Porter Goss

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood), who is the chairman of the Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee who has done an extraordinary job on a very difficult subject.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins), who is a new and valued member of our committee, and we welcome him.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I am very happy to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the distinguished vice chairman of the committee. (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), the distinguished chairman of the House Committee on Science. (Mr. BOEHLERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham), the distinguished gentleman who is a very valued member of our committees and has helped us on a number of fronts.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), also a valuable member of our committee. (Mr. BURR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to advise the Chair to advise the gentlewoman that we have no further speakers except myself to make a few household and closing remarks.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have?

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time. I would like to also announce that the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra), who is the chairman of our Subcommittee on Technical and Tactical Intelligence, and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Everett) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) are other members of the committee who will probably join us later on and we are equally proud of them. We obviously have an extraordinarily high level of group of members, as my colleagues have seen, on both sides of the aisle who take this business quite seriously, and we are very pleased about that. I would like to include for the Record the administration policy and exchange of correspondence with the chairmen of the appropriate committees. That would be the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), and the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter). Statement of Administration Policy H.R. 2417--Intelligence Authorization Act for FY 2004 (This statement has been coordinated by OMB with the concerned agencies.) The Administration appreciates the support of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence for the work and efforts of the Intelligence Community (IC), as well as the Committee's inclusion in its bill of a significant number of requested provisions. The Administration would support H.R. 2417 if the concerns outlined below are addressed. The Administration has not had the opportunity to review the classified schedule of authorizations, and reserves comment on those authorizations. The Administration would strenously object if certain high priority transformational development programs affecting the IC's future collection and research and development strategies, are not authorized as requested. The Administration appreciates the Committee's support for our initiatives to improve our nation's intelligence capabilities, and believes that section 336, regarding improved information sharing among federal, State, and local government officials, addresses significant and important issues. However, the Administration has concerns with this and other sections of the bill (such as section 321) which seek to direct specific roles and responsibilities to be carried out by particular components of the Executive Branch. They could impinge on the President's constitutional authority to determine how Executive Branch agencies should be organized to carry out national defense and anti-terrorism activities. Section 505, concerning the measurement and signatures intelligence (MASINT) research program, would provide the Defense Department the authority to review CIA and other intelligence agencies' MASINT programs. The Administration would oppose this expanded authority for DoD, as we believe the existing authorities and responsibilities are properly vested. The Administration looks forward to working with the Congress on these and a number of other policy and technical concerns as H.R. 2417 moves through the legislative process.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2417 and on the rule that was just passed.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would like to clarify for the record that the provisions of H.R. 2417, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, amending the Homeland Security Act, fall within the jurisdiction of the Select Committee on Homeland Security and that their inclusion in H.R. 2417 does not create a basis for the assertion of jurisdiction over the act by the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Furthermore, I would like to clarify for the distinguished chairman that the chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security and I have indeed agreed upon a revision of the provisions that are acceptable to both our ranking members, that is, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner), the gentleman's committee's ranking member. I will commit to work with the gentleman's committee and the Committee on the Judiciary for substitution of the revised language in the conference negotiations between the House and the Senate, and to that end I have also agreed to support the request of the Select Committee on Homeland Security for the appointment of two conferees on H.R. 2417.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I am not going to use the 5 minutes. I just want to clarify this point while the distinguished chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security is here that his efforts and the gentlewoman from California's (Ms. Harman) efforts to work out acceptable language had in fact transpired and we were prepared to accept an amendment to the bill to do that. There is another party involved, and we wanted to make sure that the appropriate full dialogue took place because what we are about here is really trying to plug in a Foreign Intelligence Program, which is what our portfolio is with the new efforts domestically to deal with terrorism on the homeland. We are not interested in any territorial acquisition, as I have said many times. We are interested in plugging in the national foreign intelligence activity and capability in the right places in the right way. That will involve working with a number of committees. Fortunately, we have good Members who serve on a number of committees and we are using that expertise to make these bridging arrangements. I would like to publicly thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) for their efforts to get the homeland security piece done. We have more work to do on this particular element. They have my pledge in the colloquy that we will work together to get this done properly, and I have nothing further to add to that.

Mr. GOSS. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman for yielding. All I would say is that I was going to compliment the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) for a very helpful, thoughtful contribution to our work product. In fact, we have been working on this subject for a number of years, which is the training question and the language question; and the gentleman has some very unique perspectives on this which have been very helpful to us. We are improved in our committee for his participation in this process. I do not believe it is necessary to offer the amendment. Apparently he has not, but I nevertheless wanted to appreciate publicly the contribution he has made.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. First of all, I want to congratulate the gentlewoman on an amendment that she has worked hard on and I know cares a great deal about, and I will say right up front that the amendment is acceptable to the committee. I do want to make a comment on it, though. The amendment requires the DCI to consider whether further consolidation of the various U.S. Government terrorist watchlist databases might add to the efficiency of the watchlist system in identifying known or suspected terrorists. Absolutely a goal that we have to achieve. The question is what is the right way to do it? And the gentlewoman has raised the question properly. I commend her for it. Her dedication and expertise on counterterrorism issues I think is well known. She has served not only the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of this Congress but previous iterations of this effort on national commissions and so forth; and I think we all very much respect her judgment. And as I said, this amendment is a good one and it brings the issue to the floor. It asks the DCI to review and determine how much more consolidation of the various terrorist watchlists is needed, but I would add the words ``if any.'' And the reason I say that is I am concerned about the potential loss of data that might result from the consolidation of all the watchlists available to the government. I do not know that that would happen. It is a question that has to be asked. Additionally, I would think that there is one other area that I worry about a little bit, and that is sort of the idea of Big Brother. The one big unified, centralized U.S. Government computer database with all of the information available to the U.S. Government on individuals and their associates might be viewed to some as concerning, particularly those who worry about Big Brother invading their privacy. I am not saying I have the answer; but at this stage of my thinking, I am sort of in the position to be inclined to support a network solution that virtually combines the data in various databases without actually dumping all of the information from all the databases into one big government Big Brother database. So I would think that something on the order perhaps of Web browser or Web sniffer, some way of searching out all the databases simultaneously, using some of those extraordinary technological tools that are developed in the gentlewoman's district, the software that is out there that not only searches all of them at the same time but also crossreferences the search results in such a way that maximizes the researchers' efficiencies and at the same time gives us some of the safeguards, or the appearance of safeguards anyway, the perception that we are safeguarding better than one big database. I do not wish to prejudge the outcome of the review. As we always do, we candidly state our positions on these things. As I said, I think the gentlewoman has raised exactly the right question. I thank her for her contribution in doing that, and I believe the amendment is worded properly so we go forward, and I will accept the amendment on behalf of the committee.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that this amendment is before us. It is entirely consistent with the committee position, and I am very happy to accept it. I want to congratulate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) for his continued, persistent, effective leadership on this, along with our colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes), who have both done the committee a big favor by keeping us focused on this. The amendment directs the DCI to establish a pilot project to test and evaluate alternative and innovative methods to recruit and hire women and minorities with diverse skills, expertise, cultural, and ethnic backgrounds, and language proficiencies. That is obviously a very rich contribution to the Intelligence Community. The pilot project would be carried out for a 3-year period, with a report on the effectiveness of the project at the end of the second year, as I understand the amendment. The amendment also includes direction to the DCI to report to the committee by mid-February of the next calendar year on the DCI's diversity strategic plan, which is something we have been after for a while. This aspect of this amendment incorporates, in part, the amendment made to the schedule of authorizations by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes) in the committee's markup. I think they are complementary to each other. I see no conflict, and I think that combined, they are a benefit. Both members deserve and are commended for promoting the needs of the Intelligence Community in the area of diversity of skills, expertise, languages, cultural understanding, and ethnic background, which is not a fully met need, very clearly, in the Community, as we know. In the committee report we stated that, and I am going to quote the language, ``Diversity throughout the Intelligence Community population can pay dividends with respect to the richness it brings to the work of the IC, particularly as it relates to cultural understandings of particular target sets, increased language capabilities, and increased skills to address particular intelligence problems.'' Amen. I believe that this project will help. I very eagerly accept the amendment without reservation, and I am pleased that the gentleman has offered it.

Mr. GOSS. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. GOSS. I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I just wanted to say I was remiss in my remarks not to note the gentleman's service on the committee on this particular issue and many other issues as well. It is a pleasure to welcome you back to the debate here.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. I want to point out two things, and they are meant to be constructive. First of all, it is certainly true everybody in the United States counts on it being true and it is true that the Vice President and the President are responsible for the protection of the national security. The national security team involves the Vice President. The President and the Vice President are regular consumers of intelligence information, and were they not, we probably should be calling for some kind of an investigation. I do recall it was not so long ago that one of the complaints from one of the Directors of the CIA was in fact just that, that he did not get enough quality time and enough access with the top leaders of the country and the Intelligence Community was not being well-served. That was at another time and we need not go into that. My suggestion to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich), who I have great respect for, is that this amendment is truly not worthy of his best efforts. I do not believe the gentleman is fully informed on it. It appears that the gentleman is basing his amendment and information and his case on media. Again, at the risk of getting impaled by the media, I have this trouble with the errancy problem in the media. Media simply does not know everything, and if they did, they would stop asking me and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) and other members of the committee questions. Believe me, the media does not know everything. They are not fully informed, and if the gentleman is using the media, the gentleman is not fully informed. I invite the gentleman to come upstairs, sign the secrecy agreement if the gentleman has not already, and review the material. That is why we have it there. If the gentleman took advantage of that, the gentleman would be better able to understand what we are doing, and I would hope would be supportive of our efforts. Having said all that, I hope we are getting ready for a vote on this amendment.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?