Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "Cumming, Alfred" in: author
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Polygraph Use by the Department of Energy: Issues for Congress [Updated December 10, 2007]
"Four years after Congress directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to revamp its polygraph program, taking into account a 2003 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report that questioned the scientific basis for the accuracy of polygraph testing, particularly when used to 'screen' employees, DOE promulgated a regulation on October 30, 2006, that eliminated polygraph screening tests without specific cause. DOE said its counterintelligence evaluation policies were now consistent with existing Intelligence Community practices and the NAS 2003 report's recommendations, particularly for cases when polygraph tests were used for screening purposes rather than for investigating specific events."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2007-12-10
-
Position of Director of National Intelligence: Issues for Congress [Updated August 13, 2004]
"The 9/11 Commission, in its recent report on the attacks of September 11, 2001, criticized the U.S. Intelligence Community's (IC) fragmented management structure and questioned whether the U.S. government, and the IC, in particular, is organized adequately to direct resources and build the intelligence capabilities that the U.S. will need to counter terrorism, and to address the broader range of national security challenges in the decades ahead. The Commission made a number of recommendations, one of which was to replace the current position of Director of Central Intelligence with a National Intelligence Director (NID) who would oversee national intelligence centers on specific subjects of interest - including a National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) - across the U.S. government, manage the national intelligence program, oversee the agencies that contribute to it, and have hiring, firing and budgetary authority over the IC's 15 agencies. The Commission recommended that the director, and the NCTC, be located in the Executive Office of the President and that a deputy NID be established to oversee the day-to-day operations of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The Commissions recommendation to strengthen management authority over the IC is the latest contribution to an IC structural reform debate that dates at least to 1955, when arguments for stronger IC authority began to surface. OMB deputy director James Schlesinger in 1971 first broached the DNI concept. Recently some Members of Congress have introduced intelligence community reform legislation that would establish the position of Director of National Intelligence (DNI), or strengthen DCI authorities."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2004-08-13
-
Polygraph Use by the Department of Energy: Issues for Congress [Updated April 7, 2006]
"On January 7, 2005, the DOE proposed a new regulation that would institute a polygraph screening program, but only for individuals with regular access to the most sensitive information. The result would be to reduce from more than 20,000 to approximately 4,500 the number of DOE and contractor personnel potentially subject to mandatory polygraph tests. DOE's new proposal came after some Members of Congress urged that the Department adopt a more focused polygraph program in the wake of a 2002 study by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) that questioned the validity of polygraph testing, particularly when it is used for screening purposes. In the wake of the Wen Ho Lee case, DOE in March 1999 initiated and later announced its first-ever use of the polygraph to screen approximately 800 DOE federal and contractor employees in certain high-risk programs.2 Congress in October 1999 formally mandated that DOE employ the polygraph as a screening tool (P.L. 106-65, Sec. 3154) and expanded the program to cover 13,000 DOE employees. The following year, Congress further expanded polygraph screening to cover approximately 20,000 DOE employees (P.L. 106-398, Sec. 3135). In part because of continuing opposition by some DOE nuclear weapons laboratory employees, Congress in 2001 requested that NAS review the scientific evidence regarding the validity and reliability of the polygraph, particularly when used for personnel security screening. Congress directed DOE to institute a new polygraph program that took into account the NAS findings (P.L. 107-107, Sec. 3152)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2006-04-07
-
Polygraph Use by the Department of Energy: Issues for Congress [February 9, 2009]
"Four years after Congress directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to revamp its polygraph program, taking into account a 2003 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report that questioned the scientific basis for the accuracy of polygraph testing, particularly when used to 'screen' employees, DOE promulgated a regulation on October 30, 2006, that eliminated polygraph screening tests without specific cause. DOE said its counterintelligence evaluation policies were now consistent with existing Intelligence Community practices and the NAS 2003 report's recommendations, particularly for cases when polygraph tests were used for screening purposes rather than for investigating specific events. Under its 2006 regulation, DOE requires that an applicant or employee be polygraph tested only if one of the following five causes is triggered: (1) a counterintelligence evaluation of an applicant or employee reveals that the individual may be engaged in certain activities, including clandestine or unreported relationships with foreign powers, organizations, or persons; (2) an employee is to be assigned to certain activities within DOE which involve another agency, and that agency requires a polygraph examination; (3) an agency to which a DOE employee will be assigned requests that DOE administer a polygraph examination as a condition of the assignment; (4) an employee is selected for a random counterintelligence evaluation, including a polygraph test; or (5) an employee is required to take a specific-incident polygraph examination."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2009-02-09
-
Intelligence Reform at the Department of Energy: Policy Issues and Organizational Alternatives [July 19, 2006]
"Concerned by reported security and counterintelligence (CI) lapses at the Department of Energy (DOE), Congress in 1999 established a semi-autonomous agency -- the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) -- to oversee DOE's national security-related programs. Within NNSA, Congress established the Office of Defense Nuclear Counterintelligence to implement NNSA's counterintelligence program. Although DOE's existing Office of Counterintelligence develops CI policy for both agencies, it implements policy only at non-NNSA facilities. Some studies have questioned the effectiveness of a dual office structure in combating foreign espionage and have urged the adoption of an alternative structure. Several alternative organizational approaches have been discussed, including the following. One approach, which DOE has initiated, merges under the control of a new DOE Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence DOE's Office of Intelligence, which assesses foreign nuclear weapons programs, and DOE's CI office. […]. Under a second approach, the DOE and NNSA CI programs could be consolidated under the control of the NNSA administrator. […]. Under a third approach, DOE could integrate its Office of Intelligence and CI office under a new DOE intelligence agency, but allow NNSA's CI office to remain as a separate entity. […]. A fourth approach would be to completely separate the DOE and NNSA counterintelligence programs. Proponents suggest that such an approach would clarify the chain of command. Opponents assert that separation could further undermine coordination and communication. A final approach would be to maintain the status quo. […]. This report will be updated as warranted."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2006-07-19
-
Open Source Intelligence (OSINT): Issues for Congress [December 5, 2007]
"Open source information (OSINT) is derived from newspapers, journals, radio and television, and the Internet. Intelligence analysts have long used such information to supplement classified data, but systematically collecting open source information has not been a priority of the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC). In recent years, given changes in the international environment, there have been calls, from Congress and the 9/11 Commission among others, for a more intense and focused investment in open source collection and analysis. However, some still emphasize that the primary business of intelligence continues to be obtaining and analyzing secrets. A consensus now exists that OSINT must be systematically collected and should constitute an essential component of analytical products. This has been recognized by various commissions and in statutes. Responding to legislative direction, the Intelligence Community has established the position of Assistant Director of National Intelligence for Open Source and created the National Open Source Center. The goal is to perform specialized OSINT acquisition and analysis functions and create a center of excellence that will support and encourage all intelligence agencies. The effort has been only underway since late 2005 but the Center is up and running, and providing support, including training, to OSINT professionals throughout the Intelligence Community. Administrative mechanisms are in place to ensure that there is a comprehensive community-wide open source effort. It appears, however, to some observers that not all agencies have as yet made comprehensive commitments to acquiring and using open source information, nor that the ODNI has taken sufficient steps to ensure that open sources are appropriately exploited."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Best, Richard A.; Cumming, Alfred
2007-12-05
-
Intelligence Reform at the Department of Energy: Policy Issues and Organizational Alternatives [April 10, 2006]
"Concerned by reported security and counterintelligence (CI) lapses at the Department of Energy (DOE), Congress in 1999 established a semi-autonomous agency - the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) - to oversee DOE's national security-related programs. Within NNSA, Congress established the Office of Defense Nuclear Counterintelligence to implement NNSA's counterintelligence program. Although DOE's existing Office of Counterintelligence develops CI policy for both agencies, it implements policy only at non-NNSA facilities. Some studies have questioned the effectiveness of a dual office structure in combating foreign espionage and have urged the adoption of an alternative structure. Several alternative organizational approaches have been discussed, including the following. One approach, reportedly approved but not yet initiated, would merge under the control of a new DOE intelligence agency DOE's Office of Intelligence, which assesses foreign nuclear weapons programs, and DOE's CI office. As part of an anticipated second phase, NNSA's CI office would be consolidated under the DOE's intelligence agency. Proponents assert that such a consolidation would improve command, control, and communication. Opponents argue that consolidation would dilute the counterintelligence attention DOE's weapons labs now receive."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2006-04-10
-
Director of National Intelligence Statutory Authorities: Status and Proposals [Updated April 17, 2008]
"In passing the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458) in 2004, Congress approved the most comprehensive reform of the U.S. Intelligence Community since it was created over 50 years ago. Principal among enacted changes was the establishment of a new position of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to manage the Intelligence Community (IC). Some observers have questioned whether the act provides the DNI the authority necessary to effectively implement Congress's 2004 intelligence reforms. Others assert that the DNI's authorities are significantly stronger than those of the former Director of Central Intelligence (DCI), but suggest that the DNI has failed to aggressively assert the authorities he has been provided. In examining the DNI's current authorities, it is clear that they are significantly stronger than those that were available to the DCI, but whether they are sufficient to implement intelligence reforms mandated by Congress will continue to depend on several factors. They include the extent to which the authorities themselves are adequate, the DNI's willingness to assert those authorities, and the extent to which the DNI receives presidential and congressional support. This report will be updated as new information becomes available."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Best, Richard A.; Cumming, Alfred
2008-04-17
-
Open Source Intelligence (OSINT): Issues for Congress [Updated January 28, 2008]
"Open source information (OSINT) is derived from newspapers, journals, radio and television, and the Internet. Intelligence analysts have long used such information to supplement classified data, but systematically collecting open source information has not been a priority of the U.S. Intelligence Community. In recent years, given changes in the international environment, there have been calls, from Congress and the 9/11 Commission among others, for a more intense and focused investment in open source collection and analysis. However, some still emphasize that the primary business of intelligence continues to be obtaining and analyzing secrets. The collection and analysis of OSINT information will be ultimately judged by its contribution to the overall intelligence effort. Collecting information from open sources is generally less expensive and less risky than collection from other intelligence sources. The use of OSINT may result not only in monetary savings but also in less risk than utilizing sensitive technical and human sources. OSINT can also provide insights into the types of developments that may not be on the priority list for other systems or may not be susceptible to collection through other intelligence approaches - innovative applications of new technologies, shifts in popular attitudes, emergence of new political and religious movements, growing popular discontent, disillusionment with leadership, etc. Supporters of OSINT maintain that the future contribution of the Intelligence Community will be enhanced by its ability to provide detailed information and incisive analyses of such developments. This report will be updated as new information becomes available."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Best, Richard A.; Cumming, Alfred
2008-01-28
-
Director of National Intelligence Statutory Authorities: Status and Proposals [Updated January 25, 2008]
"In passing the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458) in 2004, Congress approved the most comprehensive reform of the U.S. Intelligence Community since its establishment over 50 years ago. Principal among enacted changes was the establishment of a new position of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to manage the Intelligence Community. Some observers have questioned whether the statute gives the DNI sufficient authority to implement the 2004 intelligence reforms enacted by Congress. Others believe that the DNI's existing authorities are substantially stronger than those of the former Director of Central Intelligence (CIA), but that the DNI must more effectively assert those authorities. […]In examining the DNI's current authorities, it is clear that they are substantially stronger than those held by the former DCI, but whether they are sufficient to implement mandated reforms will depend on several factors. […] This report reviews the congressional debate over authorities that occurred during consideration of the 2004 Act; examines the DNI's request for more authority and the congressional response to date; compares several of the DNI's authorities with those of former DCIs; and, examines some potential Congressional concerns. This report will be updated as new information becomes available."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Best, Richard A.; Masse, Todd; Cumming, Alfred
2008-01-25
-
Covert Action: Legislative Background and Possible Policy Questions [Updated January 28, 2008]
"This report examines the statutory procedures governing covert action and associated questions to consider. Published reports have suggested that in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Pentagon has expanded its counter-terrorism intelligence activities as part of what the Bush Administration terms the global war on terror. Some observers have asserted that the Department of Defense (DOD) may be conducting certain kinds of counterterrorism intelligence activities that would statutorily qualify as 'covert actions,' and thus require a presidential finding and the notification of the congressional intelligence committees. Defense officials assert that none of DOD's current counter-terrorist intelligence activities constitute covert action as defined under the law, and therefore, do not require a presidential finding and the notification of the intelligence committees. Rather, they contend that DOD conducts only 'clandestine activities.' Although the term is not defined by statute, these officials characterize such activities as constituting actions that are conducted in secret, but which constitute 'passive' intelligence information gathering. By comparison, covert action, they contend, is 'active,' in that its aim is to elicit change in the political, economic, military, or diplomatic behavior of a target."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2008-01-28
-
Director of National Intelligence Statutory Authorities: Status and Proposals [May 26, 2010]
From the Summary: "In passing the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458) in 2004, Congress approved the most comprehensive reform of the U.S. intelligence community since it was created over 50 years ago. Principal among enacted changes was the establishment of a new position of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to serve as head of the intelligence community (IC) and principal adviser to the President on intelligence matters related to the national security and to oversee and direct the implementation of the National Intelligence Program. Some observers have questioned whether the act provides the DNI the authority necessary to effectively carry out these responsibilities. Others assert that the DNI's authorities are significantly stronger than those of the former Director of Central Intelligence (DCI), but suggest that DNIs have failed to aggressively assert the authorities they have been provided. During his Senate confirmation proceeding in January 2009, DNI Dennis C. Blair said that he would withhold judgment as to whether his authorities were sufficient but over time would advise the President and Congress if he concluded they were not. He also assured Senators that he would exercise his authorities to the fullest. The abrupt announcement of his resignation in May 2010 suggested to some that he had been unable to exercise his authorities to meet his responsibilities and, for some, raised questions about the viability of the DNI position."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Best, Richard A.; Cumming, Alfred
2010-05-26
-
Congress as a Consumer of Intelligence Information [January 28, 2010]
"This report examines the role of Congress as a consumer of national intelligence and examines several issues that Congress might address during the second session of the 111th Congress. The President, by virtue of his role as commander-in-chief and head of the executive branch, has access to all national intelligence collected, analyzed and produced by the Intelligence Community. By definition, the President, the Vice President, and certain Cabinet-level officials, have access to a greater overall volume of intelligence and to sensitive intelligence information than do members of the congressional intelligence committees. Moreover, since the intelligence agencies are part of the executive branch, the President has the authority to restrict the flow of intelligence information to Congress and its two intelligence committees. The Fort Hood Army base shootings in November 2009, followed later that year by the Christmas Day airline bombing plot and the Afghanistan suicide bombing that killed seven Central Intelligence Agency employees refocused congressional attention on a number of intelligence issues, including the role Congress plays as a consumer of intelligence. Each of these cases serves to underscore the sensitivity with which Congress views the executive branch's statutory obligation to keep the legislative branch fully and currently informed of all intelligence activities."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2010-01-28
-
Director of National Intelligence: Statutory Authorities [Updated January 30, 2007]
From the Summary: "In passing the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458) in late 2004, Congress approved the most comprehensive reform of the U.S. Intelligence Community since its establishment over 50 years ago. Principal among enacted changes was the establishment of a new position of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to manage the Intelligence Community. Some observers have questioned whether the new statute provides the DNI the necessary authorities to effectively manage the Community. In examining the DNI's authorities, it is clear that they are substantially stronger than those held by the former Director of Central Intelligence (DCI), but whether the DNI has sufficient management authority to implement mandated reforms will depend on several factors. They include the DNI's determination to assert his new powers, the extent to which the DNI receives presidential and congressional support, and the DNI's ability to successfully establish a transparent intelligence budget process that will permit him to make and effectively enforce informed budget decisions. This suggests close and continuous congressional oversight of the reform process. This Report will be updated as new information becomes available."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Best, Richard A.; Masse, Todd; Cumming, Alfred
2007-01-30
-
Congress as a Consumer of Intelligence Information [December 14, 2005]
"This responds to your request for a discussion of Congress and its role as a consumer of national intelligence, and for a listing and a description of some of the U.S. Intelligence Community's principal intelligence products, including an identification of those which the executive branch routinely shares with Congress, and those which it does not. Limitations on Congressional Access to Certain National Intelligence By virtue of his constitutional role as commander-and-in-chief and head of the executive branch, the President has access to all national intelligence collected, analyzed and produced by the Intelligence Community. The Presidents position also affords him the authority - which, at certain times, has been aggressively asserted - to restrict the flow of intelligence information to Congress and its two intelligence committees, which are charged with providing legislative oversight of the Intelligence Community. As a result, the President, and a small number of presidentially-designated Cabinet-level officials, including the Vice President " in contrast to Members of Congress " have access to a far greater overall volume of intelligence and to more sensitive intelligence information, including information regarding intelligence sources and methods. They, unlike Members of Congress, also have the authority to more extensively task the Intelligence Community, and its extensive cadre of analysts, for follow-up information. As a result, the President and his most senior advisors arguably are better positioned to assess the quality of the Community's intelligence more accurately than is Congress."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2005-12-14
-
Director of National Intelligence Statutory Authorities: Status and Proposals [Updated January 15, 2009]
From the Summary: "In passing the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458) in 2004, Congress approved the most comprehensive reform of the U.S. Intelligence Community since it was created over 50 years ago. Principal among enacted changes was the establishment of a new position of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to manage the Intelligence Community (IC). [...] In examining the DNI's current authorities, it is clear that they are stronger than those that were available to the DCI, but whether they are sufficient to implement the 2004 intelligence reforms mandated by Congress will continue to depend on several factors, including the degree to which the authorities themselves are adequate, the DNI's willingness to assert those authorities, and the extent to which the DNI receives presidential and congressional support. This implies an important oversight role for the 111th Congress. This report will be updated as new information becomes available."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Best, Richard A.; Cumming, Alfred
2009-01-15
-
Comparison of 9/11 Commission Recommended Intelligence Reforms, S. 2845, S.2774, H.R. 5024, Administration Proposal, H.R. 10, Current Law [Updated October 6, 2004]
"On July 22, 2004, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission) released its bipartisan, unanimous final report containing recommendations for far-reaching and fundamental changes to the United States Intelligence Community (IC). Almost 20 months after its creation by P.L. 107-306, the commission, as mandated by its founding legislation, attempted to present a full and complete accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, as well as recommendations for corrective measures that can be taken to help prevent acts of terrorism. This report, the second of two reports, presents side-by-side comparisons of the 9/11 Commission recommendations and current law and legislation proposed by Senators Collins and Lieberman (S. 2845) and unanimously approved by the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on September 22, 2004, as amended; House Speaker Dennis Hastert (H.R. 10), as reported out be the House Committee on Rules; Senators McCain and Lieberman (S. 2774); Representative Pelosi (H.R. 5024); and President Bush."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2004-10-06
-
Proposed Authorities of a National Intelligence Director: Issues for Congress and Side-by-Side Comparison of S. 2845, H.R. 10, and Current Law [Updated October 5, 2004]
"The 9/11 Commission, in its recent report on the attacks of September 11, 2001, criticized the U.S. Intelligence Community's (IC) fragmented management structure and questioned whether the U.S. government, and the IC, in particular, is organized adequately to direct resources and build the intelligence capabilities that the United States will need to counter terrorism, and to address the broader range of national security challenges in the decades ahead. The Commission made a number of recommendations, one of which was to replace the current position of Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) with a National Intelligence Director (NID) who would oversee national intelligence centers on specific subjects of interest- including a National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC)- across the U.S. government, manage the national intelligence program; oversee the agencies that contribute to it; and have hiring, firing, and budgetary authority over the IC's 15 agencies. Although the Commission recommended that the director be located in the Executive Office of the President, the Commission Vice Chairman in testimony before Congress on September 7, 2004, withdrew that portion of the recommendation in light of concerns that the NID would be subject to undue influence. The Commission further recommended that a deputy NID be established to oversee the day-to-day operations of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The Commission's recommendation to strengthen management authority over the IC is the latest contribution to an IC structural reform debate that dates at least to 1955, when arguments for stronger IC authority began to surface. OMB deputy director James Schlesinger in 1971 first broached the NID concept."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2004-10-05
-
Counterintelligence Reform at the Department of Energy: Policy Issues and Organizational Alternatives [Updated March 8, 2005]
From the Summary: "Troubled by reported lapses in security and counterintelligence (CI) at the Department of Energy (DOE), the Congress in 1999 established a semi-autonomous agency -- the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) -- to oversee DOE's national security-related programs (P.L. 106-65). Within NNSA, Congress created the Office of Defense Nuclear Counterintelligence to 'implement' CI policy at NNSA facilities. DOE retained a separate Office of Counterintelligence, which 'develops' CI policy for DOE and NNSA, but, implements it only at non-NNSA facilities. Though representing separate organizations, the two CI offices share resources and personnel for some programs. Although DOE has taken steps to strengthen CI practices, some observers have questioned whether the Department's bifurcated CI structure is the most effective in countering continuing efforts by foreign intelligence services, friendly and hostile, to target DOE and NNSA facilities."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2005-03-08
-
Intelligence Reform Implementation at the Federal Bureau of Investigation: Issues and Options for Congress [August 16, 2005]
"This report analyzes the FBIs overall intelligence reform effort, focusing on the implementation of intelligence reform initiatives in the field. Reform policies designed at FBI Headquarters, with field input, may be of marginal utility unless they are fully and effectively implemented across the 56 FBI field offices. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) examined the FBIs reform initiatives with a focus on the implementation of the field intelligence group concept, at five field offices. Allowing for varying levels of progress across field offices, a central tenet of a high-order functioning intelligence organization is its ability to harness collection resources to nationally developed intelligence priorities and gaps. While areas of promise exist, field research indicates that the FBIs ability to formally harness intelligence collection (including systemic accountability mechanisms) to analytically identified intelligence gaps, remains nascent. In addition, this report discusses several overall options for Congress in addressing FBI intelligence reform. Organizationally and structurally, Congress could establish a stand-alone domestic intelligence agency. Alternatively, it could codify the recently announced National Security Service within the FBI. Potential areas are outlined for functional oversight, including the FBI-CIA relationship, and the FBIs efforts to stanch terrorism finance. And finally, the report reviews options for addressing the FBIs intelligence budget, both at the strategic and tactical levels."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Masse, Todd; Cumming, Alfred
2005-08-16
-
Sensitive Covert Action Notifications: Oversight Options For Congress [July 7, 2009]
"Legislation enacted in 1980 gave the executive branch authority to limit advance notification of especially sensitive covert actions to eight Members of Congress--the 'Gang of Eight'--when the President determines that it is essential to limit prior notice in order to meet extraordinary circumstances affecting U.S. vital interests. In such cases, the executive branch is permitted by statute to limit notification to the chairmen and ranking minority members of the two congressional intelligence committees, the Speaker and minority leader of the House, and Senate majority and minority leaders, rather than to notify the full intelligence committees, as is required in cases involving covert actions determined to be less sensitive. [...] In its mark-up of the FY2010 Intelligence Authorization Act, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) eliminated the Gang of Eight statutory provision, adopting instead a statutory requirement that each of the intelligence committees establish written procedures to govern such notifications. According to Committee report language, the adopted provision vests the authority to limit such briefings with the committees, rather than the President. [...] With Congress considering a possible change, this memorandum describes the statutory provision authorizing Gang of Eight notifications, reviews the legislative history of the provision, and examines both the impact of such notifications on congressional oversight as well as options that Congress might consider to possibly improve oversight."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cumming, Alfred
2009-07-07
