T2 B18 Hamilton on Congressional Oversight Fdr- Entire Contents- MFR Re 2-25-04 Meeting With...

8/14/2019 T2 B18 Hamilton on Congressional Oversight Fdr- Entire Contents- MFR Re 2-25-04 Meeting With Hamilton (Not at NARA Site) Stapled w Email Re Congress

1/7

C O M M I S S I O N S E N S I T I V E

MEMORANDUMFOR THE RECORD

Meeting with Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton on Congressional OversightFebruary 25, 2004Attendees: Philip Zelikow, ChrisKojm, John Roth,th e Vice Chairman's assistant,and

Gordon LedermanPrepared by: G ordon Lederman

Gordon Lederman provided a brief update on our work concerning Congressionaloversight. TheHPSCI and SSCI have collected documents at our request and are holdingthem for our review . W e have scheduled interviews w ith SSCI and HPSC Istaffers.Also, w e have covered Congressional oversight issues during interviews with ExecutiveBranch officials and academics.

Vice Chairman H amilton suggested that w e talk w ith thestaff director of Rep. ChrisShays' GovernmentReform subcommittee. W e should also talk with Senator BobGraham'sstaffers and Sen. Shelby's staffers. We are already scheduled to meet w ith BillDuhnke. Philip Zelikow suggested that we talk w ith Sen.Shelby's staffer wh o wrote theSenator's addendum to the Joint Inquiry; Philip Zelikow thought that thestaffer had goneinto the Executive Branch.

Vice Ch airman Hamilton said that he is unsure how to approach this issue and directed usto meet withstaffers of Senators McCain, Rockefeller,and Harman to ask them forrecommendationsfor strengthening oversightand what recommendationsare actuallyfeasible. He noted that th e Joint Inquiry did not examine Congressional oversight due totime constraints.

Vice Chairman H amilton said that we should keep in close contact w ithCommissionersKerrey, Roemer,and Gorton because they havea strong interestin this issue on accountof their experience in Congress. Com missioner Ke rrey is extremely interested, V iceChairman Ham ilton said.

Vice Ch airman Ham ilton said we should not confine our interview sjust to Congress butshould talk w ith high-level Executive Branchofficials. How ever, talking with suchofficials is a delicate matter. W e should also talk w ith thePFIAB. The IntelligenceCommunity is difficult to oversee because (1) it has a "leave it to us" attitude, and(2) there is no media exposure.The PFIAB an d Congress are the tw obodies withastand-off perspective on the Intelligence Com munity, although Vice Ch airman Ham iltonnoted that the PFIA B is appointed by the President.

Chris Kojm suggested that w e need to go beyondCongressional oversight of theIntelligence Com munity and examine how Congress as an institution is handling nationalsecurity issuesafter 9/11. He noted that thereis a Select Committeeon HomelandSecurity in the Hou se but no comparable com mittee in the Senate.



2/7


Vice C hairman Ham ilton suggested that we review the historical record of the HPSC Iand SSCI before 9/11, such as what the Intelligence Communitydid to warn thecomm ittees concerning terrorismand how man y hearingson terrorism were held. Th eVice Ch airman said that he isno t hesitant to criticize Congress because C ongress has tworesponsibilities to fulfill: legislationand oversight. His personal view is that Congressfailed to do oversight. We should also exam inehow Congress has done oversight after9/11. We should generate recom mendationsfor wha t they shoulddo from now on.

Gordon Ledermanasked whether we include the HA SC andSASC in our inquiry giventhat these com mittees have resisted increased DCI authorities. Vice Chairman Hamiltonnoted that man y comm issions have recomm ended increased DCI authorities but that theHASC and SASC have opposed it. SecDef Rum sfeld 's response to theDCI/DoD issue isto have good personal relations with the DCI - but are good personal relations enough,Vice Chairman H amilton asked.

Philip Zelikow commentedas follows:

(1) Congressional oversight seems to be'all trees and no forest,' n ot engagingon strategic issues (which concern the Executive Branch) but rather at themicro-budgetarylevel or on issues prom inentin the media.

(2) W e will likely demand that the DC I develop a resource p lan for terroristintelligence across Intelligence Com munity,bu t there mustbe parallelCongressional oversight authority: Congress should be aligned so thatthe intelligence oversight committees havefull authorization authorityover the Nationa l Foreign Intelligence Program,and the HASC and SASCwould then oversee onlyJMIP and TIARA. This alignment, however,would require declassifying the top line of the intelligence budget.

The Vice Cha irman agreed that Congressional oversight gets lost in the trees. How ever,the more the recommendationsfocus on structuralreform in Congress, theless feasiblethey become. The Vice C hairman suggested that,on the other hand, perhapstheCom mission 's role is to tell Congress to get its house in order. He relayed to usCom missioner Kerrey's recomm endation that we start by reviewing the charters of theintelligence committees.

Philip Zelikow asked about the Vice Cha irman 's experience in Congress. Vice ChairmanHamilton responded that Congress brings independence and is an 'outsider looking into'the Intelligence Comm unity. The Intelligence Com mun ity is still a closed fraternity,

although less so than in the past. Congress has the ability to make sharp criticisms thatwill rarely come out of the Executive Branch themselves, as people in the ExecutiveBranch depend upon the E xecutive Branch for theirjobs. And Congress ultimately hasthe power of the purse. Congress's responsibilityin national securityis to be veryvigorous in exercising oversight. Oversight shouldbe as serious a Congressionalendeavor as legislation . But in the last several decades, Congress hasfallen down. It is aseparation of powers issue- oversight is an institutiona l responsibility. Obviously,the



3/7


intelligence arenais secret, and Congress doesnot have the assistance of the press like indom estic arenas; therefore, Congress has a special responsibility in the intelligence areato perform oversight. The Vice Chairman suggested thatthe major changes needed- asin many other areas- are attitudinal.

The Vice C hairman said thatwe need to interview a lot of staffers. Regarding Members,he will follow our recommendation- perhapsfive should be interviewed. The interviewswould be led by Commissioners,and the Vice Chairmanis happy to assist. Indeed, theVice Chairman told Rep. Goss and Senator Graham that he will likely come back to talkwith them. However,he would wantto go talk w ith them armed w ithspecificrecomm endations. The Vice Chairman noted that Rep. Goss complains abou tdeclassification issues, although m any comm issions hav e studied this issue overtheyears. ChrisKojm suggested we talk with Rep. David Dryer and asked abo ut otherMembersto speak with abo ut Congressional oversightas a whole (not justintelligence).The Vice Chairman suggested Reps. Cox and Turner. Chris Kojm suggested that we lookat the question of whether the Select Co mm ittee on Homeland Security in the Houseshould be made perm anent. The Vice Chairm an recently testified on this issue be fore aHou se Rules subcom mittee, and we might talk to the chairman of that subcommittee.

Vice Chairman H amilton also suggested that we interview Members of the HASC andSASC such as Rep. Duncan Hunterand Rep. Norman Dix. He said that form erSenatorBill Cohen favors giving up DoD budget authority over the Intelligence Community butis an exception on this issue.

The Vice Chairman w ants to speak withformer SecDef Perry and wou ld be glad to do soby speakerphonefrom the Vice Chairman's office.

The Vice Chairman said that, whenthe HPSCI was initially established, the idea was toappoint very senior Members- Memberswho were not outside playersand who could betrusted. Du ring theHPSCFsearly years, Mem bers had on average 15-20years'experience. Today,the Democrats have appointedto the HPSCI a first-term Member!.The HPSC I andSSCI have become the most popular committees asidefromAppropriationsand Ways-and-Means/Finance. Members believe that,by being on thesecomm ittees, they become'players' - the media pursues them,and their colleagues thinkthey have access to secret information. Congressional leaders wo uld likelysay thatMembers are clamoring to be appointedto these comm ittees. This desireis a source ofpower for the leaders, as they decidewho is appointed. However,in the Vice Chairman'sopinion, the rise in the committees' desirabilityand the decrease in the averageexperience of the committees' Members- factors which perhaps w ere inevitable ov erthelong term - have led to deterioration in the quality of oversight. GordonLederman notedthat at one point the Members of the SSC I were the chairs of other comm ittees, andrequiring the intelligence oversight committeesto be composed of the chairs of othercommittees m ightbe a good institutional arrangemen tto increase the level of experienceof the committees' Members.



4/7


The Vice Chairman asked thatwe stay in close touch withhim on ourprogress, includingvia meetings, and also keep Com missioners Roemer, Kerrey,and Gorton informed.

Gordon Lederman said thathe would draft a strategy in conjunction withthe Front Officeand Kevin Scheid.

Philip Zelikow, Chris Kojm ,the Vice Chairman's assistant,and Gordon Ledermanleftthe meeting. John Roth stayedin order to brief the Vice Chairmanon a discrete issuespecific to Team 4's interview with Secretary Snow.



5/7

February 25 , 2004To: LHHFrom: BenCC: ChrisRe: Congressional Oversight

A brief outline of some of the topics and recommendations that have come up in Commissionmeetings, briefings and hearings regarding Congressional oversight:

ProblemsIn general, people feel that oversight is bogged down in investigations of front-page stories, turf wars,an d ineffectivebudgeting. Due to complex issues and limited terms, Members lack expertise on someissues, and do notsupply vigorous and forward-looking oversight.

Budgeting Process: There is wide agreement that the budgeting process is not effective. Theintelligence community budgets through supplemental; the legislative process of authorization andappropriation has broken down; conflictingpriorities and turf wars with DoD and the Armed Services

Committees interfere; and the annual budgeting cycle is not practical.

Compelling Compliance: Oversight lacks teeth. Often, Committees excoriate intelligence officials inpublic hearings, then raise their budgets. Senator Shelby framed the question like this: Do you try tocut funds to compel compliance and risk diminishing intelligence capabilities?

Inexperienced Membership: Terms on the Committees are limited, and it takes time to learn thenuances of intelligence issues. Committee appointments used to go to senior Members. Now it is asought-afterappointment, and leadership has even appointed a freshman Member.

Too much Investigation: Senator Rockefeller feels the Committee spends too much time inbackward-looking investigations. This deters from forward-looking oversight and budgeting.

Classification Process: Congressman Goss complains that the Committee spends a huge amount oftime on classification - some of which is unnecessary. This takes time away from oversight.

Recommendations

Extend terms or make membership permanent: This would allow Members to develop realexpertise; contrary argument is that Members would become too close to the intelligence community.

Appropriations Subcommittee on Intelligence: This would bring more order and expertise to thebudgeting process.

Longer budgeting cycle: Senator Nunn and others favor extending the budgeting cycle to two or threeyears. This would help resolve the problem of budgeting by supplemental; would enable agencies toplan; an d would free up time fo r more oversight an d other work by Committee staff.

Investigation subcommittee: Creating an investigations subcommittee would narrow investigativework, freeing up more resources and time for the committee to take on other oversight issues.


6/7

Create a single Committee for both Houses: This ideahas been floated to unify the oversightprocess, but lacks support and is probably impractical.

More political appointees in intelligence community: This would put more accountability into theintelligence agencies and provide ano ther lever to put som e teeth into oversight.

Outside expertise: Senator Grahamand others highlightthe importance of Committees drawingonexpertise from outsidethe intelligence communities. More academic expertise givesthe Committeesadifferent viewpoint, and increases the public's awareness of intelligenceissues.


7/7

Page 1 of 1

Gordon Lederman

From: Kevin ScheidSent: Tuesday, Decembe r 09, 2003 5:41 PM

To : Philip Zelikow

Cc: Chris Kojm; Dan Marcus; Barbara Grew e; Steve Dunne; Christine Healey; Team 2

Subject: Congressional Oversight Plan

Philip,

As you'll recall, Team 2 is responsible for reviewing and assessing congressional oversight for the Commission.In earlier discussions with you we decided to limit this review of oversight tointelligence. This email is to provideyou a plan on how we recommend conducting this review. Further, since we understand that M r. Roemer hasbeen meeting with some mem bers of Congress on these issues, we also want to get your guidance on how toproceed in light of his work and the views of other Comm issioners on the topic.

Document Review: We now have access to documents from the House and Senate Intelligence oversightcomm ittees. We are in the process of reviewing these documen ts looking for insights into how the Com mitteesconducted oversight of CT. The HPSCI forwa rded to us many copies of finishedintelligence related to terrorism,much of itafter 9-11. I've asked them to broaden their search criteria to include Afghanistan, UBL, al-Qa'ida, andPakistan. The Senate documents are very helpful,but the Comm ittee w illnot release them w/o a SenateResolution. They've requested that I review the documents on the Hill, identify which oneswe want to havecopies of, and then they w ill pass a resolution to release those particular files.This review is in process.

Interviews: In addition to documents, we want to interviewstaff and Committee members, both current andformer. We wou ld like to forw ard a request for interviews to the Comm ittees in the next week.

On the House side, we would like to interview the following:

Chairman GossRanking Minority Member, Ms. Jane HarmanCongressman N orm Dicks

Pat Murray, HPSCIstaff directorSuzanne Spalding, HPSCI minoritystaff directorTim Sample, former HPSCIstaff directorKevin Roper, Majoritystaff director, House Appropriations, Defense SubcommitteeBetsy Phillips, House Appropriations, Defense Subcommittee

On the Senate side:

Chairman RobertsVice Chairman RockefellerFormer Chairman GrahamFormer Vice Chairman ShelbyBill Duhnke,staff director

Chris Mellon, minoritystaff directorA rt Grant, Senator Kerrey's staffer and forme r m inoritystaff director

In addition to the se interview s we w ill be able tocall on the experience of Mr. Hamilton, Senator Gorton, Mr.Roemer and Senator Kerrey.

We understand from comments made by M r. Hamilton that Mr. Roem er has been m eeting w ith members ofCongress to discuss oversight issues. Unless yo u direct otherwise. Barbara Grewe and I plan to speak with Timabout his discussions before we launch into the^nteryiews^Q we don't duplicate work he perhaps has alreadydone. Tim would also be very helpfulin calling members to help open doors on the Hill. I willlet you know wherewe stand after this meeting and give you a more complete sense of next steps.

2/25/2004

T2 B18 Hamilton on Congressional Oversight Fdr- Entire Contents- MFR Re 2-25-04 Meeting With...

Documents

Transcript of T2 B18 Hamilton on Congressional Oversight Fdr- Entire Contents- MFR Re 2-25-04 Meeting With...