[Congressional Record: May 26, 2011 (Senate)] [Page S3367-S3372] [Senate Colloquy on Secret Law} Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to engage in a colloquy between Senators Udall, Feinstein, and Merkley. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am going to talk for just a couple of minutes about the issue of secret law that Senator Udall and I, as we are both members of the Intelligence Committee, have been working on for quite some time. Then I am going to yield to our friend, the distinguished chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee, Senator Feinstein, for a colloquy. What this issue is all about is this: I believe there are two PATRIOT Acts in America. The first is the text of the law itself, and the second is the government's secret interpretation of what they believe the law means. As an example, several years ago Americans woke up to learn that the Bush administration had been secretly claiming for years that warrantless wiretapping was legal. This disclosure greatly undermined the public's trust in the Department of Justice and our national intelligence agencies, and it took Congress and the executive branch years to sort out the situation. I believe the American people will also be extremely surprised when they learn how the PATRIOT Act is secretly being interpreted, and I believe one consequence will be an erosion of public confidence that makes it more difficult for our critically important national intelligence agencies to function effectively. As someone who served on the Intelligence Committee for 10 years, sitting right next to Senator Feinstein, I don't want to see that happen. Let me yield now to Senator Udall. He will also have brief remarks, and any colleagues who want to speak, and then Senator Feinstein will lead us in the discussion of how we will be moving forward. So I yield to Senator Udall who has been an invaluable member on the Intelligence Committee. He and I have worked on this since the day he joined our committee, and I am so appreciative of his involvement. Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Oregon for his kind words. I also wish to echo his remarks about the leadership of the chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee and her focus on keeping our country safe and our citizens protected. I also wish to make the point that, as my colleague from Oregon, I also oppose reauthorization of the expiring provisions in the PATRIOT Act without significant reforms. I believe it is critical that the administration make public its interpretation of the PATRIOT Act so Members of Congress and the public are not kept in the dark. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I wish to thank both Senator Wyden and Senator Udall for their comments. We did have a meeting last night. We did discuss this thoroughly. The decision was that we would enter into this colloquy, so I will begin it, if I may. These Senators and I, along with the junior Senator from Oregon, Mr. Merkley, the Senator from Colorado, Mr. Mark Udall, and the Senator from Rhode Island, Mr. Whitehouse met last night to discuss this amendment, the legal interpretation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act provisions and how these provisions are implemented. I very much appreciate the strong views Senator Wyden and Senator Udall have in this area, and I believe they are raising a serious and important point as to how exactly these authorities are carried out. I believe we are also all in agreement that these are important counterterrorism authorities and have contributed to the security of our Nation. Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I have enormous respect for my special friend from California, the distinguished chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee. I have literally sat next to her for more than a decade. We agree on virtually all of these issues, but this is an area where we have had a difference of opinion. I have said I wouldn't support a long-term reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act without significant reforms, particularly in this area. I am especially troubled by the fact that the U.S. Government's official interpretation of the PATRIOT Act is secret, and I believe a significant gap has developed now between what the public thinks the law says and what the government secretly claims it says. That is why I and my colleagues from Oregon and Colorado and New Mexico have proposed an amendment that would make these legal interpretations public. Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, let me say once again, as does my colleague from Oregon, I oppose reauthorization of the existing provisions of the PATRIOT Act that we have been debating on the Senate floor without significant reforms. I also have to say I believe it is critical that the administration make public its interpretation of the PATRIOT Act so Members of Congress and our public are not kept in the dark. That is the important work we have in front of us, and we have a real opportunity to accomplish those goals. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, if I may respond, I have agreed that these are important issues and that the Intelligence Committee, which is charged with carrying out oversight over the 16 various intelligence agencies of what is called the intelligence community, should be carried out forthrightly. I also believe the place to do it is in the Intelligence Committee itself. I have said to these distinguished Senators that it would be my intention to call together a hearing as soon as we come back from the Memorial Day break with the intelligence community agencies, the senior policymakers, and the Department of Justice to make sure the committee is comfortable with the FISA programs and to make changes if changes are needed. We will do that. So it would be my intention to have these hearings completed before the committee considers the fiscal year 2012 intelligence authorization bill so that any amendments to FISA can be considered at that time. The fact is, we do not usually have amendments to the intelligence authorization bill, but I believe the majority leader will do his best to secure a future commitment if such is needed for a vote on any amendment. I have not agreed to support any amendment because at this stage it is hypothetical, and we need to look very deeply into what these Senators have said and pointed out last night with specificity and get the response to it from the intelligence committee, have both sides hear it, and then make a decision that is based not only on civil liberties but also on the necessity to keep our country safe. I believe we can do that. I am very appreciative of their agreement to enter this colloquy. Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee for proposing this course of action for addressing the secret law issue. Obviously, colleagues would like more information on that, and they are going to be in a position to know that the Intelligence Committee is going to be examining it closely. I will just describe the next steps from there. Senator Udall and I have discussed this issue with Senator Reid. Senator Reid indicated to the chairwoman and myself and Senator Udall that we would have an opportunity through these hearings--and, of course, any amendments to the bill would be discussed on the intelligence authorization legislation, which is a matter that obviously has to be classified--but if we were not satisfied, if we were not satisfied through that process, we would have the ability to offer an amendment such as our original one on the Senate floor. Of course, the chairwoman would still retain full rights to oppose it, but we would make sure if this issue of secret law wasn't fixed and there wasn't an improved process to make more transparent and more open the interpretation of the law--not what are called sources and methods which are so important to protect our people--we would have an opportunity, if it wasn't corrected in the intelligence community, to come to the floor. [[Page S3370]] Senator Reid has just indicated to all of us that he would focus on giving us a vote if we believed it was needed on another bill--not the intelligence authorization--before September 30. So there is a plan to actually get this fixed, and that is what is key. At this time I yield to the Senator from Colorado. Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, as we begin to end this important colloquy, I wish to acknowledge the leadership of Senator Wyden on this important matter. I also wish to acknowledge the involvement of the Senator from New Mexico, who is presiding at this moment in time, and the Senator from Oregon, Mr. Merkley, and the Senator from Rhode Island, Mr. Whitehouse, who has been very involved in bringing this case to the attention of all of us. I wish to also thank my good friend from California, the chairwoman of the committee. She has shown a great willingness to work with everybody and to listen. I have to say I expect that once the committee examines this issue more closely, I think many more of our colleagues will want to join us in reforming the law in this area. I think this is important. I do think we can find the right balance between protecting civil liberties and protecting the health and welfare of the American citizens. Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, let me just make one last comment. I also wish to express my appreciation to Senator Merkley, who has been an extraordinarily outspoken advocate of our civil liberties and our privacy in striking a good balance between fighting terror and protecting the rights of our people, and I have so appreciated his leadership on this issue. Let me sum up. First, I am very grateful to our chairwoman and pleased with this agreement. The chairwoman has indicated she believes those of us who want to reform secret law have raised a serious and important issue. Those are her words. We are grateful for that because we obviously believe very strongly about it. The chairwoman has said we will hold hearings promptly to examine the secret law issue, give serious consideration to looking at reforms in the fiscal year 2012 intelligence authorization bill, and then, per our conversations with the majority leader, if Senator Udall and I believed it had not been corrected on the intelligence authorization bill, we would have the right to offer--and certainly the chairwoman could oppose it--an amendment on the floor of the Senate on an unrelated bill. Senator Reid, to his great credit, in an effort to try to resolve this and move it along, said to the three of us that he would be working to do that. Again, our thanks to the chairwoman and all of my colleagues on the floor, including Senator Merkley, who is not a member of the committee and knows an incredible amount about it and certainly showed that last night in our discussions and was very helpful. I wish to yield to him. So with the cooperation the chairwoman has shown all of us who are trying to change this and the efforts of Senator Reid to make sure if we didn't work it out we could come back to the floor again, I withdraw the Wyden-Udall amendment for the time being. It ought to be clear to everybody in the Senate that we are going to continue to prosecute the cause of making more open and accountable the way the government interprets this law in making sure that the American people have the confidence that the way it is being interpreted is in line with the text of the legislation. I withdraw at this time the Wyden-Udall amendment, and I yield the floor. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Oregon. Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I am deeply appreciative of the dialogue that has just taken place. It was William Pitt in England who commented that the wind and the rain can enter my house, but the King cannot. It captured the spirit and understanding of the balance between personal privacy, personal freedoms, and issues of the Crown regarding maintenance of security. It was this foundation that came in for our fourth amendment of our Constitution that lays out clear standards for the protection of privacy and freedoms. So as we have wrestled with the standard set out in the PATRIOT Act, a standard that says the government may have access to records that are relevant to an investigation--now, that term is, on its face, quite broad and expansive, quite a low standard, if you will. But what happens when it is interpreted out of the sight of this Chamber, out of the sight of the American people? That is the issue my colleague has raised, and it is a very important issue. I applaud the chair of the Intelligence Committee for laying out a process whereby we all can wrestle with this issue in an appropriate venue and have a path for amendments in the committee or possibly here on the floor of the Senate because I do think it is our constitutional responsibility to make sure the fourth amendment of the Constitution is protected, the privacy and freedoms of citizens are protected. I say thank you to the Senator from Colorado; my senior colleague, who has led this effort from Oregon; my colleague from New Mexico, who is the Acting President pro tempore; and the chairwoman from California. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues very much. I believe this concludes our colloquy. I thank the Acting President pro tempore, and we yield the floor. [...]