DNI Reports “Substantial Progress” in Intelligence Reform
In an unusually informative new report to Congress, the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) advised that he “is making substantial progress in the implementation of the [Intelligence Reform Act of 2004].
The DNI outlined the actions he has taken to integrate the U.S. intelligence bureaucracy and alluded in passing to several new initiatives he has undertaken. For example:
“For the first time, the IC [intelligence community] is reassessing all of its relationships with foreign counterparts to determine whether new relationships may be beneficial and whether there are additional activities that need to be deconflicted.”
And: “The ODNI is reviewing information disclosure policies and is working to improve training and awareness of information security procedures, implement audit technologies, and ensure that unauthorized disclosures are investigated.”
“The ODNI will soon issue a community-wide directive on unauthorized disclosures.”
“The ODNI has established a digital library of all new intelligence products produced by the community to bring together all available national intelligence on any given topic…. To ensure that analysis is based on all available sources, the ODNI is exploring ways to increase the capacity of analysts across the community to exploit the full range of classified data and openly available information relevant to national security.”
“The analytic ombudsman recently reviewed IC tradecraft and assumptions on the recent Hamas victory in the Palestinian elections, and lessons learned from that exercise are already being put into place.”
This report serves as a landscape assessment and toolbox from which local governments can negotiate an informed position when it comes to the levers available to them and includes a first-of-its kind analysis of eight executed community benefits agreements.
When a hurricane hits, it’s all hands on deck – that goes for federal data, too. Pulling back from our investments in timely, accurate, and accessible public data will only make us less prepared and put us all at greater risk.
This is bigger than a singular elimination of race and ethnicity questions. It could accelerate the second wave of widespread reductions to demographic data, leaving public health officials with even less information to deliver better health outcomes for all Americans.
Soft law was never meant to be a permanent solution. Treating it as one, and letting the sandcastle stand in for the skyscraper indefinitely, is how we end up with a decade of voluntary commitments and no enforceable accountability to show for it.