Congressional Record: January 16, 2007 (Senate) Page S556 LEGISLATIVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2007 The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the hour of 1 p.m. having arrived, the Senate will resume consideration of S. 1, which the clerk will report. [...] Amendment No. 70 Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, I call up amendment No. 70. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from California [Mrs. Feinstein], for herself and Mr. Rockefeller, proposes an amendment numbered 70. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: (Purpose: To prohibit an earmark from being included in the classified portion of a report accompanying a measure unless the measure includes a general program description, funding level, and the name of the sponsor of that earmark) On page 7, after line 6, insert the following: ``4. It shall not be in order to consider any bill, resolution, or conference report that contains an earmark included in any classified portion of a report accompanying the measure unless the bill, resolution, or conference report includes to the greatest extent practicable, consistent with the need to protect national security (including intelligence sources and methods), in unclassified language, a general program description, funding level, and the name of the sponsor of that earmark.''. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, this amendment is presented by myself and Senator Rockefeller, chairman of the Intelligence Committee. It aims to bring the same goals of accountability and transparency of earmark reform to the most opaque of earmarks, and those are classified ones. The amendment prohibits any bill authorization or appropriation from containing an earmark in the classified portion of that bill or accompanying a report, unless there is unclassified language that describes in general terms the nature of the earmark. The amount of the earmark is disclosed and the sponsor of the earmark is identified. We have cleared this with Senator Rockefeller and also, I believe, with Senator Bond, who requested a change that we have made. This amendment would provide the public with the assurance that the classified parts of the defense and intelligence budgets--which are indeed large--are subjected to the same scrutiny and openness as everything else. The need for the amendment was made clear by the actions of former Congressman Duke Cunningham. According to a report by the House Intelligence Committee, Cunningham was able to enact a staggering $70 million to $80 million in classified earmarks over a 5- year period. These earmarks benefited his business partners and were not known to most Members of the Congress or the public. The Washington Post, in a November 2006 editorial, pointed out: Until the last decade or so, earmarks weren't permitted to intelligence bills because of the absence of public scrutiny. The Post also notes that Cunningham's earmarks could be the tip of the iceberg in terms of classified pork and corruption. Under this amendment, the public can be assured that this cannot happen. In saying these words, I say them as a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; I say them with the knowledge that these earmarks can be very large; I say them with the knowledge that this budget, which is known as a ``black budget'' and is considered by the Defense Subcommittee of Appropriations to be very difficult to get at, even by those of us who serve on both intelligence and defense appropriations. Senator Bond and I are in the process of suggesting a procedure to the chairman of the Defense Appropriations Committee, as well as the leadership, that might bring greater intelligence staff work to bear on the classified part that relates to intelligence of the defense bill. This amendment is a very simple amendment. It simply says make as clear as possible, without jeopardizing national security, what the earmark is and provide transparency as to who is requesting the earmark. I don't think that is too much to ask. I do not believe it is going to in any way, shape, or form disrupt or change anything other than bring the light of day to classified earmarks. I am prepared to ask for the yeas and nays. I ask the ranking member if he has looked at this amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah. Mr. BENNETT. Madam President, I have looked at this amendment, and I have no particular problem with it. I would think we could pass it by voice vote, but as a courtesy to Senator Bond and the Intelligence Committee, we have asked them to confirm that the understanding which the Senator from California has is, indeed, correct. I have no reason to doubt her word on this matter, but the earlier comment to us was we want to be sure that the fix has been made. She assures us it has been. But as a courtesy to them, I have asked my staff to check with them. When that word comes back, which I expect to be positive, I will be willing to move ahead with a voice vote. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, I have no problem with trust but verify. I am happy to cease and desist at this time and wait and see. I thank the ranking member. I thank the Chair. Mr. BENNETT. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Pryor). Without objection, it is so ordered. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I urge--and I think this is my fourth urgent importuning of my colleagues--to please come to the floor with their amendments. The floor is open now. At 5:30 p.m. we will have a vote on two amendments and a cloture vote on a third amendment. I ask them to please come to the floor and press their cause now because the week is going on. It is Tuesday. We all heard the majority leader saying this morning that we could finish this bill as early as Wednesday evening or as late as Saturday. I know we would all want to see it done on the former date. Hopefully, Members will come to the floor. It is my understanding there are some 60 amendments in the line. If a Senator does not want his or her amendment to proceed further, please so advise us so we can eliminate it from the list. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I have heard from the minority on the Intelligence Committee, and they verify what Senator Feinstein has said; that is, that the corrections which they suggested which she has accepted are, in fact, in the bill. I am prepared to go to a vote on the bill at this point, and I will support it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I thank the ranking member. I call up amendment No. 70. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is pending. Is there further debate? If not, the question is on agreeing to amendment No. 70. The amendment (No. 70) was agreed to. Mr. BENNETT. I move to reconsider the vote. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the pending amendment be set aside so I can call up three amendments at the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. [...]