Increasing spending or streamlining the work into subcommittees
A joint committee on the old model of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy and forming A single committee in each house of Congress
Increasing taxes to maintain the current level of funding, invite volunteers to help with routine tasks
Streamlining the work into subcommittees or increasing taxes
Making a new Department to oversee everything or increasing spending
What are two alternatives that Congress have considered?
By sharing intelligence
Four of the members appointed to this committee or committees should be a member who also serves on each of the following additional committees: Armed Services, Judiciary, Foreign Affairs, and the Defense Appropriations subcommittee
In a joint yearly conference
By sharing the same funding sources
By having a new Joint Chief
In what way can other congressional interests can be brought together
Defense Department
Congress
Foreign Affairs Committee
Municipality
Department of Homeland Security
Who should address Congressional Oversight for intelligence-and counterterrorism?
They should have served multiple years in different intelligence committees
They should have serviced in the Armed Forces Committee
Four of the members appointed to this committee or committees should be a member who also serves on each of the following additional committees: Armed Services, Judiciary, Foreign Affairs, and the Defense Appropriations subcommittee
The majority of the committee should never exceed the minority by more than one and four of the members on the committee should also serve in Armed Services, Judiciary, Foreign Affairs and the Defense Appropriations subcommittee
Have legal background and completed military training
What are some suggestions for requirements of the people in this new committee that is being proposed?
They would be more aware of what is happening
So that each member feels a greater sense of responsibility, and accountability, for the quality of the committee's work
The cost to run the committees would be less
They would not manage to cope with current work load
They would be able to have subcommittees do the smaller jobs
What would be the results of reducing intelligence committee sizes?
Defense Department
Secretary of defence
Foreign Affairs Committee
Department of Homeland Security
Who should address dysfunctional oversight for intelligence-and counterterrorism
That fact that the leaders of the Department of Homeland Security now appear before 88 committees and subcommittees of Congress
Congressional oversight for intelligence-and counterterrorism-is now dysfunctional
Too many varying opinions
Funding
The leaders of the Department of Homeland Security now appear before 88 committees and subcommittees of Congress
Lack of solid leadership
What is perhaps the single largest obstacle impeding the department's successful development
Make the leader more accountable
They should conduct continuing studies on intelligence agencies and report these findings to the House and Senate and the national intelligence program should be given to the National Intelligence Director not the Secretary of Defense
Many documents loose their confidential status
Show more financial gains
Give back money to the tax payers
In what ways is it recommended that the new committee could be more transparent?
A joint committee or an Intelligence Czar
A joint committee or a single committee for each part of Congress
Increasing taxes to maintain the current level of funding, invite volunteers to help with routine tasks
A joint committee or restructuring of the Department of Homeland Security
An intelligence Czar
A joint committee or a single committee in both houses of Congress
What are some recommendations for fixing the dysfunctional way congressional oversight for intelligence and counter-terrorism are run right now?
The members should be able to serve indefinitely and the committees should be smaller, between seven and nine members
7-9 members to serve a four year term
4 members to serve indefinitely
7-9 members in each house to serve indefinitely
Max 24 members with fixed 2 year contracts
4 members to serve a four year term
What is the recommendation for the term and size of the commitee?
They are overtaxed and underpaid
They have to go before 88 committees and subcommittees of Congress and they don't have enough clear authority to deal with threats to Homeland Security
They do not have the necessary funding
They don't have the authority to actuate change
Insuffient funding
What are some of the problems Homeland Security faces right now?
Recommendation: Congressional oversight for intelligence-and counterterrorism-is now dysfunctional. Congress should address this problem. We have considered various alternatives: A joint committee on the old model of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy is one. A single committee in each house of Congress, combining authorizing and appropriating authorities, is another. The new committee or committees should conduct continuing studies of the activities of the intelligence agencies and report problems relating to the development and use of intelligence to all members of the House and Senate. We have already recommended that the total level of funding for intelligence be made public, and that the national intelligence program be appropriated to the National Intelligence Director, not to the secretary of defense. We also recommend that the intelligence committee should have a subcommittee specifically dedicated to oversight, freed from the consuming responsibility of working on the budget. The resolution creating the new intelligence committee structure should grant subpoena authority to the committee or committees. The majority party's representation on this committee should never exceed the minority's representation by more than one. Four of the members appointed to this committee or committees should be a member who also serves on each of the following additional committees: Armed Services, Judiciary, Foreign Affairs, and the Defense Appropriations subcommittee. In this way the other major congressional interests can be brought together in the new committee's work. Members should serve indefinitely on the intelligence committees, without set terms, thereby letting them accumulate expertise. The committees should be smaller-perhaps seven or nine members in each house-so that each member feels a greater sense of responsibility, and accountability, for the quality of the committee's work. The leaders of the Department of Homeland Security now appear before 88 committees and subcommittees of Congress. One expert witness (not a member of the administration) told us that this is perhaps the single largest obstacle impeding the department's successful development. The one attempt to consolidate such committee authority, the House Select Committee on Homeland Security, may be eliminated. The Senate does not have even this. Congress needs to establish for the Department of Homeland Security the kind of clear authority and responsibility that exist to enable the Justice Department to deal with crime and the Defense Department to deal with threats to national security. 