[House Report 108-413]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
108th Congress Rept. 108-413
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session Part 2
======================================================================
REQUESTING THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTING THE SECRETARY OF STATE, THE
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO TRANSMIT TO THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES NOT LATER THAN 14 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THE
ADOPTION OF THIS RESOLUTION DOCUMENTS IN THE POSSESSION OF THE
PRESIDENT AND THOSE OFFICIALS RELATING TO THE DISCLOSURE OF THE
IDENTITY AND EMPLOYMENT OF MS. VALERIE PLAME
_______
February 27, 2004.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hyde, from the Committee on International Relations, submitted the
following
ADVERSE REPORT
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H. Res. 499]
The Committee on International Relations, to whom was
referred the resolution (H. Res. 499) requesting the President
and directing the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense,
and the Attorney General to transmit to the House of
Representatives not later than 14 days after the date of the
adoption of this resolution documents in the possession of the
President and those officials relating to the disclosure of the
identity and employment of Ms. Valerie Plame, having considered
the same, report unfavorably thereon without amendment and
recommend that resolution not be agreed to.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 2
Background and Need for the Legislation.......................... 2
Hearings......................................................... 3
Committee Consideration.......................................... 3
Vote of the Committee............................................ 3
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 4
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................ 4
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 4
Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 4
New Advisory Committees.......................................... 4
Congressional Accountability Act................................. 4
Federal Mandates................................................. 4
Dissenting Views................................................. 5
Purpose and Summary
House Resolution 499 requests the President and directs the
Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, and the Attorney
General to transmit to the House of Representatives not later
than 14 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution
documents, including telephone and electronic mail records,
logs and calendars, personnel records, and records of internal
discussions, in the possession of the President and those
officials relating to the disclosure of the identity and
employment of Ms. Valerie Plame during the period beginning on
May 6, 2003, and ending July 31, 2003.
Background and Need for the Legislation
House Resolution 499 is a resolution of inquiry, which
pursuant to Rule XIII, clause 7, of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, directs the Committee to act on the resolution
within 14 legislative days, or a privileged motion to discharge
the Committee is in order. H. Res. 499 was introduced and
referred to the Committee on International Relations, among
others, on January 21, 2004, and was ordered reported adversely
by the Committee on February 25, 2004.
Under the rules and precedents of the House, a resolution
of inquiry is the means by which the House requests information
from the President of the United States or the head of one of
the executive departments. According to ``Deschler's
Precedents'' it is a ``simple resolution making a direct
request or demand of the President or the head of an executive
department to furnish the House of Representatives with
specific factual information in the possession of the executive
branch.''
On January 21, 2004, Mr. Holt of New Jersey introduced H.
Res. 499, a resolution of inquiry requesting the President and
directing the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, and
the Attorney General to transmit to the House of
Representatives the documents, including telephone and
electronic mail records, logs and calendars, personnel records,
and records of internal discussions, in the possession of the
President and those officials relating to the disclosure of the
identity and employment of Ms. Valerie Plame as an employee of
the Central Intelligence Agency during the period beginning on
May 6, 2003, and ending July 31, 2003.
H. Res. 499 would direct Executive Branch officials to
transmit to the House of Representatives documents that are the
subject of an ongoing criminal investigation. In light of this,
the Committee voted to report the resolution of inquiry
adversely on the grounds that a criminal investigation is
ongoing.
The Department of Justice opened a criminal investigation
in September 2003 into whether government officials who
allegedly identified Valerie Plame to the press violated
Federal law that prohibits identifying covert agents. Press
reports indicate that the FBI investigation includes the White
House, the Departments of State and Defense, and the Central
Intelligence Agency and that ``boxloads'' of documents have
been forwarded to the FBI investigation team--including White
House phone logs and e-mails. Law enforcement officials have
been quoted indicating that the dozen agents assigned to the
case have not encountered any stalling tactics.
In December 2003, the Attorney General recused himself from
the investigation and the Deputy Attorney General appointed
United States Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald to lead the
investigation as special prosecutor. Mr. Fitzgerald, according
to press reports, has been granted more independence than the
norm under Department of Justice Regulations. For instance, Mr.
Fitzgerald, unlike other U.S. Attorneys, reportedly does not
have to seek approval from Department of Justice officials in
Washington, DC before issuing subpoenas or granting immunity.
Mr. Fitzgerald is a veteran prosecutor with experience in
national security matters and, as reported widely in the press,
enjoys a stellar reputation.
The press reports that in January 2004 a grand jury
convened in Washington, DC to hear testimony on the Valerie
Plame matter. The grand jury has broad authority that allows
investigators to subpoena witnesses and documents, including
the same documents requested in H. Res. 499.
By all reports, Mr. Fitzgerald is pursuing the
investigation into the Valerie Plame matter aggressively and
responsibly. The Committee concluded that it would be unwise to
allow H. Res. 499 to jeopardize an ongoing criminal
investigation by the Department of Justice.
Of equal importance to deliberations of the Committee was
the action taken by the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence (NPSCI), the Committee of primary jurisdiction
over the subject matter of H. Res. 499. In a bipartisan vote,
the Intelligence Committee voted to report the resolution
adversely. The Chairman of the Intelligence Committee has
publicly committed that Committee to continue to monitor and
conduct oversight of this matter. The Committee concluded that
conducting congressional oversight of the protection of the
identities of our intelligence agents under the Intelligence
Identities Protection Act of 1982 is best left to the Committee
of primary jurisdiction, the House Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence.
Because H. Res. 499 could impede an ongoing criminal
investigation and the HPSCI is conducting oversight of this
matter in its capacity as Committee of primary jurisdiction,
the Committee ordered it reported adversely
Hearings
The Committee did not hold hearings on H. Res. 499.
Committee Consideration
On January 25, 2004, the Committee met in open session and
with a quorum being present ordered the resolution of inquiry
H. Res. 499 reported adversely without amendment by a record
vote of 24 ayes to 22 noes.
Vote of the Committee
A motion to report H. Res. 499 adversely to the House was
agreed to by a record vote of 24 ayes to 22 noes.
Voting yes: Hyde, Leach, Bereuter, Smith (NJ), Burton,
Gallegly, Ros-Lehtinen, Ballenger, Rohrabacher, Royce, King,
Chabot, Houghton, McHugh, Tancredo, Smith (MI), Pitts, Flake,
Davis, Green, Weller, Pence, McCotter, and Harris.
Voting no: Berman, Ackerman, Faleomavaega, Payne, Menendez,
Brown, Sherman, Wexler, Engel, Delahunt, Meeks, Lee, Crowley,
Hoeffel, Blumenauer, Berkley, Napolitano, Schiff, Watson, Smith
(WA), McCollum, and Bell.
Committee Oversight Findings
The Committee held no oversight activities under clause
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 3(2) of House Rule XIII is inapplicable because H.
Res. 499 does not provide new budgetary authority or increased
tax expenditures.
Performance Goals and Objectives
The rule requiring a statement of performance goals and
objectives is inapplicable.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for
this resolution in article I, section 1 of the Constitution.
New Advisory Committees
H. Res. 499 does not establish or authorize any new
advisory committees.
Congressional Accountability Act
H. Res. 499 does not apply to the legislative branch.
Federal Mandates
H. Res. 499 provides no Federal mandates.
Dissenting Views
We believe, as should every member of Congress, that the
intentional disclosure of the identity of a U.S. covert
intelligence agent poses a grave threat to the national
security of the nation and imperils the lives of the men and
women who risk their lives in protecting this nation from
foreign threats. In the consideration of H. Res. 499, the
International Relations Committee had a choice on how to
address this despicable act: whether to stand on record against
this action and assume the responsibility of oversight of the
Executive Branch in areas of intelligence that affect U.S.
foreign policy, as the rules of the House charges it, or
whether it would simply step aside and accede to the evident
wishes of the Administration to investigate itself, trusting
that this inherent conflict of interest will nonetheless not
play any role in the administration of justice in this matter
or in consideration of how to avoid leaks in the future which
threaten our national security. We are gravely disappointed by
the decision of the Committee, effected by the majority vote of
all the Republican Members, to choose the latter course.
Last summer, the American people learned that an
Administration official, reportedly from the White House,
exposed the identity of a CIA undercover operative to the
media, perhaps calling six separate journalists with the
information. One of these journalists--a conservative
commentator who alone among the six chose to put personal
publicity above national security--published the agent's
identity in a column ostensibly about the charges leveled by
her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, that the
Administration's claim that Iraq had sought to buy uranium from
Niger was false and misleading. This journalist wrote in his
column that he was told by the White House officials that the
Ambassador's wife was ``an operative'' of the CIA, presumably
intending to cast doubt about the Ambassador's motivations;
other journalists were apparently told this was the ``real
story'' and that Wilson's wife was ``fair game.''
As events have borne out, Ambassador Wilson was correct.
The claims made by the President and others in his
Administration that Iraq had purchased uranium from Niger were
indeed false. Indeed, clearly and evidently false, based on
badly-forged documents that even a cursory investigation would
ascertain. According to press reports, our own intelligence
agencies had grave doubts about their authenticity as early as
the summer of 2002. Nevertheless, the President and his
Administration used it as a vital piece of evidence that Iraq
was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Even after
senior intelligence officials insisted the claim be deleted
from the President's speeches, the claim continued to surface
in statements by senior Administration officials. The Secretary
of State, in his presentation before the United Nations
Security Council in February 2003, wisely refused to repeat the
claim, recognizing its dubious character.
Administration officials have since admitted that the Iraq-
Niger uranium claims were unsupportable--admitting this fact
only reluctantly and in a raft of finger-pointing. And yet,
someone in the White House could apparently not resist the
temptation to tarnish the reputation of the one man who had
actually, personally investigated the claim and who quietly
told the Administration that the charges were false. When he
was not heeded, he rightfully stated his opinions and
information, openly and for the public record, in The New York
Times in June 2003.
We find it extremely hard to believe that the disclosure of
the CIA agent's identity by White House officials was
inadvertent. How could anyone in the White House believe that
this public revelation was not criminal or dangerous? Rather,
we believe that the leaking of Mrs. Plame's identity as a
covert operative was clearly an intentional effort to discredit
her husband' s public charges of the Administration's misuse of
intelligence, conducted to exact political vengeance and
perform damage control. If we are correct, this was the
ultimate ``dirty trick'' by an Administration to silence its
critics.
The seriousness of this episode cannot be understated. The
perception that senior U.S. political appointees and officials
may expose covert CIA operatives' identity for political
expediency--and escape punishment--may make intelligence-
gathering even more difficult. If foreign sources worry that
their U.S. agents' identity may be disclosed, possibly exposing
their own identities, these potential sources may decide not to
talk to us. In these times of terrorism, we must expand our
efforts to gather human intelligence about possible terrorist
attacks at every turn, because we do not know when one vital
morsel of information may save thousands of innocent American
lives. To the extent this episode undercuts that effort, we may
sacrifice the awareness of that vital morsel of information;
ultimately, we may not learn about another 9/11 in time to
prevent it. Just as importantly, the danger this type of
exposure poses to our dedicated covert intelligence officers
and their sources is self-evident.
It is true that this matter is already being investigated
by a special prosecutor, whom we do not intend to demean. But
it is imperative that Congress fulfill its own oversight
function in the investigation of this serious matter. U.S.
Attorney Fitzgerald and the grand jury that is investigating
this issue may find that while there has been wrongdoing, the
legal elements of the federal criminal statutes involved here
have not been met, and no indictment may be handed down. In
that eventuality, he has no duty to report to Congress on his
findings. And the fact that there may not be, in the course of
this investigation, enough evidence to charge a federal crime
does not mean that our national security is unaffected. Indeed,
we need to ferret out how such an act, even if unintentional,
could happen and establish safeguards to ensure that it never
happens again.
This resolution of inquiry does not ask for Mr.
Fitzgerald's or the Justice Department's internal investigatory
documents or in any way impair grand jury secrecy; it demands
instead the primary materials that would allow Congress and
this Committee to conduct its own investigation. Indeed, as we
prepare for any investigation that is deemed necessary, these
documents can be kept in complete security and confidentiality
and need not undermine Mr. Fitzgerald's efforts. We would
remind our colleagues that even in this Administration there
have been congressional inquiries conducted while the U.S.
Government had a criminal investigation open. Just to cite one
case, in the last Congress both the House and the Senate
conducted an investigation of the Enron scandal with multiple
hearings and the subpoena of Justice Department targets,
including calling all the major corporate officers who have
been subject to plea agreements and indictments or remain
targets of the investigation. Allegations of insider trading
involving Martha Stewart were also investigated by
congressional committees during the course of a criminal
investigation. Of course, in the last Administration there were
numerous congressional investigations of matters under criminal
investigation (including some where grand juries were active).
These investigations include those of the Waco Incident, the
U.S. technology transfers to China, allegations of campaign
finance violations, the White House Travel office and many
others.
Moreover, it is a fact that the Executive Branch is
investigating itself on what may turn out to be, at least in
part, a political act. Congress must conduct oversight as it
has repeatedly in the last ten years, and may need to charter
an independent investigation.
We regret that some choose to see this effort at seeking
the truth as merely a political gambit in an election year.
They should know us better than that. We note that just last
month, ten former CIA case officers and analysts, some of whom
are known to us and are generally sympathetic to this
Administration, wrote to the Speaker of the House and stated
``[f]or the good of the country, we ask you to please stand up
for every man and woman who works for the U.S. intelligence
community by immediately launching a congressional
investigation.'' We endorse this plea wholeheartedly, and
regret that the majority of this Committee chose not to hear
it.
Tom Lantos.
Howard L. Berman.
Gary L. Ackerman.
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega.
Donald M. Payne.
Robert Menendez.
Sherrod Brown.
Brad Sherman.
Robert Wexler.
Eliot L. Engel.
William D. Delahunt.
Barbara Lee.
Joseph Crowley.
Joseph M. Hoeffel.
Earl Blumenauer.
Shelley Berkley.
Grace F. Napolitano.
Adam B. Schiff.
Diane E. Watson.
Betty McCollum.