	Introduction

Given the short tenures of the first three Directors of National Intelligence (DNIs) and especially the abrupt departure of Admiral Dennis C. Blair in May 2010, there has been considerable speculation about the future of the position of the DNI and the roles and mission of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). 108-458 ) that created both the DNI position and the ODNI. still dominate." The concerns over the future of the reforms included in the 2004 act will probably affect consideration of the nomination of retired Air Force General James R. Clapper, Jr. to succeed Blair and become the fourth DNI. The work of intelligence agencies prior to 9/11 was extensively investigated and analyzed; the resulting consensus among many Members of Congress and outside observers was that major changes were required. Although there may have initially been some resistance in the Bush Administration to the need for wide-ranging intelligence legislation, there was a widespread consensus in Congress, especially in the Senate, that legislation was needed and that a position for a Director of National Intelligence should be established that would be separate from the head of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Some argued that they should be directly subordinate to the DNI, essentially in a new Department of Intelligence, since they constitute the major portion of the U.S. intelligence effort. The Intelligence Reform Act of 2004

After the November election, the final legislation, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 ( P.L. The act established a DNI to serve as head of the intelligence community and as principal adviser to the President and the National Security Council and the Homeland Security Council for intelligence matters. The act gives the DNI some additional managerial and budgetary authorities including certain authorities to transfer personnel and to move funds from one agency to another. In an important compromise that facilitated passage of the legislation, the Intelligence Reform Act provided that the President 
shall issue guidelines to ensure the effective implementation and execution within the executive branch of the authorities granted to the Director of National Intelligence by this title and the amendments made by this title, in a manner that respects and does not abrogate the statutory responsibilities of the heads of the departments of the United States government concerning such departments. Some observers maintain that this provision significantly undermined the authority of the DNI especially in regard to DOD agencies. The goal of the act was to reorganize the intelligence community to provide a more coordinated and agile effort that would especially be more effective at the counterterrorism mission. 2701 / S. 1494 ) or other legislative vehicles. He recalled the Intelligence Reform Act's aim "to improve information sharing, promote a strategic, unified direction, and ensure integration across the nation's Intelligence Community (IC)." None of the criticisms appears to be meritless, however. Future Direction

Most observers agree that, at best, the roles of the DNI and the ODNI are works in progress. None of the tenures of the first three DNIs lasted for more than two years. On the other hand, a number of serious terrorist attacks have reportedly been prevented by exemplary cooperative work among intelligence agencies. Some provisions for enhanced authorities of the DNI are included in FY2010 intelligence authorization bills ( H.R.
The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458) was the most significant legislation affecting the U.S. intelligence community since the National Security Act of 1947. Enacted in the wake of the 9/11 Commission's final report, the 2004 act attempted to ensure closer coordination among intelligence agencies especially in regard to counterterrorism efforts. Most notably, the Intelligence Reform Act established the position of Director of National Intelligence (DNI) with more extensive authorities to coordinate the nation's intelligence effort than those formerly possessed by Directors of Central Intelligence. The DNI speaks for U.S. intelligence, he briefs the President, has authority to develop the budget for the national intelligence effort and manage appropriations made by Congress, and, to some extent, can transfer personnel and funds from one agency to another. The Office of the DNI (ODNI), a staff of some 1,600 officials along with additional contract personnel, works to carry out the DNI's responsibilities.
Observers are divided over the success of the DNI position and the ODNI. Three DNIs have been successively appointed and confirmed; none served more than two years. A number of innovations have been undertaken in the intelligence community to encourage coordination and information sharing. However, some observers remain skeptical of the need for a DNI or ODNI. A widespread perception is that coordinative mechanisms and authorities as currently established are inadequate to the goal of creating a more flexible and agile intelligence effort. Still others see cooperative efforts in the intelligence community as a test-case of the extent to which independent federal agencies can work closely together without being merged under a single leader.
Congress has monitored the work of DNIs and the ODNI, but oversight has thus far been largely informal, given the absence of enacted intelligence authorization legislation since 2004, shortly after passage of the Intelligence Reform Act. Some outside observers would repeal the act, but there appears to be little enthusiasm among Members to undo a major piece of legislation and return to the status quo ante. On the other hand, there appears to be limited sympathy for creating a "Department of Intelligence," directly managed by one official.
The roles of the DNI and the ODNI are likely to form the backdrop for congressional consideration of intelligence authorization legislation for FY2010 (H.R. 2701 and S. 1494) and for FY2011. In addition, confirmation hearings for General James R. Clapper, Jr., nominated by President Obama on June 7, 2010, to serve as the fourth DNI, are likely to include consideration of the responsibilities of the position.
Additional information on issues related to the DNI and the ODNI can be found in CRS Report RL33539, Intelligence Issues for Congress, by [author name scrubbed]; CRS Report RL34231, Director of National Intelligence Statutory Authorities: Status and Proposals, by [author name scrubbed] and [author name scrubbed]; and CRS Report R41284, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Acquisition: Issues for Congress, by [author name scrubbed]