Intelligence: Promises kept

Intelligence—Promises Kept

December 15, 2006

The 9/11 Commission report concluded, “Congressional oversight for intelligence—and counterterrorism—is now dysfunctional.” Yesterday, incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) announced a plan “to heighten congressional oversight of intelligence, answering complaints by national security specialists and lawmakers in both parties that Congress has been lax in monitoring the highly secretive community.” Pelosi proposed “a new intelligence oversight panel within the House Appropriations Committee that will examine the intelligence budget, monitor funds spent by intelligence agencies, and prepare the classified document that explains their expenses.” The proposal was praised by members of 9/11 Commission, who advocated just such a plan. Commissioner Slade Gordon (R) said, “I think it's a significant step forward. It means there will be one group of members who will be primarily responsible for the intelligence budget. They will therefore pay attention to it and provide a greater degree of oversight.” (Read American Progress report on intelligence overhaul, “No Mere Oversight.”)

• This new intelligence panel will address key oversight problems. “For years there has been underlying competition between the Intelligence and Appropriations committees,” The Wall Street Journal notes. Pelosi's proposal addresses this problem by creating a “hybrid” panel drawn from both the Intelligence and Appropriations committees. The new Intelligence Oversight Panel will be responsible for examining the president's budget submission for intelligence, recommending funding levels for intelligence programs to the appropriations committees, and conducting oversight of the use of appropriated funds.
• Congress hasn’t acted on the 9/11 Commission recommendations in two years. It's ironic that Outgoing Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Rep. Peter King (R-NY) would target Pelosi's efforts for criticism. For two years, they held leadership positions in Congress. The 9/11 Commission awarded them a “D” for their efforts on intelligence reform. As American Progress stated in June, the failure to act on 9/11 Commission reforms “leaves America more exposed to terrorist threats.” During this time, progressives repeatedly requested that the House leadership move to enact the commission's recommendation. Pelosi wrote in an op-ed last January, “as the Sept. 11 commission noted, the way intelligence information is conveyed to Congress and the way Congress operates make rigorous oversight impossible...in the 17 months since the Sept. 11 commission called on Congress to review the adequacy of its intelligence oversight system, I have written to House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) four times to urge that we proceed in a bipartisan fashion to get that job done.”
• The media has been getting the story wrong as well. The media has been misreporting the story for some time. Two weeks ago, The Washington Post reported that Pelosi had “decided for now against” following through on her “solemn pledge” to enact the 9/11 Commission recommendations. The New York Times followed up with an op-ed accusing Pelosi of “cherry-picking campaign promises.” Even after Pelosi announced her plan, the media continued to spin it as a broken promise. The New York Times reported that the plan “does not go as far as the commission recommended.” The Wall Street Journal headline yesterday got it right: “‘Hybrid’ Committee Spans Oversight and Budget Work, Fulfilling 9/11 Panel's Call.”