knowledge and foreign language 
skills of people who may not be able to be cleared, in a timely manner, 
to the highest levels. It will also help increase the workforce 
diversity and skills-mix, both of which are critical to the future 
success and viability of the Intelligence Community.
  The report accompanying H.R. 2475 also highlights the work of the El 
Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC). Although EPIC is funded through DEA in 
other legislation instead of this bill because of its drug-related 
intelligence mission, its work is critically important to the U.S. 
national security overall. I look forward to working with my colleagues 
to ensure EPIC's activities are funded at an appropriate and consistent 
level.
  In addition to highlighting the strengths of this bill, I must also 
note my serious concerns about the general oversight of systematic 
failures related to the handling and interrogation of detainees. While 
it is critical that we collect actionable intelligence from detainees 
to prevent future threats, it is imperative that we do so in a way that 
respects U.S. law, and international conventions and treaties.
  Although there were some issues some of us would have resolved 
differently, H.R. 2475 is, on balance, a sound bill.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate on the bill has expired.


                   Amendment Offered by Mrs. Maloney

  Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Speaker, I offer an amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mrs. Maloney:
       At the end of title III (page 14, after line 23) insert the 
     following:

     SEC. 310. REPORTS ON FAILURE TO TIMELY IMPLEMENT THE NATIONAL 
                   COUNTER-
                   TERRORISM CENTER.

       (a) Initial Report on Failure to Meet Deadlines Imposed 
     Under Law.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the President shall provide written 
     notice to Congress explaining the failure of the executive 
     branch to implement the National Counterterrorism Center, as 
     established under section 119 of the National Security Act of 
     1947, as added by section 1021 of the National Security 
     Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 (title I of the Intelligence 
     Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004; Public Law 108-
     458), by the deadlines imposed under section 1097(a) of such 
     Act for the implementation of such Center, including the 
     failure by the President to nominate an individual to serve 
     as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center.
       (b) Subsequent Monthly Updates.--The President shall 
     provide to Congress monthly updates to the initial notice to 
     Congress under subsection (a) until the National 
     Counterterrorism Center is fully implemented and operational.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 331, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) and a Member opposed each will 
control 15 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).
  Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Our amendment requires the President to keep the Congress and the 
American people updated monthly on the progress of the implementation 
and operation of the National Counterterrorism Center until it is fully 
implemented and operational.
  The Congress and the President recognize the National 
Counterterrorism Center as a critical office for the safety of our 
country. The Congress and the President agreed that it had to be up and 
running, fully operational and fully staffed, by June 17, 2005, or last 
Friday.
  While director Admiral John Redd was nominated on June 10, he has yet 
to be confirmed by the Senate, and he has many challenges before him, 
chief among which is to get this center fully staffed and operational.
  The Bush administration manages by goals and reports. A fully 
operational and staffed NCTC is a goal that must be attained as quickly 
as possible.
  The National Counterterrorism Center was a core element of the 
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. The center 
must be the central organization for analyzing and integrating all 
foreign and domestic intelligence on terrorism.
  It also is to conduct strategic operational planning for 
counterterrorism operations at home and abroad, integrating all 
elements of national power. In short, the NCTC was created to bring all 
of the pieces together to prevent a future attack. The Congress and the 
President established June 17, last Friday, as the deadline for the 
NCTC.
  Unfortunately, we cannot stand here today and say that it is fully 
operational and fully implemented. This is not the only deadline in 
this important bill to be missed. I have a chart that I

[[Page 13457]]

requested from the Congressional Research Service. It is an 8-page 
chart of deadlines.
  And what CRS found is no fewer than 22 deadlines have been missed in 
the first 6 months of this bill becoming law. And many other important 
deadlines are looming. Some of the deadlines we have missed include: 
developing a national transportation strategy, a number of port 
security strategic plans, and streamlining the security clearance 
process.
  We must keep the implementation of this bill on track; hence the need 
for this amendment. This is not to say that there has not been 
substantial progress. Prior to the NCTC being created in law, President 
Bush created the NCTC last August by executive order.
  This center has operated for months under the direction of an interim 
director. A positive step towards the goal of implementation took place 
on June 10 when Retired Vice Admiral John Redd was nominated to be the 
permanent director of the NCTC.

                              {time}  1545

  I would like to note that when we originally submitted this amendment 
to the Committee on Rules on June 2, no NCTC director had been 
nominated. Upon confirmation, the new director and Ambassador 
Negroponte will be faced with a number of issues before full 
implementation. Chief among these issues is working out the 
inconsistencies between the statute and the executive order. The 
existing inconsistencies which have been identified by CRS hold much 
danger of creating confusion which could undermine the maximum 
functioning of the NCTC.
  Another example of these inconsistencies relates to the danger that 
the tactic supplied to foreign intelligence collection may be applied 
against U.S. citizens. Thus, the importance of a robust Civil Liberties 
Board, the beginnings of which were included in the enacted statute.
  This amendment will motivate all of the participants to get the job 
done to protect the American people. I am confident that the Permanent 
Select Committee on Intelligence, under the leadership of the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) and the ranking member, the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Harman), will relentlessly monitor the 
implementation of these important deadlines. It is too important to the 
safety of the American people.
  Just as the Goldwater-Nichols bill unified the Army, Navy, and Air 
Force into a single effective fighting force, so too does the 
intelligence reform legislation draw together the isolated elements of 
the intelligence community into a unified shield to protect the 
American people.
  The basic function of the NCTC is to prevent another 9/11. As someone 
who represents a city that was attacked on 9/11, we owe it to the 
victims and to all Americans to put this central defense mechanism 
against future attacks in place. We must fulfill the promise of this 
functional restructuring of the intelligence community for the safety 
of the American people.
  For me, the intelligence bill was the most important bill we passed 
since I have been in this Congress, and I am deeply grateful to the 
families of the victims who fought so hard for the enactment of this 
bill along with the President and my colleagues in this Congress.
  Our amendment is a step towards implementing this important bill.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I rise to claim the time in opposition 
to the amendment, but I do not object to the amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Miller of Michigan). Is there objection 
to the gentleman from Michigan controlling the time in opposition?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I will not oppose this amendment. I believe the author 
will have a perfecting amendment.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Speaker, I appreciate very much the gentleman 
from Michigan (Chairman Hoekstra) not opposing my amendment and all the 
hard work that he and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) did 
on the intelligence bill.
  I would like to note the concern that the gentleman reported to me or 
gave to me about the reporting requirement.


           Modification to Amendment Offered by Mrs. Maloney

  Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the 
amendment be modified to accept changing the reporting requirement in 
the amendment from the President to the Director of National 
Intelligence, Ambassador Negroponte.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment as modified, offered by Mrs. Maloney:
       At the end of title III (page 14, after line 23) insert the 
     following:

     SEC. 310. REPORTS ON FAILURE TO TIMELY IMPLEMENT THE NATIONAL 
                   COUNTER-
                   TERRORISM CENTER.

       (a) Initial Report on Failure to Meet Deadlines Imposed 
     Under Law.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence 
     shall provide written notice to Congress explaining the 
     failure of the executive branch to implement the National 
     Coun-
     terterrorism Center, as established under section 119 of the 
     National Security Act of 1947, as added by section 1021 of 
     the National Security Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 (title 
     I of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 
     2004; Public Law 108-458), by the deadlines imposed under 
     section 1097(a) of such Act for the implementation of such 
     Center, including the failure by the President to nominate an 
     individual to serve as Director of the National 
     Counterterrorism Center.
       (b) Subsequent Monthly Updates.--The Director of National 
     Intelligence shall provide to Congress monthly updates to the 
     initial notice to Congress under subsection (a) until the 
     National Counterterrorism Center is fully implemented and 
     operational.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the amendment is 
modified.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Reclaiming my time, I thank my colleague, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) for that change.
  I think the reason we are accepting the amendment is in the spirit 
that it was offered by my colleague from New York and, I believe, my 
colleague from Connecticut. We on the committee, the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Harman) and myself have laid down as one of the 
parameters and one of the things that we expect from the oversight 
subcommittee is to vigorously and aggressively track the implementation 
of the intelligence reform bill.
  I agree in the time that the gentlewoman and I have been in Congress 
together until we pass Federal prison industries reform, this will be 
one of the most significant pieces of legislation that we will have 
worked on together.
  There are some talking points on the technicality as to what ``fully 
operational'' means, and those types of things; and whether it is fully 
operational now and whether it could have been fully operational before 
June 17, because that is when the law came into effect, we fully 
understand and appreciate the concern that the gentlewoman has in 
bringing this amendment forward, that we on the committee and that 
Congress and the American people be fully informed as to the progress 
we are making in implementing the intelligence reform bill.
  We are committed to doing that. We are committed to staying informed 
on the committee, riding herd over the director of National 
Intelligence to make sure that this bill is implemented to the full 
intent of Congress when we passed it.
  So it is in light of the spirit of that approach that we accept this 
amendment.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to 
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), the ranking member.
  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
time. I want to commend her and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. 
Shays) for the enormous work they did outside the intelligence 
committee. As

[[Page 13458]]

we were considering the intelligence reform legislation last year, the 
faces that I saw on a constant basis were theirs and the families. And 
I often have said that the families were the wind beneath our wings. I 
would add a couple of Members of Congress to that, too, and I thank 
them for all they did.
  I am very pleased that the majority is accepting the amendment. It is 
a good idea for us to make absolutely clear that the NCTC, the National 
Counter Terrorism Center, is a vital piece of the reform we enacted 
last year and that it needs to be fully operational ASAP.
  To explain further, one of the big mistakes we made leading up to 9/
11 is everyone now knows our failure to connect the dots. Obviously, 
having a fusion center designed for this purpose is a very good way to 
make sure we do not fail to connect the dots the next time.
  So it took, I would say, the introduction of this amendment to cause 
the President to nominate a very able fellow, Vice Admiral Redd, to be 
the director of the NCTC. He did that 2 days after this amendment was 
presented in the Committee on Rules. And perhaps now that we are 
accepting it as part of today's debate, the NCTC will become fully 
operational even before that prison reform bill is enacted.
  In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I strongly support this. I support the 
team that has brought this to us. And I would note to this body, that 
bill last year that we worked so hard on gets its real sea legs today 
as the House takes this necessary step in funding its critical parts 
and in making clear that we will not accept any efforts to roll back 
the jurisdiction of the DNI, who is going to be the commander of the 
tip of the spear in this era of terror.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), and I commend his 
leadership and support on this amendment and his hard work on the 
intelligence reform committee. We both had many victims that were lost 
from our respective districts and we worked closely throughout that 
period with the families and with our colleagues on that important 
bill. I thank the gentleman for his hard work.
  Mr. SHAYS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
time. I thank her for her very hard work and the work again of the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) and the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Harman).
  I rise, obviously, in support of this amendment that we are offering, 
as amended, which would require the director of National Intelligence 
to provide Congress written explanation why the National Counter 
Terrorism Center, NCTC, is not fully operational since the June 17 
deadline set forth in Public Law 108-458.
  The Joint Inquiry and the 9/11 Commission both found that the lack of 
information-sharing and coordination within the intelligence community 
led to numerous missed opportunities to detect and prevent September 11 
terrorist attacks.
  The establishment of the NCTC was a key 9/11 Commission 
recommendation and an integral part of the effort to increase 
information-sharing and coordination among intelligence agencies.
  The director will serve a critical function in our Nation's 
intelligence capability, as he will report to the President and to the 
director of National Intelligence.
  The NCTC, once fully operational, will be the Nation's primary agency 
for now analyzing terrorist threats and planning counterterrorism 
operations at home and abroad.
  The deadline by which the NCTC was required by law to be fully 
operational has passed, and while I am pleased the President nominated 
Vice Admiral John Redd as the Center's permanent director on June 10, I 
wish Congress had received this nomination sooner than a week before 
the deadline so that the Center could have been operational on time.
  The bottom line is it has been done. We are making progress. I thank 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) for accepting this amendment 
and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) as well. It is an 
amendment that I think deserves passage and I thank them for accepting 
it.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I thank my colleagues for working through this amendment and making 
the necessary changes. As I indicated earlier, we are willing to accept 
this amendment.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Hoekstra) for accepting 
the amendment. Certainly certain issues are above partisan politics. 
The defense, the protection of our Nation, intelligence reform, is 
certainly among them.
  The gentleman and the ranking member have really worked together in 
the best interest of the American people on this important issue. I 
thank the gentleman for his support.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise to show my support 
for the men and women who work in the intelligence community each day 
sacrificing their lives so that we may remain safe. This measure, H.R. 
2475, does authorize 100 percent of the funding requests made by the 
community, which is a positive departure from the measure proposed in 
2005, which funded only 26 percent of the requests. In addition, this 
legislation improves upon the President's request of only 40 percent of 
the community's counterterrorism funding needs. This departure is 
important because this measure is the first authorization bill to come 
to the floor since passage of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism 
Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458)--the families of the victims of 
9/11 as well as the entire international community still look to us for 
responsible action in the area of intelligence.
  I also applaud the Committee's inclusion of provisions for the 
recruitment and clearing of personnel adept in language skills 
necessary to truly aid our intelligence-gathering and processing 
initiative.
  However, I join my colleagues in disagreeing with Section 305 of the 
bill as reported out of Committee. This section gives congressional 
committees a ``pocket veto'' of the personnel transfers that the new 
Director of National Intelligence might recommend. Absent passage of 
the Manager's Amendment offered by Mr. Hoekstra, this provision will 
contravene much of the authority conferred in the Intelligence Reform 
and Terrorism Prevention Act that was signed into law by the President 
last year. Public Law 108-458 contains provisions that I offered that 
deal with commercial alien smuggling such as penalty enhancement as 
well as an outreach section that would require publication of the 
enhancements by DHS to act as a deterrent.
  I support the amendment that will be offered by my colleague from New 
York, Mrs. Maloney that would require a report to Congress until the 
Director of the National Counterterrorism Center has been confirmed and 
until the Center is fully functional.
  Madam Speaker, for the reasons above stated, I support the 
legislation with reservations.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 331, the 
previous question is ordered on the bill and the amendment, as 
modified, offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).
  The question is on the amendment, as modified, offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).
  The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Waxman

  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit with 
instructions.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. WAXMAN. I am, Madam Speaker, in its current form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:


[[Page 13459]]

       Mr. Waxman of California moves to recommit the bill H.R. 
     2475 to the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence with 
     instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith 
     with the following amendment:
       At the end, add the following new title:

    TITLE V--ESTABLISHMENT OF INDEPENDENT COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE 
                            DETAINEE ABUSES

     SEC. 501. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.

       There is established in the legislative branch the 
     Independent Commission on the Investigation of Detainee 
     Abuses (in this title referred to as the ``Commission'').

     SEC. 502. DUTIES.

       (a) Investigation.--The Commission shall conduct a full, 
     complete, independent, and impartial investigation of 
     intelligence and intelligence-related activities carried out 
     in Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, and 
     any operation within the Global War on Terrorism in 
     connection with abuses of detainees, including but not 
     limited to the following:
       (1) The extent of the abuses.
       (2) Why the abuses occurred.
       (3) Who is responsible for the abuses.
       (4) Whether any particular Department of Defense, 
     Department of State, Department of Justice, Central 
     Intelligence Agency, National Security Council, or White 
     House policies, procedures, or decisions facilitated the 
     detainee abuses.
       (5) What policies, procedures, or mechanisms failed to 
     prevent the abuses.
       (6) What legislative or executive actions should be taken 
     to prevent such abuses from occurring in the future.
       (7) The extent, if any, to which Guantanamo Detention 
     Center policies influenced policies at the Abu Ghraib prison 
     and other detention centers in and outside Iraq.
       (b) Assessment, Analysis, and Evaluation.--During the 
     course of its investigation under subsection (a), the 
     Commission shall assess, analyze, and evaluate relevant 
     persons, policies, procedures, reports, and events, including 
     but not limited to the following:
       (1) The Military Chain of Command.
       (2) The National Security Council.
       (3) The Department of Justice.
       (4) The Department of State.
       (5) The Office of the White House Counsel.
       (6) The Defense Intelligence Agency and the Central 
     Intelligence Agency.
       (7) The approval process for interrogation techniques used 
     at detention facilities in Iraq, Cuba, Afghanistan, and 
     elsewhere.
       (8) The integration of military police and military 
     intelligence operations to coordinate detainee interrogation.
       (9) The roles and actions of private civilian contractors 
     in the abuses and whether they violated the Military 
     Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act or any other United States 
     statutes or international treaties to which the United States 
     is a party.
       (10) The role of nongovernmental organizations' warnings to 
     United States officials about the abuses.
       (11) The role of Congress and whether it was fully informed 
     throughout the process that uncovered these abuses.
       (12) The extent to which the United States complied with 
     the applicable provisions of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, 
     and the extent to which the United States may have violated 
     international law by restricting the access of the 
     International Committee of the Red Cross to detainees.
       (13) The extent to which the United States complied with 
     the applicable provisions of other human rights treaties, 
     including the International Covenant on Civil and Political 
     Rights and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, 
     Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

     SEC. 503. COMPOSITION OF COMMISSION.

       (a) Members.--The Commission shall be composed of 10 
     members, of whom--
       (1) 1 member shall be appointed by the President;
       (2) 1 member shall be jointly appointed by the minority 
     leader of the Senate and the minority leader of the House of 
     Representatives;
       (3) 2 members shall be appointed by the majority leader of 
     the Senate;
       (4) 2 members shall be appointed by the Speaker of the 
     House of Representatives;
       (5) 2 members shall be appointed by the minority leader of 
     the Senate; and
       (6) 2 members shall be appointed by the minority leader of 
     the House of Representatives.
       (b) Qualifications; Initial Meeting.--
       (1) Nongovernmental appointees.--An individual appointed to 
     the Commission may not be an officer or employee of the 
     Federal Government or any State or local government.
       (2) Other qualifications.--Individuals that shall be 
     appointed to the Commission should be prominent United States 
     citizens, with national recognition and significant depth of 
     experience in such professions as governmental service, law 
     enforcement, the armed services, law, public administration, 
     intelligence gathering, international human rights and 
     humanitarian law, and foreign affairs.
       (3) Deadline for appointment.--All members of the 
     Commission shall be appointed within 45 days following the 
     enactment of this Act.
       (4) Chairman and vice chairman.--The chairman and vice 
     chairman of the Commission shall be elected by a majority 
     vote of the members.
       (5) Meetings.--The Commission shall meet and begin the 
     operations of the Commission as soon as practicable. After 
     its initial meeting, the Commission shall meet upon the call 
     of the chairman or a majority of its members.
       (c) Quorum; Vacancies.--Six members of the Commission shall 
     constitute a quorum. Any vacancy in the Commission shall not 
     affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner in 
     which the original appointment was made.
       (d) Conflicts of Interest.--Each member appointed to the 
     Commission shall be independent of any agency, individual, or 
     institution that may be the subject of investigation by the 
     Commission.

     SEC. 504. POWERS OF COMMISSION.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Hearings and evidence.--The Commission or, on the 
     authority of the Commission, any subcommittee or member 
     thereof, may, for the purpose of carrying out this title--
       (A) hold such hearings and sit and act at such times and 
     places, take such testimony, receive such evidence, 
     administer such oaths; and
       (B) subject to paragraph (2)(A), require, by subpoena or 
     otherwise, the attendance and testimony of such witnesses and 
     the production of such books, records, correspondence, 
     memoranda, papers, and documents,
     as the Commission or such designated subcommittee or 
     designated member may determine advisable.
       (2) Subpoenas.--
       (A) In general.--A subpoena may be issued under this 
     subsection only--
       (i) by the agreement of the chairman and the vice chairman; 
     or
       (ii) by the affirmative vote of 6 members of the 
     Commission.
       (B) Signature.--Subject to subparagraph (A), subpoenas 
     issued under this subsection may be issued under the 
     signature of the chairman or any member designated by a 
     majority of the Commission, and may be served by any person 
     designated by the chairman or by a member designated by a 
     majority of the Commission.
       (3) Scope.--In carrying out its duties under this Act, the 
     Commission may examine the actions and representations of the 
     current Administration as well as prior Administrations.
       (b) Contracting.--The Commission may, to such extent and in 
     such amounts as are provided in appropriation Acts, enter 
     into contracts to enable the Commission to discharge its 
     duties of this Act.
       (c) Information From Federal Agencies.--
       (1) In general.--The Commission may secure directly from 
     any executive department, bureau, agency, board, commission, 
     office, independent establishment, or instrumentality of the 
     Federal Government, information, suggestions, estimates, and 
     statistics for the purposes of this Act. Each department, 
     bureau, agency, board, commission, office, independent 
     establishment, or instrumentality shall, to the extent 
     authorized by law, furnish such information, suggestions, 
     estimates, and statistics directly to the Commission, upon 
     request made by the chairman, the chairman of any 
     subcommittee created by a majority of the Commission, or any 
     member designated by a majority of the Commission.
       (2) Receipt, handling, storage, and dissemination.--
     Information shall only be received, handled, stored, and 
     disseminated by members of the Commission and its staff 
     consistent with all applicable statutes, regulations, and 
     Executive Orders.
       (d) Assistance From Federal Agencies.--Departments and 
     agencies of the United States may provide to the Commission 
     such services, funds, facilities, staff, and other support 
     services as they may determine advisable and as may be 
     authorized by law.

     SEC. 505. PUBLIC HEARINGS.

       (a) Public Meetings and Release of Public Versions of 
     Reports.--The Commission shall--
       (1) hold public hearings and meetings to the extent 
     appropriate; and
       (2) release public versions of the reports required under 
     section 509.
       (b) Public Hearings.--Any public hearings of the Commission 
     shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the protection 
     of information provided to or developed for or by the 
     Commission as required by any applicable statute, regulation, 
     or Executive order.

     SEC. 506. STAFF OF COMMISSION.

       (a) Appointment and Compensation.--The chairman and the 
     vice chairman jointly, in accordance with rules agreed upon 
     by the Commission, may appoint and fix the compensation of a 
     staff director and such other personnel as may be necessary 
     to enable the Commission to carry out its functions.
       (b) Detailees.--Any Federal Government employee may be 
     detailed to the Commission.
       (c) Consultant Services.--The Commission is authorized to 
     procure the services of experts and consultants.

[[Page 13460]]



     SEC. 507. COMPENSATION AND TRAVEL EXPENSES.

       (a) Compensation.--Each member of the Commission may be 
     compensated at a reasonable rate for each day during which 
     that member is engaged in the actual performance of the 
     duties of the Commission.
       (b) Travel Expenses.--While away from their homes or 
     regular places of business in the performance of services for 
     the Commission, members of the Commission shall be allowed 
     travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence.

     SEC. 508. SECURITY CLEARANCES FOR COMMISSION MEMBERS AND 
                   STAFF.

       (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), the appropriate 
     Federal agencies or departments shall cooperate with the 
     Commission in expeditiously providing to the Commission 
     members and staff appropriate security clearances to the 
     extent possible pursuant to existing procedures and 
     requirements.
       (b) Exception.--No person shall be provided with access to 
     classified information under this title without the 
     appropriate required security clearance access.

     SEC. 509. REPORTS OF COMMISSION; TERMINATION.

       (a) Interim Reports.--The Commission may submit to Congress 
     and the President interim reports containing such findings, 
     conclusions, and recommendations for corrective measures as 
     have been agreed to by a majority of Commission members.
       (b) Final Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall submit to 
     Congress and the President a final report containing such 
     findings, conclusions, and recommendations for corrective 
     measures as have been agreed to by a majority of Commission 
     members.
       (c) Form of Report.--Each report prepared under this 
     section shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may 
     contain a classified annex.
       (d) Recommendation to Make Public Certain Classified 
     Information.--If the Commission determines that it is in the 
     public interest that some or all of the information contained 
     in a classified annex of a report under this section be made 
     available to the public, the Commission shall make a 
     recommendation to the congressional intelligence committees 
     to make such information public, and the congressional 
     intelligence committees shall consider the recommendation 
     pursuant to the procedures under subsection (e).
       (e) Procedure for Declassifying Information.--
       (1) The procedures referred to in subsection (d) are the 
     procedures described in--
       (A) with respect to the Permanent Select Committee on 
     Intelligence of the House of Representatives, clause 11(g) of 
     Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, One 
     Hundred Ninth Congress; and
       (B) with respect to the Select Committee on Intelligence of 
     the Senate, section 8 of Senate Resolution 400, Ninety-Fourth 
     Congress.
       (2) In this section, the term ``congressional intelligence 
     committees'' means--
       (A) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the 
     House of Representatives; and
       (B) the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate.

     SEC. 510. TERMINATION.

       (a) In General.--The Commission, and all the authorities of 
     this Act, shall terminate 60 days after the date on which the 
     final report is submitted under section 509(b).
       (b) Administrative Activities Before Termination.--The 
     Commission may use the 60-day period referred to in paragraph 
     (1) for the purpose of concluding its activities, including 
     providing testimony to committees of Congress concerning its 
     reports and disseminating the final report.

     SEC. 511. FUNDING.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated funds not to exceed $5,000,000 for 
     purposes of the activities of the Commission under this Act.
       (b) Duration of Availability.--Amounts made available to 
     the Commission under subsection (a) shall remain available 
     until the termination of the Commission.

  Mr. WAXMAN (during the reading). Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that the motion be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  1600

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Miller of Michigan). Pursuant to the 
rule, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) is recognized for 5 
minutes in support of his motion.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, this motion to recommit would amend the 
bill to add language establishing an independent commission to examine 
detainee abuses.
  In the year since the horrific photographs of prisoner abuse at Abu 
Ghraib surfaced, more and more instances of detainee abuse from a 
growing number of locations around the world have come to light.
  The reports of detainee abuse are undermining one of our Nation's 
most valuable assets: our reputation for respect for human rights.
  The Pentagon's internal investigations of the abuse allegations have 
resulted in conflicting conclusions. Some of these reports have been 
little more than whitewashes.
  Congress has failed to conduct a comprehensive public investigation 
of detainee abuse allegations at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram and 
other facilities. We have abdicated our constitutional duty to conduct 
responsible oversight.
  My motion to recommit would fill the huge oversight gap. A lack of 
oversight leads to a lack of accountability, and no accountability 
breeds arrogance and abuse of power.
  It is time for this House to take our oversight responsibility 
seriously, and I urge a ``yes'' vote on the motion to recommit.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), 
the ranking member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, 
my colleague.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me and 
commend him for sponsoring this notion of an independent commission to 
look at detainee abuses.
  Mr. Speaker, though I am a strong supporter of this legislation, I 
think it would be even better if it included language to establish this 
commission, and so I support the motion to recommit the bill for the 
purpose of adding the gentleman from California's (Mr. Waxman) 
amendment.
  Military historians often talk about the ``fog of war.'' I believe 
our intelligence professionals operate in a fog of law, a confusing 
patchwork of treaties, laws, memos and policies.
  Article I, section 8 of the Constitution says that it is Congress' 
responsibility to establish rules concerning captures on land and 
water. I hope that we will seize this responsibility.
  But as Congress studies the policy options going forward, it is vital 
that we have the facts. Only a bipartisan, independent commission can 
get to the bottom of what happened among administration policymakers 
within the military chain of command and out in the field.
  The steady stream of revelations about Guantanamo and other 
facilities around the world erode our moral credibility, just as we are 
trying to win the hearts and minds of the Arab and Muslim world.
  It is vital to our national security, Mr. Speaker, that we fix this 
problem so that our detention and interrogation policies get us 
actionable intelligence without creating a whole new generation of 
terrorist recruits. Pretending that there is no problem is not a 
strategy for success.
  So in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, our committee, on a bipartisan basis, 
is looking into these issues through our Subcommittee on Oversight. I 
commend our progress; but in addition, I think the public will have 
more confidence in what we are doing if we also have an outside, 
independent commission.
  In that spirit, I support the Waxman motion to recommit.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, the failure to have an investigation of 
detainee abuse is eroding our moral standard in the world. It is also 
endangering our Armed Forces and inciting hatred against the United 
States. As Senator Biden said about Guantanamo, it is the greatest 
propaganda tool for the recruitment of terrorists worldwide.
  Some of the allegations that have been repeated over and over again 
may not be true. In fact, I hope they are not true. President Bush 
calls them absurd, but we do not know what is true and what is not 
unless we investigate; and when we refuse to conduct a thorough, 
independent, credible investigation, the rest of the world thinks we 
have something to hide.
  The independent commission established by this proposal would 
establish a 10-member bipartisan commission modeled on the successful 
9/11 commission. I think we need this. I think we need it badly.

[[Page 13461]]

  If the Congress had done its job of oversight, we might well say the 
job is done and we do not need to do anything further; but Congress has 
done relatively little on this whole matter. The reports that have been 
issued by the various investigative agencies have been in conflict.
  This is why I ask my colleagues to support this motion to recommit. 
Vote ``aye.''
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to 
recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) 
is recognized.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused, as I listened to 
those on the other side as to whether we have or have not done 
oversight. The author of the amendment says there has been no 
oversight. My ranking member applauds the work that the committee has 
done in its role of doing oversight on a bipartisan basis.
  Mr. Speaker, we are at a time of war that was not begun by the making 
of the United States. We are at war against an international terrorist 
movement that has engaged our country in a clash of values driven by 
those who fundamentally oppose American democracy and freedom.
  The 9/11 Commission emphasized the importance of engaging the 
terrorists in the ``struggle of ideas,'' noting that many views in the 
Muslim world of the United States are ``at best uninformed about the 
United States and, at worst, informed by cartoonish stereotypes among 
intellectuals who caricature U.S. values and policies. Local newspapers 
and the few influential satellite broadcasters, like al Jazeera, often 
reinforce the jihadist theme that portrays the United States as anti-
Muslim.''
  Mr. Speaker, comments that significantly exaggerate and overstate the 
situation in Guantanamo Bay do nothing but reinforce the false 
perceptions of America that have encouraged our enemies.
  There is aggressive oversight under way by the executive branch and 
by Congress into our detention procedures. It is only because of this 
aggressive oversight and the freedoms provided by American democracy 
that we are having this discussion in the first place. The system is 
working properly, and we should continue to let it work; and for those 
who do not know about the work that is going on, perhaps they could 
ask.
  So when senior Members of Congress, including a member of the 
minority leadership in the Senate, exaggerate and distort these issues, 
including by comparing American soldiers to Nazis, those comments do 
nothing but reinforce the false prejudices abroad that have led us to 
war.
  As an example, I note that the al Jazeera network gave prominent 
coverage to the remarks of a Member of the Senate comparing the actions 
of U.S. soldiers to Nazis, Soviet gulags, and a mad regime like Pol 
Pot's Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.
  A columnist in the Chicago Sun Times said of those remarks: ``He 
should at least be made a little uncomfortable over what he's done.'' 
What did he do? ``In a time of war, make an inflammatory libel against 
his country's military that has no value whatsoever except to America's 
enemies.''
  We are better than those who oppose us. Our oversight has exposed our 
weaknesses. Now is the time to move on.
  To quote from President Roosevelt's ``Man in the Arena'' speech: ``It 
is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong 
man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.''
  I want this Congress to be seen as a doer of deeds. If we fail, we 
fail while daringly great. To do anything less would be unworthy of the 
House of Representatives.
  Self-loathing of America on the floor of this House accomplishes 
nothing but fueling the fires abroad that seek to destroy America's 
democracy and our way of life. I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' 
on this motion to recommit.
  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. WAXMAN. 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 (Mr. Petri). Evidently a quorum is not 
present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 
XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by 
5-minute votes, if ordered, on passage of H.R. 2475 and on the motions 
to suspend the rules previously postponed in the following order:
  H.J. Res. 52, by the yeas and nays,
  H. Con. Res. 160, by the yeas and nays,
  H. Con. Res. 180, de novo.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 197, 
nays 228, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 289]

                               YEAS--197

     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Case
     Chandler
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NAYS--228

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachus
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeLay
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Gutknecht
     Hall

[[Page 13462]]


     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Jindal
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McMorris
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pearce
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pombo
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schwarz (MI)
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Sodrel
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Carter
     Conaway
     Herseth
     Lewis (GA)
     Murphy
     Pence
     Sessions
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  1639

  Mrs. KELLY, Mr. BUYER, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE changed their vote from 
``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. GONZALEZ, ETHERIDGE and CHANDLER changed their vote from 
``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Petri). The question is on the passage 
of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 409, 
nays 16, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 290]

                               YEAS--409

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Bean
     Beauprez
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Case
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Chocola
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harman
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     Jindal
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Schwarz (MI)
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Sodrel
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)

                                NAYS--16

     Conyers
     Duncan
     Jackson (IL)
     Kucinich
     Lee
     McDermott
     McKinney
     Oberstar
     Owens
     Paul
     Payne
     Rangel
     Stark
     Waters
     Watson
     Woolsey

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Carter
     Conaway
     Herseth
     Lewis (GA)
     Murphy
     Pence
     Sessions
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  1647

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I was detained and unable to cast a vote on 
H.R. 2475, the Intelligence Authorization Act for FY06, on June 21, 
2005. I was enroute to Brownwood, Texas to attend the funeral of Lance 
Corporal Mario Castillo, a Marine from the 11th District of Texas. 
Please let the Record reflect that had I been here, I would have voted 
``yes.''

                          ____________________