Susan Collins

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at 2 p.m. today, the Senate proceed to a vote in relation to the Specter amendment No. 3761, regarding a 10-year term, provided that no amendment be in order to the amendment prior to that vote. I also ask consent that following that vote, the Senate proceed to a vote in relation to the Specter amendment No. 3706 regarding the NID consolidation, again with no second degrees in order to the amendment prior to the vote on the first degree. And finally, I ask that the order with respect to the statements of Senator Harkin and Senator Stevens begin following those two votes.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I certainly understand the intent of the Senator from Pennsylvania in offering this amendment. Indeed, he offered it during the markup of the Governmental Affairs Committee. It was debated at length. Initially, in considering this issue, I, too, was inclined to believe that the new national intelligence director should have some sort of term of office. However, the testimony we heard through our eight hearings changed my mind in this regard. Under our legislation, S. 2845, the NID serves as the principal adviser to the President. The individual not only manages the intelligence community and heads up the new national intelligence authority, but serves as the principal adviser to the President. I am stressing that role because I believe that is key to why the director, in fact, should not have a fixed term. It is essential that the NID enjoy the full confidence and trust of the President of the United States. That was a point made by the 9/11 Commission chairman, Tom Kean, at our very first hearing on July 30. But we heard that repeated time and again by our witnesses. All of the former DCIs who came before the committee, representing a variety of times and administrations, were unanimous in their view that the new NID should serve at the pleasure of the President. The then Acting Director of the CIA John McLaughlin made the point at our September 8 hearing that for the NID to successfully clarify our assignment of serving as the principal adviser to the President, he must enjoy the President's trust and confidence. Consider a situation where the Presidency changes parties during that 10-year-period. It would be very awkward for a new President of a different party to inherit the national intelligence director from the previous administration. Their world views and philosophy may have nothing in common. Yet the President has to have a close and trusting relationship with the national intelligence director. The President should be able to choose his or her own person for that critical post. Proponents of having a 10-year term have frequently compared this proposal to the 10-year term of the Director of the FBI. I would note that I asked Director Mueller whether he thought the new NID should have a 10-year term similar to his. He said he did not think a 10-year term or any fixed term was appropriate for the national intelligence director. He said the role of the FBI Director is very different from the role of the national intelligence director. Over and over again during our hearings, Senator Lieberman and I raised this question with the witnesses because we, too, were trying to reach the right determination. Over and over again, the advice was the same, whether it was the 9/11 Commission, the Acting Director of the CIA, the former Directors of the CIA, or Director Mueller of the FBI. Over and over again, they advised against setting a term. So we need to create a position where the individual will enjoy the full confidence and trust of the President of the United States. That is the only way that individual can effectively carry out the role he is assigned in this legislation to serve as the President's principal intelligence adviser. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment of the Senator from Pennsylvania.

Ms. COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. President. I thank the Senator.

Ms. COLLINS. They are indeed.

Ms. COLLINS. Seven plus the pending amendment.

Ms. COLLINS. I apologize for interrupting the Senator. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the only amendments remaining to the bill other than the pending amendments be the two lists I now send to the desk; provided further that they be subject to second degrees that are related to the subject matter of the first degree; further, that all other provisions governing the consideration of this bill remain in effect.

Ms. COLLINS. Would the Senator yield briefly for a unanimous consent request?

Ms. COLLINS. Senator Stevens is going to be speaking on the bill so he has asked for an unlimited amount of time.

Ms. COLLINS. As part of that sequencing, it would be 10 minutes for Senator Harkin and 10 minutes for Senator Stevens--oh, I am sorry. Senator Stevens is on the bill?

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, if I could complete my sequencing here. After Senator Roberts, Senator Levin had asked to be recognized on the Specter amendment. They were both here last night, so I want to respect their requests as well. I wonder if we could arrange for Senator Harkin to speak after the first series of votes today, for 10 minutes.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, if I can respond to the Democratic leader's inquiry, there was an informal discussion last night. There was not an order entered, to the best of my knowledge, but an informal agreement that Senator Roberts would be recognized, and it was either 25 or 30 minutes. I am uncertain.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, the debate now will resume on the amendment offered by the Senator from Pennsylvania. As discussed last night, we have an informal agreement that Senator Roberts would be recognized for--is it 25 minutes, I ask Senator Roberts?

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I hope we can continue to work on the underlying amendment with the goal of having a vote on it shortly. I also want to announce to all of my colleagues that we do intend to vote on Senator Specter's amendment tomorrow. I recognize there are a few Senators who have not been heard on it who desire to be heard, but we do intend to conclude the debate and vote on Senator Specter's amendment tomorrow. I thank the Chair. amendment no. 3731

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the Levin second-degree amendment No. 3732, which is at the desk, now be considered and agreed to, with the motion to reconsider laid upon the table.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I have two amendments that have been cleared on both sides. Both of these amendments are second-degree amendments to my underlying amendment No. 3705 regarding Homeland Security grants. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that the Inhofe- Jeffords second-degree amendment No. 3731, which is at the desk, be considered and agreed to, with the motion to reconsider laid upon the table.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I know the Senator from Kansas is waiting. I need to make a couple of very brief announcements, with the Senator's indulgence. Amendment No. 3731 to Amendment No. 3705

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. COLLINS. We hope the Senator will be here.

Ms. COLLINS. I would certainly welcome that. Perhaps we can try with the help of the floor staff to order the series of speakers. We will make sure the distinguished chairman of the Intelligence Committee is protected in that regard.

Ms. COLLINS. We do not. We have not been able to determine how many people still want to speak on the amendment. We are trying to accommodate those who do wish to speak.

Ms. COLLINS. The Senator is correct. The vote will occur tomorrow.

Ms. COLLINS. I am sorry, I couldn't hear the Senator.

Ms. COLLINS. The leaders have been waiting for Senator Lieberman and me since 5:30 for a meeting and they have summoned us again. I did not want to walk off the floor without explaining to my distinguished colleagues the fact that we have already kept our leaders waiting for more than 20 minutes.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I apologize for interrupting the Senator.

Ms. COLLINS. Correct.