Congressional Record: May 13, 1999 (House)
Page H3112-H3141
INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000
[...]
Amendment No. 2 Offered By Mr. Barr of Georgia
Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Barr of Georgia:
At the end of title III (page 10, after line 2), insert the
following new section:
SEC. 304. REPORT ON LEGAL STANDARDS APPLIED FOR ELECTRONIC
SURVEILLANCE.
(a) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director of Central Intelligence,
the Director of the National Security Agency, and the
Attorney General shall jointly prepare, and the Director of
the National Security Agency shall submit to the appropriate
congressional committees a report in classified and
unclassified form describing the legal standards employed by
elements of the intelligence community in conducting signals
intelligence activities, including electronic surveillance.
(b) Matters Specifically Addressed.--The report shall
specifically include a statement of each of the following
legal standards:
(1) The legal standards for interception of communications
when such interception may result in the acquisition of
information from a communication to or from United States
persons.
(2) The legal standards for intentional targeting of the
communications to or from United States persons.
(3) The legal standards for receipt from non-United States
sources of information pertaining to communications to or
from United States persons.
(4) The legal standards for dissemination of information
acquired through the interception of the communications to or
from United States persons.
(c) Inclusion of Legal Memoranda and Opinions.--The report
under subsection (a) shall include a copy of all legal
memoranda, opinions, and other related documents in
unclassified, and if necessary, classified form with respect
to the conduct of signals intelligence activities, including
electronic surveillance by elements of the intelligence
community, utilized by the Office of the General Counsel of
the National Security Agency, by the Office of General
Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency, or by the Office
of Intelligence Policy Review of the Department of Justice,
in preparation of the report.
(d) Definition.--As used in this section:
(1) The term ``intelligence community'' has the meaning
given that term under section 3(4) of the National Security
Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4)).
(2) The term ``United States persons'' has the meaning
given such term under section 101(i) of the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801(i)).
(3) The term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means
the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the
Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives,
and the Select Committee on Intelligence and the Committee on
the Judiciary of the Senate.
Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I had the honor of serving this
great land back in the 1970s, including those years in which the
government of our country, in an effort to institutionalize proper
oversight of our intelligence agencies, enacted public laws that
established the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and
the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
In the intervening generation, these committees, including under the
current leadership of the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss), have
provided very, very essential oversight of the intelligence activities
of our government.
Hopefully in so doing, we have avoided any excesses that have given
rise to some of the incidents in the past that have troubled our
intelligence gathering capabilities and hurt the credibility of these
great institutions such as the CIA.
However, Mr. Chairman, the oversight with which the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Goss) and many others have worked so diligently to both
implement and then preserve over the last 24 years is under attack
right now, and the survivability of that oversight mechanism is
threatened.
I speak particularly, Mr. Chairman, of efforts by the intelligence
community to deny proper information for the House Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence to conduct oversight, meaningful oversight
responsibilities.
For example, in recent communications between the chairman and the
NSA, the general counsel of the NSA interposed what, by any stretch of
the imagination, is a bogus claim of attorney/client privilege in an
effort to deny the chairman and the committee members proper
information with which to carry out their oversight responsibilities.
In particular, the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) was seeking
very important information that goes to the standards whereby the
intelligence community and the agencies comprising the intelligence
community gather intelligence and gather information on American
citizens.
One such project in particular that has recently come to light, Mr.
Chairman, is a project known as Project Echelon, which has been in
place for several years and which, by accounts that we have recently
seen in the media, engages in the intercession of literally millions of
communications involving United States citizens over satellite
transmissions, involving e-mail transmissions, Internet access, as
[[Page H3130]]
well as mobile phone communications and telephone communications.
This information apparently is shared, at least in part, and
coordinated, at least in part, with intelligence agencies of four other
countries: the UK, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia.
As part of our effort here in the Congress, both on the Select
Committee on Intelligence, which the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss)
chairs, as well as others of us, while not serving on that committee,
are concerned about the privacy rights for American citizens and
whether or not there are constitutional safeguards being circumvented
by the manner in which the intelligence agencies are intercepting and/
or receiving international communications back from foreign nations
that would otherwise be prohibited by the prohibitions and the
limitations on the collection of domestic intelligence.
We have been trying to get information with regard to Project Echelon
and others. The amendment that I propose today simply would require the
intelligence community, and that is specifically the Department of
Justice, the National Security Agency, and the CIA to provide to the
Congress within 60 days of the enactment this Intelligence
Authorization Act a report setting forth the legal basis and procedures
whereby the intelligence community and the agencies comprising
intelligence community gather intelligence.
This will enable the intelligence community and the Committee on the
Judiciary of both Houses to properly evaluate whether or not these
procedures are being implemented properly according to proper legal and
constitutional standards.
It would be very interesting to see, Mr. Chairman, if the
administration or the Senate opposes this very straightforward
amendment, which simply requires a report on the legal basis for such
interceptions to be furnished within 60 days to the Select Committee on
Intelligence of both Houses and to the Committee on the Judiciary of
both Houses.
I ask Members on both sides of the aisle to support this very
straightforward amendment, which not only will help guarantee the
privacy rights for American citizens, but will protect the oversight
responsibilities of the Congress which are now under assault by these
bogus claims that the intelligence communities are making. I ask for
the adoption of the amendment.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I want to say I very much appreciate the remarks of the
distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr). He has characterized
an ongoing vigilance of oversight matters that we carry on every day. I
am certainly prepared to accept his amendment. I think it is useful and
indeed helpful to some problems we are having directly now.
{time} 1245
I also think that it is helpful in the area of the very delicate
balancing act that we have to do on HPSCI, and I hope we do it well. I
think we do it well.
It is, on the one hand, absolutely accepting no compromise on the
rights of American citizens and, on the other hand, not tying the hands
of our law enforcement people who are trying to catch people who are
trying to work mischief against the United States of America. And it is
not always as clear as it might be which it is at the beginning of a
process involving individuals.
So this is a very difficult judgment area for us. Nobody would want
us, particularly in light of the news coming out of the weapons labs
today, to release or relax our efforts to catch people who are trying
to steal our secrets or penetrate our appropriately applied security
arrangements. On the other hand, it is intolerable to think of the
United States Government, of big brother, or anybody else invading the
privacy of an American citizen without cause.
I believe that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. Barr) will help in that debate, and I am prepared to accept it. I
know that it is offered in that spirit, and I know that it will also be
helpful to me in my current problems, making sure the intelligence
community understands that penetrating oversight is here to stay. I
think most of them are getting the message.
Mr. DIXON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The minority will accept this amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr).
The amendment was agreed to.