GovernmentExecutive.com

Following a key recommendation from the panel investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, President Bush Monday called on Congress to create a position to oversee foreign and domestic intelligence operations.

The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States released a report last month calling for a major overhaul of the intelligence community, including the creation of a Cabinet-level national intelligence director that would oversee 15 federal intelligence agencies and consult with the director of the CIA. The CIA director currently coordinates all federal intelligence efforts.

The commission's report also called for a position with budgetary power over the 15 agencies, but Bush administration officials describe the proposed position as an adviser to the president.

"The person in that office will be appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate, and will serve at the pleasure of the president," Bush said during a White House press conference where he appeared with several Cabinet members. "The national intelligence director will serve as the president's principal intelligence adviser and will oversee and coordinate the foreign and domestic activities of the intelligence community."

Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security adviser, and White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card said the newly created position would have "input" on intelligence agency budgets.

"I would think that the recommendation of this person on the budget would ... strongly influence any final budget," Rice said. "Right now, budgetary authority is chopped up among many different jurisdictions, and so that has to be dealt with, too."

Bush rejected the panel's recommendation that the new post be within the White House. Last week, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.,expressed concern about that potential arrangement. Bush said Monday that a separate intelligence office will be in a better position to oversee activities between different agencies.

"I don't think that the office ought to be in the White House," he said. "I think it ought to be a stand-alone group to better coordinate, particularly between foreign intelligence and domestic intelligence matters."

During his press conference, Bush also announced the establishment of a National Counterterrorism Center, which will build on the work of the existing Terrorist Threat Integration Center. The new center will become "our government's knowledge bank for information about known and suspected terrorists," according to Bush.

Although many of the 9/11 panel's proposed reforms will require congressional approval -- Bush said that "creating the position of the national intelligence director will require a substantial revision of the 1947 National Security Act" -- lawmakers are not scheduled to return to Capitol Hill for another month, and it is unclear when they would be able to take action.

Bush indicated that the White House is not planning an urgent push to implement any of the measures.

"Listen, the Congress has been thinking about some of these ideas. They can think about them over August and come back and act on them in September," he said. "We look forward to working with them."

COMMENTS

• A new intelligence post???? Obviously we don't have one now. NO weapons of mass destruction, no connection between Iraq and terrorists. Now the president says we all had bad intelligence and that is why we went to war. BALONEY. We knew the evidence was sketchy at best. We are now at a war of words with France and Germany because they didn't support us in this illegal war. They wouldn't support us because they didn't believe us on WMD's. They were right, there were none. You won't hear the Bush elite talking about that during the election campaign, but we will have many more alerts and assertations that he would mislead us again if given the chance. The Pentagon knew what was true and not, as did the Vice President. If the going gets hot, just out a couple of CIA agents and take the focus off. By the way, Robert Novak should be tried for treason for disclosing an operative during time of war. Wait, this isn't a congressionaly declared war so that doesn't matter, nor does the Geneva convention, or common sense. GovExec.com reader Posted August 4, 2004 1:50 PM
• Let's see ... this person would have no hire/fire authority, no budget authority, and wouldn't be a cabinet position. Maybe his/her job could be to clarify the president's message. When he speaks on the campaign trail he says America is "safer" and when he speaks from the Rose Garden, America is in "danger." Does that mean we are safer when he is OUT of the white house??? GovExec.com reader Posted August 4, 2004 8:26 AM
• This all reminds me of a tough guy contest. Everyone- President Bush, Senator Kerry, the Senate, the House, Administration officials are all racing to show that they are tougher than the next guy. To show that no level of security is too much- even if it means closing down the Capital of the Free World. Mayor Williams of DC hit the target this week. The terrorists win if we close down Washington, DC to protect Washington, DC from non-specific and four year old threats. Democracy is a deliberative form of government- it is slow, it is cumbersome, it is sometimes illogical and a waste of resources--and that is the beauty of our system. We check and balence ourselves in order to avoid tyranny. Where is the check and balence in this race to out tough everyone else? Where is the argument whether all of this is security and intelligence is even necessary in a free and open society. Or are we so far gone that the choice is to close down our society out of fear. GovExec.com reader Posted August 4, 2004 8:01 AM