Sen. Rockefeller and Sen. Wyden on fiscal year 2005 intelligence authorization conference report
08 December 2004
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Madam President, I will spend a minute on separate
intelligence-related matter before speaking about the bill currently
before the Senate. In the time I have been vice chairman of the
Intelligence Committee, I have worked hard to try to make sure that funds
are channeled to where they ought to be in intelligence. For this reason,
and with a great deal of reluctance, I am going to oppose the fiscal year
2005 intelligence authorization conference report, which the Senate will
consider later today.
My decision to take this somewhat unprecedented action is
based solely on my strenuous objection--shared by many in our
committee--to a particular major funding acquisition program that I
believe is totally unjustified and very wasteful and dangerous to
national security.
Because of the highly classified nature of the programs
contained in the national intelligence budget, I cannot talk about them
on the floor. But the Senate has voted for the past 2 years to terminate
the program of which I speak, only to be overruled in the appropriations
conference. The intelligence authorization conference report that I
expect to be before the Senate later today fully authorizes funding for
this unjustified and stunningly expensive acquisition. I simply cannot
overlook that.
My decision is shared by a number of my colleagues. Speaking
for myself, if we are asked to fund this particular program next year, I
will seriously consider and probably will ask the Senate to go into
closed session so the Senators can understand, fully debate, become
informed upon, and then vote on termination of this very wasteful
acquisition program.
Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I rise today to express my
concern regarding
[Page: S11958]
a provision included in the Intelligence authorization conference report,
which has been included in the intelligence reform legislation before us.
I commend the efforts of both Chairman ROBERTS and Vice Chairman
ROCKEFELLER for their hard work during the negotiations over this
legislation. But I, like the vice chairman, do not support the continued
funding of a major acquisition program which is unnecessary, ineffective,
over budget, and too expensive. The easier path would be to step aside
and let this program continue without dissent. In this case, however, I
do not believe the continued funding of this program is the best way to
secure our Nation and the safety of our troops and citizens.
The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has raised
concerns about the need and costs of this program for the past 4 years
and sought to cancel this program in each of the past 2 years. This has
not been a political issue, a Democratic or Republican issue, nor should
it be. The members of the Senate committee have supported these efforts
in a nonpartisan way with unanimous votes each time.
The Senate Intelligence Committee has determined that this
program should not be funded based on firm policy judgments. Numerous
independent reviews have concluded that the program does not fulfill a
major intelligence gap or shortfall, and the original justification for
developing this technology has eroded in importance due to the changed
practices and capabilities of our adversaries. There are a number of
other programs in existence and in development whose capabilities can
match those envisioned for this program at far less cost and
technological risk. Like almost all other acquisition programs of its
size, initial budget estimates have drastically underestimated the true
costs of this acquisition and independent cost estimates have shown that
this program will exceed its proposed budgets by enormous amounts of
money. The Senate Intelligence Committee has also in the past expressed
its concern about how this program was to be awarded to the prime
contractor.
I understand why funding for this program was included in
the conference report. The administration requested it, the appropriators
have already funded it, and the House wanted to maintain the funding.
Nevertheless, I believe this issue must be highlighted because it is not
going away. I wish more of my colleagues knew of the details of this
program and understood why we are so convinced that it should be
canceled. I encourage you to request a briefing, to come to the
Intelligence Committee and let our staff explain why we believe we are
right about this program. If you do, I believe my colleagues would agree
with the members of the Senate Intelligence Committee and vote to stop
this program next year.
NEWSLETTER
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|