LETTER TO MR. PRESIDENT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75B00380R000200010024-7
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 21, 2004
• Sequence Number: 24
• Publication Date: September 14, 1973
• Content Type: LETTER

Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP75B00380R000200010024-7
14 September 1973
Mr. President:
I appreciate the concern of the Senator from that the
Central Intelligence Agency not engage in domestic activities outside of
its statutory charter. But I do feel that it is unwise to legislate in this
area without the benefit of hearings where this matter can be thoroughly
considered with the care that it deserves.
I do not believe there is any disagreement whatsoever on the
fact that the Central Intelligence Agency should not engage either in domestic
intelligence or in the exercise of police powers. Moreover, the 1947 law
(section 102 of the National Security Act of 1947) prohibits such activities:
"PROVIDED, That the Agency shall have no police,
subpoena, law-enforcement powers, or internal-security
functions.... "
It is the clear intent of the law that CIA not be engaged domestically in
collecting information on citizens of the United States who, unlike Agency
employees, for example, are not of legitimate interest to the Agency.
Moreover, the CIA quite rightly has no police, subpoena, or law-enforcement
powers and as far as I know has never attempted to exercise such powers
and its legal inability and lack of authority to do so is abundantly clear.
On the other hand, I do not think there is anything in the law
which would prohibit CIA from protecting its installations in the United
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP75B00380R000200010MQ, 8/11/2003
 Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP75B00380R000200010024-7
States or investigating its personnel or other persons having a need
for access to its information, or, of course, in engaging in activities
in the United States solely in support of the Agency's foreign intelligence
mission.
I do feel, however, that because of the sum of events the
time has come to review the statutory underpinnings of the Central
Intelligence Agency to assure that the statutory lines drawn by Congress
are clear and where we want them. Such a review can only be conducted
properly through the traditional hearings process as the judgment
reached by Congress should be the result of comprehensive consideration
of all relevant factors.
As I stated in my 19 July letter to Senator Muskie, I have already
started some staff work review of the CIA Act preparatory to hearings
by the Senate Armed Services Committee. During the planned hearings
all proposed changes, additions or deletions can be fully developed.
One problem I have with the amendment illustrates why I
am disturbed about developing legislation on the floor of the Senate
without proper background hearings. As I read the amendment,
CIA could be effectively prohibited from providing assistance of any
kind to any agency engaged in police, law-enforcement, or internal-
security functions. Let's consider what this could mean.
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP75B00380R000200010024-7
 Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000200010024-7
In the course of its intelligence mission, CIA could develop
information on such things as narcotics smuggling, aerial high-
jacking, terrorism, and foreign directed espionage and subversion,
information which could assist in forestalling serious criminal action
or security threats within the United States. Does the Senator really
want to prohibit the forwarding of that type of information on to the
domestic agencies who could use it to prohibit or solve a criminal
offense ?
Mr. President, it is hoped that my colleagues will agree with
me that the amendment of the Senator from should be rejected
with the understanding that all legislative proposals relating to CIA
will be given a fair and full hearing before the Senate Armed Services
Committee during the 93rd Congress.
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000200010024-7
 Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000200010024-7
S 14190
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE July 20, ..19'73
Eagleton amendment, now we become Again, this is beyond the ambit of this' that kind could and would be fully consld-
lawyers and take a look at it. Here again, bill. ered by the Committee at that time. I could
there are Problems. The matter was so eloquently and pro- support some major points In that particular
I would like to point out the d efiiled cisely put by the Senator from Maine amendment an a part of a bill on the subject,
parameters of the 1 agleton amendment: -(Mr, Musxii,) in what he said in respect but fully oppose the amendment presented
an a part; of the War Powers 13111.
Any person employed by, under contract 'of the amendment. It simply does not fit The ))ill. now before the .`lnate, as flnn)ly
to, or under the direction of any department within this context, and considering the written and improved by the 1Ybrelj(n lhelrl-
or agency of the United States Government. historic nature and importance of the tione Committee, is an excellent bill sad in
That could include almost anyone; it context we should not burden it with confined to the Constitutional subject of ac-
is not confined to the CIA. Indeed, it is substantive questions which in addition tunny committing the nation to war.
r
i f n I t it
r
li
b ll
1
I b
orage may be. Later on, I will explore the jurisdiction of another legislative
whether it would cover foreign nationals, standing committee, to wit, the Com-
and particularly foreign nationals who mitten. on Armed Services; and where
may be covert intelligence agents of the we are not faced with any question of
United States, For instance, would Colo- avoiding the Issue, but have the word of
net Penkovsky, who was a member of the a man whose word rings as true around
Soviet military and who provided so here as that of any Senator of the United
much key intelligence to the CIA right States, and that Is that he proposes to
out of the Kremlin, the Sovie't~eneral deal with the question.
Staff, would he have been covered? One other point which Is Interesting:
Lots of things lead to war, A man on I, too, have talked with the Senator from
horseback may lead to war; 'national Mississippi (Mr. STENNIS) at length. He
hatred could lead to war; anything could was very relucant to make this expres-
lead to war. We cannot deal with all those sion on this particular amendment, be-
subjects in this bill. cause he felt that he wanted no feel-
Another important consideration is ing here in the Senate that he was try-
that there outside the Armed Forces, ing to have his voice carry Senators
was are covered by the bill, is no agency when he was far away from us. He, too,
ol; the United States which has any ap- like everybody else, wanted to be subject
preciable armed forces power, not even to debate and cross-examination. But I
the CIA, They might have some clandes- think the Senator from Maine (Mr,
tine tagge'~.Tits with rifles and pistols engag- Musicm), and I prevailed on him to feel
big in dirty tricks, but there is no capa that as he had used his privilege very
bility of appreciable military action that 'sparingly and he had this bill so close to
would amount to war. Even in the Lao his heart, this was a measure in which
thin war, the regular U.S, Armed Forces that was deserved, and I am glad to say
had to be called in to give air'support. he acted accordingly.
'd' ho minute Combat air support is re- . Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, X yield
quired you have the Armed Forces, and myself 2 minutes,
the bill becomes operative. A key control Reference has been made to communi-
w7hich would not be reached by this cation with the Senator from Mississippi
amendment even If it could, would be ' (Mr. STENNIS), and as the Senator from
control of the use of money, The fact New York (Mr. JAVITS) has explained,
is that vast sums of money were given to the Senator from Mississippi was very
Vang Pao in Laos to pay for mercenary reluctant to appear to be trying to in-'
Moo army. The use of Air America, which fluence votes here when he could not'
was a logistical operation, and not a participate personally. But we prevailed
combat operation, presumably would not upon him, and I take the opportunity to
be reached by the amendment along read that letter into the RccoRD:
it was a key factor ii CIA involvement iii JULY 19, 1873.
11.
EumvND ,S. MuSKIV,
the secret war in Laos, F51os
Finally, one point of draftsmanship. U.S, Senate,
It will be noted the amendment starts Washington, D.C.
out with the language, "Any person em- ' Dana ED: If I could he on the Floor, I
would support you fully as you push for the
01
ploYed by. That includes a foreign per-
son, as well. There are many clandestine
agents who are foreign and employed by,
In the sense of being financed, main-
tained by, and directed by Department
of the U.S. Government, which is one of
the facts of life. Are they covered by
this bill? If they are clandestine agents
who are members of foreign armies does
this amendment apply? Suppose a mem-
ber of the Soviet or Chinese, or Vietcong
armies is a CyI(1,,, "controlled American
source," does this amendment apply if
his unit goes into hostilities?
Substantive law can determine what
activities can be engaged in with respect
to foreigners in terms of pay, and so
forth. Law can determine that, but it is
hardly a methodology. You would be
dealing there with substantive a-
-passage of the War Powers Bill, as reported
by the Foreign Relations Committee, with-
out further amendments of any substance.
One amendment of substance is by the
Senator from Missouri, Mr. Eagleton, who
has done much work and has made a fine
contribution to this Important bill as it now
stands. This amendment has a prohibition of
using the C.I.A., or its funds, in war activi-
ties of the type we have used in Laos. The
experience of the C.I.A. in Laos, as well an
more recent disclosures of matters hero at
home have caused me to definitely conclude
that the entire C.I.A. Act should be fully
reviewed.
Accordingly, I already have in mind plans
for such a review of the C.I.A. Act by the
Senate Armed Services Committee and have
already started some stall work thereon. All
proposed changes, additions or deletions can
be fully developed and hearings held thereon
at that time. I have already completed, but
proaches to the law. Shall the United have not yet introduced some amendments
of my own. The proposal by the Senator
States employ foreign citizens for these from Missouri, Mr. Eagleton, to explicitly,
1":lrt' st ? r It does, In What mW11101', a11d prohibit any action by the O.I.A. of the typo
- -- tbau naatrollad, and an forh1? Wo 11ayu 11 41 111 7afloal Qr 1MV.001er A9t-vlw,y of
con net o s p
obe
e
eve Ms
,
subject matter will pass the Senate by a large
vote and will emerge from the Conference
Committee as a bill with meaning. There
are reports, which I hope are erroneous, that
a veto is in prospect if this bill passes. If
so, I feel so strongly that a meaningful bill
relating to the War Powers, and the, re,ponsi-
billties of the President and the Congress,
should be passed, and I would strongly urge
that that bill pass, the veto notwithstand-
ing. If we clutter the War Powers 13111 with
other matters we would probably kill what
is otheriso a good chance to override a pos-
sible veto.
Again, I certainly wish you well, and hope
the Committee bill in its present form can
be preserved and passed and panned by a
large vote.
Most sincere yours,
JOHN C. STENNIS,
I think those who read this e~'~eer
would agree that this is an extraor-
dinarly strong 'tomnutment from the
Senator from Mississippi, To have an-
ticipated a veto, and to have indicated
with such vigor his intention to press for
an override, I think is the kind of action
the Senator from Mississippi would
rarely take. It is because of his voice, and
that of the Senator from New York, and
my own understanding of the forces that
wont into putting this bill together, that
X reluctantly oppose the amendment of
the distinguished Senator from Missouri,
Mr. EAGLETON, Mr. President, I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
I sat here and listened with deep Inter-
est to the comments of both the Senator
from Maine (Mr. MusicIE) and the Sen-
ator from Now York (Mr. JAVrrs). They
are both men of extraordinary capability
'and good will, and I suspect that deep
clown in the inner recesses of their hearts
they know I am right. I think they would
like to vote for the Eagleton amendment.
In fact, I think they believe In it, because
what triggered tile situation that we find
ourselves in today-what triggered the
war powers bill pending before this body
today-was not the fact that all of us
went, during the recess, to academia and
hibernated with professors. We did not
just sit there and react lots of constitu-
tional lawbooks, statutes, and what have
you. It was not because a lot of thought
had to be given to the methodology, to
use the word used by the Senator from
Now York, But it was due to the fact that
for a decade we had been in all atrocious
nightmare In Southeast Asia.
This bill was not conceived In the
abstract. It was not conceived in the
ethereal. It was conceived in blood-
50,000 dead and the whole litany of what
occurred in Southeast Asia. That is why
we are debating this bill today-not be-
cause it is a prosaic idea, but because of
our recent tragic experience.
That experience has many facets--not
Only 1ib4 Quit p9' rjn;"n 11^. 'sit ,4, ,sl4 11 CA
U.S. Senator.
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000200010024-7
 Aidk'
pproved For R Iease30~4/03/11: CIA-R P75BO038'OF2000200010024-7
,' 07
y ~'' :"(;;^{i'? `",''~F jY-{'`iL ,' ~'Y.1,'?`9 1i CI ~~?'`){!:`.} ~1 r?r'.\ y
L +,-i ft JL4e1 ~+..J wcl `~.I.IL.W..Ii..la. ILL) h.1 `4-/ .I.i. Sid. ti..J
Q '"
(/ li .lA ELI W
By Judy Nicol `'' ' A 'Iy1 ;~ a tl-? -y in remarks prepared for dcliv-
)t'xsl,lnston Po t Staff wrltr, I ~{ (I (r ' - ~~ ZI I ~, Is e cry in the Senate today, called
v, f'? :, , .~~J tJ .,,.11 U. /~) G;r1' for it Commission on the Ol-
sen. John C. Stennis, chair- flee of the Presidency to ex
man of the Senate Armed National Security Act, saysiovcr the 1Valcr,;a~:c tapes and amiuc the institution.
Services Committee, Said yes- the ahency shall have no po?:the President refuses. Stennis Sen. Walter F. llondale (D-j
terday, that he hopes to hold lice, subpoena, law?enforc~.-?said. "1 think it would be the Minn.) said the American 1
h idings aimed at further r-c-I rent powers or internal secu-; most g r a v e situation that's people seem to have "one he-
rgenc ng the Central lntelin I city functions" in the Unied al'isen maybe in a hundred yond simple respect for the of
gence Ahency's invohven)ent'In States. years." flee of the Presicicnc?y. . .111
domestic affairs. P,ut the 1947 statute con.;
"The main thing is to limit tales a loophole which has ( In an ABC broadcast yestcr- stead we have be u^ to create
day, Sen. Howard Hughes (D- a monarchy out of an office in.
(CIA) operations, domestic op- served as a charter foi specia'. l.owa) said that the American tended to be the bulwar of
orations," said Stennis on foreign and domestic open-1
Face the Nation, a CBS inter tions It say r ., that the agency-people "shoula not be eiraid democracy."
of the impeachment process.
view pro ;ram, shall perform such other
?To be afraid to use (the im-
"I totally disapprove" of do- functions and duties related to
mestic political intelligence intel]i,fence atfecting the rill . peachment power) would
operations by the CI.1, said tional security as the National mean we would be placing in
the Mississippi Democrat who Seeuriy Council may from the hands of this President
is chairman of the Central In- time to time direct." and all future Presidents an
telligrence Subcommittee of Stennis, speaking of the implied power that they could
his ,Armed Services Commit- Watergate scandals that un-;do anything they wanted to in
tee. ,folded as he was cons clesciti f cleliance of the lily and the
Ile said lie was told in ,Tune, from gunshot wounds received courts . . . with inpunity,
1972, by Richard M. Helms, in a January robbery, said,'tt'ttlt immunity, Hughes said
then CIA director, that the ?As an American citizen I'nl~on ABC's Issues and Answer.
ashamed of it. (program.
CIA had no involvement in
the Watergate burglary. He The senator said that he had I "If the facts indicate that
said Helms, now ambassador' attended a recent hearing a, the President is in violation of
to Iran, "came to Illy office it the U.S. Cotll't of Appeals on ! the law, or if the President isi
very-few days tl)ereal'ter tied President li on's refusal tj refusing to obey the direct or-
assured me they did not have tin over Tapes of conversa. (lei's of the Supreme Court,
anything to do with planning tions relating to the Water- then not to use (impeachment)
or anything in connection with; gate matter. would be a failure of the sys-;
that. break-in" (of the Demo-' if the Supreme Court rules tern entirely," said Hughes.'
cratic National Committee of-'.that Mr., Nixon . should turn; A third, Democratic senator,
fices. in the Water' "ate office
building,)
Helms could not be reached'
for comment yesterday.
IIclnts' successor, William E.
Colby, has acknowledged that
the CIA had erred in prepar-
ing a psychiatric profile of
Pentagon Papers defendant
Daniel Ellsherg and in provid-
ing cameras, tape recorders r
and disguises to White House
aides E. Howard Hunt Jr.
and G. Gordon Liddy. Liddy
and Hunt were later convicted
in the Watergate break-in.
The CIA's charter, the 1947
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP75B00380R000200010024-7