FAS

Report on Intelligence Oversight in the 110th Congress

03.17.09 | 2 min read | Text by Steven Aftergood

Between 1978 and 2004, the annual intelligence authorization bill was the principal vehicle for the congressional intelligence committees to assert their influence and control over U.S. intelligence agencies, by modifying agency statutory authorities and imposing reporting requirements.

So the failure of Congress to pass an intelligence authorization bill since December 2004 is a significant handicap to the oversight committees and inevitably constitutes a diminution of their own authority and influence.

But even so, the intelligence committees have remained at the center of momentous intelligence policy debates, sometimes intervening in Administration policy and sometimes acquiescing in it.

A new report from the Senate Intelligence Committee summarizes the Committee’s activities in the last Congress, in which it addressed a host of major and minor issues from the amendment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to the proposed expansion of the authorities of the Public Interest Declassification Board.

The 50-page report contains much that is familiar, along with some new details on staff study projects, “the poor status of IC financial management,” the Committee’s own difficulty in obtaining information from the Administration, and other topics.  See “Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence, United States Senate, Covering the Period January 4, 2007 to January 2, 2009,” published March 2, 2009.

One qualitative change in intelligence oversight that is not mentioned in the new report is that the Committee no longer publishes intelligence agency answers to Questions for the Record that are submitted following the Committee’s annual intelligence threat hearing.

In the past, richly substantive agency answers to Committee questions would appear in the published hearing volume late in the year.  But now the intelligence agencies no longer provide, and the Committee no longer demands, unclassified answers to such questions.  The last time they were published was in the 2003 hearing volume on “Current and Projected Threats to the National Security of the United States” (pdf).

The significance of the continuing failure to pass an intelligence authorization bill was assessed in “Intelligence Authorization Legislation: Status and Challenges” (pdf), Congressional Research Service, February 24, 2009.

publications
See all publications
Education & Workforce
day one project
Policy Memo
Work-based Learning for All: Aligning K-12 Education and the Workplace for both Students and Teachers

The incoming presidential administration of 2025 should champion a policy position calling for strengthening of the connection between K-12 schools and community workplaces.

12.11.24 | 13 min read
read more
Global Risk
day one project
Policy Memo
Pursuing A Missile Pre-Launch Notification Agreement with China as a Risk Reduction Measure

With tensions and aggressive rhetoric on the rise, the next administration needs to prioritize and reaffirm the necessity of regular communication with China on military and nuclear weapons issues to reduce the risk of misunderstandings.

12.11.24 | 7 min read
read more
Government Capacity
day one project
Policy Memo
Unlocking The Future Of Work by Updating Federal Job Classifications

By acting now, the Administration can create clear career pathways for workers and better equip federal agencies with critical workforce insights to optimize national investments.

12.10.24 | 4 min read
read more
Environment
day one project
Policy Memo
Polar Infrastructure and Science for National Security: A Federal Agenda to Promote Glacier Resilience and Strengthen American Competitiveness

Congress and the incoming Trump Administration should work together to reinforce the U.S. position in the regions, recognizing the role Antarctica in particular may have in a changing global order and its significance for sea-level rise.

12.10.24 | 7 min read
read more