Jane Harman

Ms. HARMAN

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), my classmate and colleague.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger), our able rookie.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I want to say first off that I am sure that is what the last speaker intended. He is a good friend, a member of our Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; and I am certain he did not have me in mind when he was suggesting that there is excessive partisanship about our intelligence budget. I call myself a passionate bipartisan on intelligence and security matters, and I take a back seat to no one for my efforts to try to work out agreements on a bipartisan basis to fix our intelligence. As I said earlier, in my view, the proposed resolution does some good things, but it also should be calling for action to keep our troops and other personnel serving in Iraq safe. Just a few hours ago, Mr. Speaker, a devastating car bomb destroyed a hotel in Baghdad. The casualty reports are still coming in, but at least two dozen people have died. Better intelligence is essential to protecting our troops in Iraq and ensuring that we ultimately succeed there. It is the first line of defense in the war on terrorism. There are good ideas from both sides of the aisle that should be discussed and debated this year. What should we be doing? In my view, let us try six things: First, the President should direct intelligence agencies to scrub weapons of mass destruction intelligence on all major targets and release updates on areas of concern. Now. Second, the President should direct intelligence agencies to improve collection and vetting of information. Now. Third, the President should require intelligence agencies to improve the way they analyze intelligence and convey information to policymakers. Now. Fourth, the President should direct a review of the activities of various DOD offices, particularly the Office of Special Plans, to see whether they fed unreliable and unvetted intelligence to him, the Vice President, or his senior national security team. Fifth, the President should take immediate steps to strengthen and reinvigorate international inspections. And, finally, the President should consider longer term changes to the leadership organization and business methods of the intelligence community. Mr. Speaker, this resolution should have been a call to action in support of our troops, in addition to an expression of our heartfelt gratitude. We could have done much, much better. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, it is my extreme pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would point out to the last speaker that I think this resolution should include words of praise for the members of the intelligence community who take risks on our behalf in Iraq. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price). (Mr. PRICE of North Carolina asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey).

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones).

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) for a unanimous consent request. (Ms. LOFGREN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. HARMAN

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the so-called Unborn Victims of Violence Act, H.R. 1997. Proponents of this bill claim it addresses violence against pregnant women. Let's be honest here. H.R. 1997 is not an anticrime bill, it is an antiabortion bill. This bill does not address the women who are victims of violence. In fact, this bill makes no mention of the woman and the harm to her that results from an involuntary termination of her pregnancy. Legislation that truly addresses the devastation of a pregnancy lost due to a violent crime should focus on the attack on the woman and resulting harm to her fetus, as does the amendment offered by my friend and colleague, the gentlewoman from California (Zoe Lofgren). I rise in support of this amendment, as it ensures efficient prosecution of the criminal wrongdoer and would not undermine the legal principles underlying a woman's right to choose. Mr. Speaker, if what we are trying to do is protect pregnant women, then let us protect them. Let us not insult the intelligence of women in this country by attacking their rights under the guise of protecting unborn fetuses. The Venice Family Clinic and Westside Family Health Center, both located in my district, have programs in place that identify pregnant women at risk of domestic violence and work closely with the family throughout the pregnancy and for at least 1 year after the baby is born. These programs have had positive results at reducing domestic violence before it occurs. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this amendment and rise in opposition to the underlying bill.

Ms. HARMAN

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to say goodbye to a dear friend and neighbor. Earlier this week, I received news that local activist and businessman Sandy Elster passed away at his Venice, California home at age 86. Sandy was a true progressive, who cared intensely about policy. He volunteered for my first congressional campaign and was generous with both his time and ideas. He was unafraid to speak out, whether he agreed or not with my positions. Indeed, I know that many of my views were shaped by the discussions we had during our bike rides and brunches along our coastal bike path. Sandy was known, in particular, for his environmental activism. In recent years, he was a consultant to the Metropolitan Transit Authority to develop a non-polluting, mass transit system. He drove one of the first electric cars, the EV-1, made by General Motors, and later became an advocate for the hybrid Toyota Prius and persuaded his friends to buy it. Sandy also led local efforts to protect the California least tern, a small gray and white seabird that was added to the endangered species list in the mid-1970s. After moving to Venice in the early 1970s, he helped cut through red tape to erect a fence around a plot of sand about half the size of a football field to keep dogs, cats and other predators away from tern eggs and chicks. Today, the least tern population is stable and growing because of his stewardship. I know that one of his proudest accomplishments was seeing then- President Ronald Reagan sign the U.N. Genocide Convention--an agreement whose ratification he spent many years working to secure. But beyond making genocide a crime under international law, he believed it important that our citizens know the horror of genocide, its roots, and the need for vigilance. During the 1980s, he was instrumental in the campaign that resulted in legislation to require California's public schools to teach about genocide to students in seventh through 12th grade. It's emblematic of Sandy's active life that the service to his memory was held at the Beverly Hills Tennis Club. He was an avid tennis player and biker, and I found it challenging to keep up with him. My thoughts are with his spectacular wife and partner of 56 years, Ernestine, and his family. Sandy was very special.

Ms. HARMAN

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am the concluding speaker on our side, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me say first that the views of the prior speaker are views I share. I am sad to hear that he will oppose the bill, but I certainly agree that we need to be sure we are narrowing the reach of these national security letters and limiting them only to financial transactions. It is important that we find terrorists. It is important that we track terrorist financing; but it is, by my lights, risky to fail to include additional language in the bill or the report that would make clear what our intent is. I hope this new authority will not be abused. I will certainly be watching it carefully, and I do appreciate the fact that the prior speaker expanded on what abuses could potentially occur. Mr. Speaker, first I would like to thank the women and men who work in our intelligence community around the world. I have been to austere places all over the world, and I have met women and men who work in the most dangerous conditions who put our security first, ahead of theirs, and who leave their families at home and take enormous risks for our country. I salute them. I know how dangerous their jobs are. I appreciate what they do every single day. And particularly, let me say today to our intelligence community in Iraq and in Turkey and places that are under siege, I really appreciate what they are doing. I thank them very much. I also want to say thank you to the members of this committee. All of them work hard. There is bipartisanship in this committee, and I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) for the partnership we have had over some years now. Let me thank the hardworking staff on a bipartisan basis. Every one of them works enormously hard, and I would just like to recognize the eight minority staffers, most of whom are sitting around me right now: Suzanne Spaulding, the minority chief of staff; Bob Emmett; John Keefe; Beth Larson; Marcel Lettre; Kirk McConnell; Wyndee Parker; and Ilene Romack. Thank you every day for what you do. Let me just make three concluding points. First, facing tough issues. It is absolutely critical at a time when security risks are expanding around the world that we face tough issues; that Congress face tough issues and ask tough questions; and that the intelligence community, which tries hard but has not always delivered perfect products, face tough issues, go through this lessons learned exercise and learn from wrong judgments that were made or inadequate collection that occurred so that the next products that are prepared by good people can be the best possible products. Please let us face tough issues. Second of all, I want to make the point that our oversight in this committee on a bipartisan basis requires constructive criticism of the intelligence community. We have done this over the years. Last year, we issued a tough report. The Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security, of which I was ranking member and Mr. Chambliss, who is now in the other body, was chairman, issued a tough report on some of the problems in intelligence leading up to 9/11. That report was constructive criticism. Some of the recommendations we made have been heeded; some have not. Constructive criticism, asking tough questions are things we properly should do. Finally, let me suggest again to the intelligence community that it is important to engage in dialogue with this committee. Shrill press releases are not dialogue. Quiet conversations, talking about how we see things, what we think can be improved, why it needs to be improved, will get the job done. This bill provides many new resources, many, many new resources, and is carefully crafted to suggest best directions for the intelligence community. We have confidence in the people who work there. We are proud of them. We thank them. We are trying to help them do better. I urge support of this authorization conference report. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 seconds. I would just point out that Members on our side strongly support the women and men in the field who work in our intelligence community. I assume the prior speaker is aware of that. We also, to my knowledge, have not produced any memos around here that could be characterized as divisive. We are all pulling in the same direction, and that is, hopefully, to enhance our national security. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), a senior member of our committee and a senior member of the Committee on Rules.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, my understanding is there is an additional speaker on the other side, and then the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) obviously has the right to close. I would reserve our time until all speakers but the chairman have spoken.

Ms. HARMAN

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), another committee member.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), my colleague and classmate, the ranking member on our Subcommittee on Intelligence Policy and National Security.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes), a senior member of our committee.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 2417. Earlier today, several large truck bombs exploded in Istanbul killing the British Consul General and dozens of others, wounding at least 450, and causing substantial property damage. The attacks appear to have the earmarks of al Qaeda, and they make today's action even more pressing. This bill is not perfect, but it represents a lot of hard work to come to bipartisan agreement on tough issues. In the past 2 years, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has completed a joint 9-11 inquiry and is currently reviewing prewar Iraq intelligence. These two reviews, among other activities we have undertaken, have pinpointed deficiencies in collection, analysis, and dissemination of intelligence that cannot be fixed one brick at a time; nor can meaningful intelligence improvements be made simply in response to the latest crisis. This bill represents progress; but, Mr. Speaker, systemic transformation is needed, and it hopefully will be the committee's primary focus in the coming year. I am particularly satisfied that this bill requires a lessons learned study on Iraq intelligence as soon as possible and no later than a year from now. This House, just 2 days ago on a virtually unanimous basis, instructed the conferees to include this language, and we did. In the course of 6 months of review, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on a bipartisan basis has identified serious shortcomings in the prewar intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and ties to terrorism. A bipartisan letter earlier this fall details the preliminary view that the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) and I hold. My own view is that estimates were substantially wrong and at a minimum the intelligence community overstated the strength of underlying data supporting its conclusions. Asking the intelligence community to do an introspective study is not an unreasonable request to ensure the credibility of our national security strategies. It will also ensure our troops and our leaders are served by the best intelligence. In intelligence collection, the bill funds initiatives to improve technical and human collection. It pushes the intelligence community to hire and develop officers who speak foreign languages and who have deep experience in other countries and cultures, important issues raised in an unprecedented public hearing a few weeks ago. In intelligence analysis and dissemination, the bill provides a new infusion of resources to modernize analyst infrastructure, including new information technology tools, training, and hiring new analytic expertise. There is also strong support for improving information- sharing across the IC and with State and local law enforcement partners. The bill provides funds to support integration of watch list efforts across the Terrorist Threat Information Center, the Department of Homeland Security, the Terrorist Screening Center, and other relevant players. The bill also authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security, working with the Director of Central Intelligence and the Attorney General, to establish a training program to help local and private sector officials identify threats and report information to Federal partners. Information-sharing, as we have shown again and again and again, was a primary intelligence failure pre-9/11. This bill goes a long way to fix it. I am pleased that the bill addresses the development of data mining efforts for fighting terrorism, while maintaining adequate privacy protections for U.S. persons. The defense appropriations conference report, which we have already voted on, terminated DOD's Terrorist Information Awareness program, but it transferred funds and projects from that program to the intelligence community. For these programs, there are restrictions on mining databases containing information on U.S. persons, and I applaud those restrictions. But data mining, properly applied, is an excellent way to isolate who the bad guys are. It is also important to ensure that research and development on data mining tools continues, even while deployment awaits the full development of policies, guidelines, and procedures for use of these tools. Let me be clear: I do not support deployment without limitations, but I think that R&D continues to be important. Responsible, respected groups like the Markle Foundation Task Force on National Security in the Information Age and the Center for Democracy and Technology, along with scholars at the Brookings Institution and the Heritage Foundation, all have concluded that data mining tools can be enormously beneficial for our national security, and that these operations can be done in a way that preserves privacy and protects civil liberties. But it will not happen automatically. It will require real work from the administration, especially in view of the hole it dug for itself over the TIA project. The bill tasks the administration to come to grips with the policy issues posed by advanced data mining technology, requiring the administration to report to Congress with proposed modifications to laws and policies, and I hope the administration will embrace this opportunity. The bill contains a provision to expand the definition of ``financial institution'' in the context of the FBI's authority to issue national security letters which compel the production of financial records without a warrant. The expanded definition closes a potentially significant loophole in the government's ability to track terrorist financing. I agree with the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) on this point. On the other hand, however, I worry that language in the bill is not as clear as it needs to be that this authority to obtain records only pertains to the customer's financial relationship with institutions. I would have preferred this clarification to be in the statute. It is in the report language. I would have preferred the report language to be even stronger, and I remain concerned that the expanded definition leaves the potential, hopefully that will never be realized, for abuse in a classic fishing expedition. The bill authorizes new personal services contracting for the FBI to allow it to more efficiently and flexibly surge capabilities against new missions. These powers granted to the FBI must not become a substitute for hiring full-time employees for the Bureau's long-term strategic needs or lead to other abuses in hiring practices. I spoke earlier this week with FBI Director Mueller and received his assurances that he will personally review this program and be sensitive to potential abuses. It is important to have strong standards and criteria alongside the increased flexibility. The gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) has said, and I agree, that intelligence community reform, or transformation, must be a central focus of the committee next year. Issues raised by our Iraq review and the Joint 9/11 Inquiry point to systemic challenges and raise fundamental questions of roles, missions, capabilities, and organization. These include whether the intelligence community should be headed by a Director of National Intelligence; whether the Nation would be best served by a domestic intelligence agency; the shortcomings of budgeting by supplemental; and our committee member, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), made this point I thought quite effectively in our previous debate on the rule for this conference report. Also, strengthening the quality of HUMINT and other collection on hard targets; the roles and authorities of the Department of Defense in intelligence activities; and the roles and responsibilities of policy officials and intelligence analysts regarding objectivity of intelligence products. Transforming the IC's approach to language and cultural expertise will also require special attention. I note the work of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), two committee members, and strongly support the gentleman from Florida's (Chairman Goss) proposal for a major initiative focused on building these skill sets. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, the best intelligence is key to stopping the insurgency and permitting reconstruction in Iraq today. It is key to addressing threats in Afghanistan today. It is key to countering threats from terrorism in Turkey and elsewhere today, and to addressing challenges in Iran and North Korea today and tomorrow. To produce less than our best intelligence is to protect national security less than is needed. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to serve as ranking member of this committee. Our 2004 authorization conference report was approved unanimously by our Members, and I urge its strong support. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes and 10 seconds to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. BOSWELL), our committee member who is the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Human Intelligence, Analysis and Counterintelligence. (Mr. BOSWELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. HARMAN

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes), an excellent committee member.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes and 10 seconds to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), another committee member, the ranking member on the Intelligence Policy and National Security Subcommittee.

Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), another member of our committee.