Senate debates control of intelligence funding, personnel

With no more votes expected until next week on legislation to overhaul the nation's intelligence community, the Senate on Friday debated two amendments that would restore some authority to the Defense Department and Congress in controlling intelligence funding and personnel.

Senate Appropriations ranking member Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., offered an amendment with bipartisan support that would give Congress stronger oversight of intelligence funding accounts.

The measure would ensure that authority granted to a new national intelligence director to transfer personnel and funding closely reflect current law. Funding transfers could not exceed $100 million or 5 percent of an agency's budget without concurrence of that agency's leader. It appeared to be directed at preserving funding and personnel control for the Defense Department's intelligence agencies that provide combat support to the military.

Senate Governmental Affairs Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, who drafted the underlying legislation with ranking member Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., opposed the amendment because she said it would weaken the intelligence director's ability to react quickly to a crisis. She noted that then-acting CIA Director John McLaughlin said during testimony last month it can take as long as five months to reprogram funds.

"In the threat environment we face today, we cannot afford a five-month delay in transferring urgently needed funds," Collins said.

Byrd contended that if Congress yields the power of the purse to the new intelligence director, it would have only limited means to "rein him in if there are abuses of power." Byrd also decried the Senate leadership's rush to complete work on the bill next week. "We ought not bend to the lash of the whip on the part of the leadership, on the part of the administration, on the part of anyone," he said.

Collins and Lieberman also took issue with an amendment offered by Armed Services Chairman John Warner, R-Va., that would give the Defense secretary priority in recommending presidential nominees to head military intelligence agencies that deal with both national and tactical intelligence. Warner noted that the directors of the National Security Agency and the National Reconnaissance Office perform dual functions within the Pentagon and oversee elements of the armed forces. Warner said he was concerned about disrupting this chain of command by giving the national intelligence director authority over determining nominees for these positions.

Although the Collins-Lieberman bill would vest that authority in the new intelligence director, it also would call for the Defense secretary's concurrence in naming the appointment. The intelligence director also would be required to notify the president if the Defense secretary does not concur with the director's recommendation. Collins asserted that Warner's proposal is "essentially making no change in current law," and current law is not adequate. "We know that the hire authority is a key authority," she said.