25 May 1999

See full bill and floor discussion: http://jya.com/hr1555-yak.txt 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[Congressional Record: May 13, 1999 (House)]
[Page H3112-H3141]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:cr13my99-42]


          INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

[Excerpt]

             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.