The House of Representatives yesterday approved an amendment to cut the budget for the National Security Council by one third in response to NSC moves to block congressional access to information.

“Over the last few months, we have had several instances in which the National Security staff has mandated that the Department of Defense and other agencies selectively withhold information from congressional oversight committees,” complained Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ), who introduced the amendment. It was not immediately clear which instances of withholding he was referring to.

“Accurate, complete, and timely reporting by the Department of Defense is essential for the [Appropriations] committee to conduct its oversight responsibilities,” added Rep. Peter Visclosky (D-IN), who endorsed the amendment to cut the NSC budget.

“Over the past few years, the size of the National Security Council’s staff has grown, and it appears that they have moved beyond their Presidential advisory role to involve themselves in decisions which are not in their purview,” said Rep. Frelinghuysen.

The amendment to reduce the FY 2015 NSC budget by $4.2 million, or approximately one-third, passed the House on a voice vote.

The Obama Administration has requested $5 billion to create a new Counterterrorism Partnerships Fund (CTPF). The program would “build on existing tools and authorities” to establish a “more sustainable and effective” counterterrorism approach, focusing on building the counterterrorism capacity of partners worldwide through “train-and-equip” and other activities, according to the Congressional Research Service.

“The CTPF proposal raises many questions regarding counterterrorism strategy, roles, responsibilities, authorities, and Congressional oversight,” said CRS in a brief overview of the initiative. See The Counterterrorism Partnerships Fund (CTPF) Proposal: Questions for Congress, July 14.

In another new publication, CRS summarized current news reporting on Israel and Hamas: Another Round of Conflict, July 15.

The latest Administration funding request, largely for immigration and border security, was discussed by CRS in FY2014 Supplemental Appropriations Request.

Some other newly updated CRS reports include these:

Block Grants: Perspectives and Controversies, July 15, 2014

Membership of the 113th Congress: A Profile, July 14, 2014

Privacy Protection for Customer Financial Information, July 14, 2014

Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress, July 11, 2014

A Request for Proposals from industry to develop a new Air Force Long Range Strike Bomber is said to be imminent. But in fact, the aircraft may already be under development, the Congressional Research Service said last week.

The projected funding stream for the proposed new aircraft “resembles a production program more than a typical development profile,” CRS said. “This may indicate that significant LRS-B [Long Range Strike Bomber] development has already been completed, presumably in classified budgets.”

“Such prior development would also help explain how the Air Force intends to get the system from a Request for Proposals to initial operational capability in about 10 years, when equally or less-complicated systems like the F-22 and F-35 have taken more than 20.”

Any pre-proposal development that may have occurred could also complicate the bidding process, CRS said.

“If there has in fact been considerable prior development, the Air Force will be challenged to construct a truly competitive RFP [because] whichever competitor may have done the bulk of any such preliminary LRS-B development is likely to have an advantage in the production contract.”

See CRS Insights: Budget Highlight: Air Force Long Range Strike Bomber, July 2, 2014.

Other noteworthy new CRS products that Congress has withheld from online public distribution include the following.

Physical Security of the U.S. Power Grid: High-Voltage Transformer Substations, June 17, 2014

Aliens’ Right to Counsel in Removal Proceedings: In Brief, June 20, 2014

Unaccompanied Alien Children: Potential Factors Contributing to Recent Immigration, July 3, 2014

Unaccompanied Alien Children–Legal Issues: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions, June 27, 2014

The Peace Corps: Current Issues, July 2, 2014

U.S. Energy: Overview and Key Statistics, June 27, 2014

Export-Import Bank: Overview and Reauthorization Issues, June 30, 2014

U.S. Circuit and District Court Nominations During the Obama Presidency: Midyear Analysis and Comparison with Recent Presidents, June 30, 2014

The Voting Rights Act of 1965: Background and Overview, July 1, 2014

U.S.-Mexico Economic Relations: Trends, Issues, and Implications, July 1, 2014

U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians, July 3, 2014

In 2012, former Navy linguist James F. Hitselberger was indicted on two felony counts under the Espionage Act statutes after several classified documents were found in his possession. In 2013, a superseding indictment charged him with another four felony counts.

But in the end, Mr. Hitselberger pleaded guilty this year to a single misdemeanor charge of removing classified documents without authorization.

Now both the defense and the prosecution are endorsing Hitselberger’s request that any jail penalty be limited to the time he has already served, including two months in DC jail and eight months of home confinement. The sentencing hearing is scheduled for July 17.

Despite the stark disparity between the multiple felony counts with which Hitselberger was charged, and the single misdemeanor of which he was convicted, the prosecution said that it had no second thoughts about the way the matter was handled.

“It is important to note that the government’s case against Mr. Hitselberger did not collapse,” prosecutors said in a June 27 sentencing memorandum. To the contrary, prosecutors wrote, “in several ways, the government’s case became stronger than what it had been when the charges were first obtained.”

Defense attorneys disputed that assertion and said the government had overreached.

“At a minimum, the evidence demonstrates that the government significantly overcharged the case, and the guilty plea to a misdemeanor not only was the appropriate result, but also demonstrates how the offense should have been charged from the beginning,” the defense wrote in a June 27 reply.

The mountain of Espionage Act charges that yielded a molehill of a misdemeanor in this case recalls a similar progression in the prosecution of former NSA official Thomas Drake, where ten felony counts gave way to a technical misdemeanor. This recurring pattern may indicate that overcharging is a standard prosecutorial approach to such cases, or that the judicial process is effectively winnowing out excessive felony charges, or perhaps both.

A June 26 sentencing memorandum submitted by the defense presented its own account of the facts of the case, along with several moving testimonials from Hitselberger’s friends and relatives as to his character.

In another pending Espionage Act case, the Obama Administration must decide if it will pursue a subpoena against New York Times reporter James Risen. For a current update, see Reporter’s Case Poses Dilemma for Justice Dept. by Jonathan Mahler, New York Times, June 27.

Those who are involved (or merely interested) in the field of geospatial intelligence will want to know about a new Army doctrinal publication on the subject.

“Geospatial intelligence is the exploitation and analysis of imagery and geospatial information to describe, assess, and visually depict physical features and geographically referenced activities on the earth. Geospatial intelligence consists of imagery, imagery intelligence, and geospatial information.”

The new publication provides a comprehensive introduction to the theory and practice of the field. See Geospatial Engineering, ATP 3-34.80, June 2014 (large pdf).

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence released the “2013 Statistical Transparency Report” detailing the frequency of use of various intelligence surveillance authorities and the estimated number of targets affected by the surveillance.

While the reported numbers give some rough sense of the scale of intelligence surveillance — civil liberties groups said the estimated numbers are bound to be misleadingly low — the report provides no basis for evaluating the utility or legitimacy of the surveillance activities.

How many of the collection activities were authorized on the basis of erroneous information? How many actually produced useful intelligence? The report doesn’t say, and the raw numbers are not a substitute. If they were ten times higher, or ten times lower, we would be none the wiser.

(A supplemental response from ODNI to Senator Wyden was released today.)

See U.S. Phone Searches Expanded in 2013 by Siobhan Gorman, Wall Street Journal, June 27, and related coverage elsewhere (WashPost, Wired, Huffington Post).

From a secrecy policy point of view, perhaps the most intriguing feature of the new release is the unconventional timing of its declassification. The report is dated June 26, 2014 and was classified at the TOP SECRET/NOFORN level. But it says it was declassified by DNI Clapper three days earlier on June 23, 2014!

This temporally fluid approach to declassification could have many useful applications.

The C-130 Hercules aircraft, which was introduced over half a century ago, is often flown by crew members who are younger than the plane they are flying. And that peculiar arrangement is likely to continue into the foreseeable future, says a new report from the Congressional Research Service.

“The C-130 has been the cornerstone of the U.S. tactical airlift fleet since the late 1950s. Military planners believe that C-130 aircraft provide the United States an edge in achieving national goals. They provide a capability to rapidly deliver forces making conventional deterrence more effective and expanding the ability to provide humanitarian assistance. However, the fleet has aged with some current models being flown by aircrew younger than the aircraft they are flying. As the fleet ages, management issues arise with reduced reliability, obsolescence and reduced parts availability, and changing aviation rules that impact availability of airspace due to obsolete avionics capabilities,” the CRS report said.

See C-130 Hercules: Background, Sustainment, Modernization, Issues for Congress, June 24, 2014.

Other newly updated CRS reports on Navy force structure and related issues include the following.

Navy Shipboard Lasers for Surface, Air, and Missile Defense: Background and Issues for Congress, June 25, 2014

Navy Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Program: Background and Issues for Congress, June 25, 2014

Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress, June 25, 2014

Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress, June 25, 2014

Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress, June 25, 2014

Navy LX(R) Amphibious Ship Program: Background and Issues for Congress, June 25, 2014

Navy TAO(X) Oiler Shipbuilding Program: Background and Issues for Congress, June 25, 2014

Navy Virginia (SSN-774) Class Attack Submarine Procurement: Background and Issues for Congress, June 25, 2014

There is too much information that is marked “For Official Use Only” at the Department of Homeland Security, the House Appropriations Committee said in its report on DHS Appropriations for 2015. Efforts to sort out what is really sensitive have “wasted substantial staff resources,” the report said.

Therefore, the Committee would require any official who marked a document FOUO to identify himself or herself on the document, along with a justification for doing so.

The Committee inaptly described the use of FOUO controls as a problem of “overclassification,” and spoke of “classifying” records as FOUO. Strictly speaking, however, national security classification and FOUO are mutually exclusive domains. Classified records cannot be marked as FOUO, and information or documents that are FOUO are by definition unclassified. Still, the Committee’s point is clear.

Here is the Committee language from its June 19 DHS Appropriations report:

Over-Classification of Information

The Committee is concerned with the number of reports, briefings, and responses to requests for information that are designated by the Department as “For Official Use Only” (FOUO), often without a consistent and appropriate review as to why information requires such a classification. As a consequence, both the Committee and the Department have wasted substantial staff resources deliberating over what information can and could be publicly disclosed. The Committee directs that all reports, briefings, or responses to requests for information provided to the Committee that are classified as FOUO include the name(s) and title(s) of the personnel that made the designation and the specific reasons for the classification based on requirements detailed in DHS Management Directive 11042.1, which provides guidance for safeguarding sensitive but unclassified FOUO information.

The implications of the conflict in Iraq for U.S. policy were examined in a new report from the Congressional Research Service. See Iraq Crisis and U.S. Policy, June 20, 2014.

The CRS report notably includes open source reporting and translations from the DNI Open Source Center. This sort of material had been routinely available to the public for decades until the CIA cut off public access to it last December 31.

The CRS report on the Iraq crisis was reported in the Washington Times on June 24.

A related CRS report (which also includes citations to the Open Source Center), newly updated, is Armed Conflict in Syria: Overview and U.S. Response, June 24, 2014.

CIA’s own open source intelligence effort leaves something to be desired. The CIA World Factbook continues to report that Syria’s population is around 17.9 million, while every other authoritative source puts it at between 22-23 million. (Secrecy News, 06/06/14).

Other new and updated CRS reports that Congress has withheld from online public distribution include the following.

Wartime Detention Provisions in Recent Defense Authorization Legislation, June 23, 2014

Prayer and Religious Expression in Public Institutions: A Constitutional Analysis, June 23, 2014

High-Frequency Trading: Background, Concerns, and Regulatory Developments, June 19, 2014

The National Science Foundation: Background and Selected Policy Issues, June 5, 2014

Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS): Is It a Health Emergency?, June 4, 2014

Progress in Combating Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs): U.S. and Global Efforts from FY2006 to FY2015, May 28, 2014

Legislation to Approve the U.S.-Mexico Transboundary Hydrocarbons Agreement, June 19, 2014

Membership in the United Nations and Its Specialized Agencies, June 19, 2014

El Salvador: Background and U.S. Relations, June 23, 2014

The Project BioShield Act: Issues for the 113th Congress, June 18, 2014

The U.S. Secret Service: History and Missions, June 18, 2014

The Secretary of the Army last week issued a directive specifying that retaliating against someone for reporting a crime is itself a crime.

“No Soldier may retaliate against a victim, an alleged victim or another member of the Armed Forces based on that individual’s report of a criminal offense,” the new Directive states. See Prohibition of Retaliation Against Soldiers for Reporting a Criminal Offense, Army Directive 2014-20, June 19, 2014.

Prohibited forms of retaliation include adverse personnel actions and ostracism, as well as “acts of cruelty, oppression or maltreatment.”

The directive implements a requirement that was enacted by Congress in the 2014 defense authorization act (section 1709) as part of a legislative response to instances of sexual assault in the military.

Congressman Rush Holt (D-NJ) devised an amendment to the 2015 Defense Appropriations bill that would earmark $2 million for investigation of intelligence community whistleblower complaints.  The amendment was approved by the House of Representatives on June 18.

The money was taken from the intelligence community management account and allocated to the IC whistleblowing and source protection directorate within the IC Office of the Inspector General.

“Currently, this directorate is literally a one-man operation,”Rep. Holt explained on the House floor.

“Given the fact that there are tens of thousands of Federal employees and contractor who work for the intelligence community elements, it is not realistic to expect the IC inspector general to be able to receive and investigate effectively any and all valid complaints from conscientious internal whistleblowers through a single investigator, no matter how talented that investigator may be.”

“This $2 million reallocation of funds will help the community whistleblowing and source protection directorate hire more needed additional investigators and support staff and will fund outreach and education efforts across the intelligence community,” Rep. Holt said. “This amendment will ensure that they have resources to respond to legitimate concerns.”

The amendment was approved on a voice vote.

Rep. Holt stressed the need for improved protections for intelligence agency whistleblowers in a May 30 op-ed we co-authored on MSNBC.com.

An Intelligence Community Directive that prohibited unauthorized contacts with the news media is overbroad and needs to be corrected, said Sen. Ron Wyden last week on the Senate floor.

“I will tell you, I am troubled by how sweeping in nature this is,” Senator Wyden said about the Directive, ICD 119, issued last March. (See Intelligence Directive Bars Unauthorized Contacts with News Media, Secrecy News, April 21).

“The new policy makes it clear that intelligence agency employees can be punished for having ‘contact with the media about intelligence-related information’,” he said. “Make no mistake about it, that is so broad it could cover unclassified information. It does not lay out any limits on this extraordinarily broad term that I have described.”

“My hope is we can get this corrected because I think it is going to have a chilling effect on intelligence professionals who simply want to talk about unclassified matters on important national security issues– such as how to reform domestic surveillance or whether our country should go to war,” Sen. Wyden said on June 12.

The new IC media policy was discussed on the NPR program On the Media on June 13.