Congressional Record: March 6, 2007 (Senate)
Page S2677-S2678


                   Unanimous-Consent Request--S. 375

  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 20, S.
372, the Intelligence authorization, 2007; that the Rockefeller-Bond
amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as
amended, be read the third time and passed; that the motion to
reconsider be laid upon the table; that a statement by Senator
Rockefeller be printed in the Record as if read, without intervening
action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, on behalf of another Senator--not
myself--I do object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Madam President, let me take this opportunity to
thank many people but not the particular Senator who is objecting--1
out of 100. Nevertheless, Senators Reid, Bond, myself, and others have
worked very hard to move this fiscal year 2007 Intelligence
authorization bill forward. All parties have been enormously supportive
in this effort. It is one of the more embarrassing efforts I have been
associated with in my 24 years in this body. I must express my dismay,
my absolute dismay. I will hold it to that.
  Despite considerable efforts on the part of the chairman and Vice
Chairman Bond and extensive efforts and negotiations to get agreement
on this bill, there is still an objection from one Senator for its
consideration. Is it just another bill? Not quite. The Senate's failure
to pass this critical national security legislation for the past 2
years is remarkably shocking and inexcusable.
  In 2005, the Senate failed, for the first time since the
establishment of the congressional intelligence committees, to pass an
annual Intelligence authorization bill. That means for 27 years we
passed authorization bills for the Intelligence Committee. It is not an
inconsequential committee. It instructs how intelligence is to be done.
There are a number of changes that have been agreed to. All of that
failure was followed by a repeat failure in 2006--in 2005 and then in
2006.

[[Page S2678]]

  So from 1978 through 2004, the Senate had an unbroken 27-year record
of completing its work on this critical legislation. You cannot move to
appropriations until you go through authorization, particularly in a
field such as intelligence authorization that has an unbelievably
important role. The Intelligence authorization bill has been considered
must-pass legislation for many years--until recently. Now, in the midst
of the war on terror, with things going downhill in Iraq, going
downhill in Afghanistan, and our continued military involvement in both
places, when good intelligence is not just vital but a matter of life
and death--and I emphasize the second--we have been prevented from
passing that bill that provides the legislative roadmap for our
intelligence programs.
  Similar to the Defense authorization and appropriations bills, the
Intelligence authorization bill is at the core of our efforts to
protect America. That is why it is simply incomprehensible, shocking,
and debasing that we cannot find a way to bring up and pass this
critical legislation.
  The result of this continued obstruction will be diminished authority
for intelligence agencies to do their job in protecting America. I hope
the Senator involved takes satisfaction in that. I am not sure his
constituents--if it is a he--would. Yes, I am angry.
  The authorization bill contains 16 separate provisions enhancing or
clarifying the authority of the Director of National Intelligence. The
bill includes major improvements in the way we approach and manage
human intelligence, information sharing, protection of sources and
methods, and even the nominations process for key intelligence
community leaders.
  I came to the floor several times last year to explain those
provisions in detail. Today, I reiterate how important this legislation
is to the war on terrorism and to every other aspect of our national
security, including the ongoing fight in Iraq and Afghanistan. This
should have happened years ago. Somebody objects and, of course, it
cannot happen; the rules of the Senate prevail.
  There is no reason the Senate cannot pass this bill quickly, so that
we can confer with the House before the committee is required to turn
its attention to drafting and reporting out what will be another
experiment, the 2008 authorization, which we should already be halfway
toward completing. If there is objection to passing this bill by
unanimous consent, we have been--the vice chairman and I, who worked
very well together--more than willing to negotiate a time agreement and
quickly debate and pass this long-overdue national security bill.
  It is essential we assist the men and women of the intelligence
agencies to continue their vital work on the frontlines of Iraq and
Afghanistan and something called the war on terror.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used his 5 minutes.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Madam President, I conclude by simply saying we need
this bill.
  I yield the floor.
  Several Senators addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, parliamentary inquiry.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont will state his
inquiry.
  Mr. LEAHY. Has there been time reserved for the Senator from Vermont?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 13 minutes.
  Mr. LEAHY. Further parliamentary inquiry: Is there an order for
recognition?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is not.
  Mr. LEAHY. Further parliamentary inquiry: Does anybody else have time
reserved to them?
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I believe I do for an amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois and the Senator from
California each have 13 minutes.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Madam President, may I just appeal to whatever
reasoned and reasonable people there may be around here, and that is
that the vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee has something to
say on this matter which relates to what I said. There is a sequential
power in that which I think deserves consideration.
  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I reserve my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
  Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, in order for the Senator from Missouri
to speak, would the Senator from Maine or one of the sponsors have to
yield time to him?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Ms. COLLINS. How much time does the Senator from Maine have
remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 6 minutes remaining.
  Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I yield 4 minutes to the Senator from
Missouri.
  Mr. BOND. Madam President, I thank the ranking member of the
committee.
  When this committee was formed a long time ago--30 years ago--we
lacked congressional oversight. Since 9/11, we found that congressional
oversight had not been as good as it should have been, and one of my
first acts when I was appointed vice chairman was I suggested to the
chairman that passing the authorization bill was the top priority. He
agreed. We have to be able to pass authorization bills if we are to
have an impact on the intelligence community.
  There are already a number of Rockefeller-Bond amendments on this 9/
11 bill. There will be more.
  There are some who say there is nothing an executive branch agency
values more than a lack of congressional oversight. But I believe
congressional oversight can help them do their job better.
  Is this bill perfect? No. But it is largely the same bill as last
year, and we have changed provisions that were objectionable. On the
good side, it would ensure that the exemption of Freedom of Information
Act requirements carries over to operational files. There is a specific
provision creating, within the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence, a National Space Intelligence Center.
  In reviewing all these, we worked very closely together to deal with
problems in the bill. I believe we have taken care of most of the
problems people raised. What I am afraid of is that people are
objecting to the bill without knowing what is in the bill, without
knowing the changes we have made, the accommodations that have been
made by the chairman and by the vice chairman to make this bill
acceptable.
  Some have said that the administration has concerns. If the
administration has concerns, obviously they could exercise those
concerns in a veto. But if they have concerns, I am not sure they know
the changes and the provisions we have added to this bill.
  I invite my colleagues who have problems with the bill to talk with
me or with the chairman about the bill so we can move it. We have
worked long and hard to help improve the operations of the intelligence
community. Our bill is the one way we have of providing that guidance
and sharing with the intelligence community the issues that the
bipartisan members of this committee believe are important.
  I invite anybody, all people or any person who has a hold on this
bill, to come forward and find out what is in the bill. Don't judge it
by what you think it may contain.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________