Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 19, 2016
Document Release Date: 
April 14, 2005
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
June 26, 1975
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP77M00144R001100190012-0.pdf2.04 MB
^UNCLAS I FI D INTERNAL i~x~=~~!- pp ved For lel ?b MI/12/14: CIA-RDP77 14 RW?7U019 %2-0 IX gaSl ^ SECRET ROUTING AND RECORD SHEET SUBJECT: (Optional) --- FROM: EXTENSION NO. --------- --------- Acting Legislative Counsel 7D49 DATE 27 June 1975 25X1 TO: (Officer designation, room number, and DATE building) OFFICER'S COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom RECEIVED FORWARDED INITIALS to whom. Draw a line across column aher each comment.) Director Attached for your information are three items of interest from 2. - - --- --` Thursday's Congressional Record. First is a statement by Senator Mondale regarding the Rockefeller 3. -- - Commission findings. Mondale begins by emphasizing the necessity - - for a CIA and a covert action capa- 4. T bility. He praises the "reasonably thorough" Commission investigation, but criticizes many of the recoin- 5. - -` -- ---- ' mendations of the Commission as too weak. He singles out the Commissio - recommendation on the sources and 6. - - `- -^` methods legislation for special attack. He shows considerable misunderstanding of the proposal 7. in equating it with the UK's Official Secrets Act. B. Representative Badillo (D., N. Y.) has introduced a bill to create a special prosecutor to investigate and 9. prosecute violations of any federal statute by CIA or any other intelli- gence agency employees. Badillo 10. says this is necessary in light of the delegation by the Department of Justice to the CIA of the authority to t t. investigate possible criminal offenses'. 12. Senator Mathias took issue with an editorial by Hanson W. Baldwin printed in The New York Times on 13. the dangers of the current investi- gations. Mathias wrote to the Editor and has placed his letter and the 14. original editorial in the Record. STAT 15. Acting Legislative Counsel Approved For Releas 2005/1 1 14: CIA RDP77M 0144R001100190012-0 FORM FORM 61 O USE EDITIONS PREV3-62 IOUS ^ SECRET ^ CONFIDENTIAL ^ INTERNAL ^ UNCLASSIFIED (1N1 Y June 26,,1975 ~tof G0512 RECORD--SEl~1AT S11609 Approved For a ease / : CI -RDP77M00144R001100190012-0 tern as applied to employee performance and feller Commission on CIA activities circuit the legislative rocess that the its influence on the responsiveness and ac- within the United States has been pub- cu'cums antes re uire b means of Ex- countability of Federal employees to the pub- lished, we have had an opportunity to ecu lye oT ers. lie interest; and consider its findings, its conclusions anal In this br f address, I want to start (6) any other aspect of the Federal bu- begin to come to grips with its recom- the debate on the appropriate iaeme- re denty y and p may rovide the improve American governmental people mendations. It opens up many crucial dies for the abuses and issues uncov- which eilicte'nc with a government more in tune. with the issues concerning our constitutional ered by the Commission report. The need for change. rights, the functions of our Government Senate select committee will be delving Sec. 4. (a) For the purposes of this reso- and the protection of our individual into these and other related matters in lution, the select committee is authorized liberties and national interests, great detail, but nonetheless, I believe in its discretion (1) to make expenditures i approach the Commission report and we can at least begin the dialog, start- from the contingent fund of the Senate, (2) m res onsibi 1 es as a memo ing with the recommendations in the to employ personnel, (8) to hold hearings. Sfina ee ecvommit~eeonn e 1 fence Rockefeller report. (4) to sit and act at any time or place dur- a er Wl 71EP,tl i will not try to deal with all 30 ing the sessions, recesses, and adjourned p~ periods of the Senate, (5) to require, by 4-CentralIntelligence An- ll:Y We need recommendations. Rather, I want to subpena or otherwise, the attendance of a thorough and coordinated intelligence focus first on those areas which are use- witnesses and the production of correspond- a ort so as-to-provide our Government fully opened up by the report, but which ence, books, papers, and documents, (6)- to a soun~C es nossl for_ _U= require further treatment; and second take depositions and other testimony, (7) to diplomacy and our defense. An L be- on those areas in which I believe the procure the services of individual consult- ieve ere ma Fe a roe or certain recommendations are inadequate to the ants or organizations thereof, in accordance covertac ns, particularly s is EC- point of where our constitutional lib- ative Reorganization ith the provisions zsection Act 2o of f 194 46, the as essa~ =counter Fie covert actions of erties could be jeopardized. I-egisl amended,. and (8) with the prior consent o f our adversaries. s n t is spirit that The subjects lisefally a amen ddressed . but the Government department or agency con- T rave care u 1 s u ie the rye orrtt of not adequately considered include: cerned and the Committee on Rules and Ad- fie iOC eer ,ommlSSiOn on flaflljG CIA relations with state and local police; ministration, to use on a reimbursable basis aetivi ies. Constraints on physical surveillance; the services of personnel of any such depart- 1 e it is clear that the Commission. The problem of overseas connections with ment or, agency. did not the mallidate 0 a ress -ll domestic crime, especially narcotics; of foreign intolli- any other committee of the Senate, the select o e m 1y r tan ue con- genre in the United States; committee may utilize the facilities and the cerning the intelligence activities of e The responsibility for counterintelligence services of the staff of such other committee ' ni d States, t a Te]~tor i~ a se Oils activities. th hil s w e a of come -b of the Senate, or any subcommittee thereof, and wor First, the report documents the fact whenever the chairman of the select com- wwlth the aloe abUSes carriedout y that the relationship between the CIA mittee. determines that such action is neces- the CIA in their domestic eratianS. and State and local law enforcement sary and appropriate. The Commission Mould die Tvenn credit (c) Subpenas authorized by the select i lligence within the United To get a clear picture of this problem, ligence alone, once he determines that States. He-etofore, that mission largely it Is important to go behind the, "don't" the investigation is necessary to protect has been the province of the FBI. If I language of the recommendations and intelligence sources and methods, the dis- read them correctly, the recommenda- focus on the exceptions which constitute closure of which -Might,- let me stress the list of "do's" for the CTA. The excep- "might," endanger the n:ltional security.- Recommendation I. tions set forth a wide variety of actions P. 13. '- pp. 233-.334. "p. 39. ~u -2 ?p. 59. Approved For Re"-2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144 101 1 001 9001 2-0 'R F. 29. June 26, -197 C NGg~ SIONAL RECORD --SENATE S 7.1611' lpproved For Release .2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl44R0011OQ 190012-0 This particular provision, recommen Mr. President, there are no strict rec- ow please no that this recom- tion No. 18, also makes the point that ? ommendations for legal changes which mended statute would operate even if no such investigations must be coordinated they make. In effect it calls for the adop- harm were done to the national defense with the FBI whenever substantial evi- Lion of an Official Secrets Act here in the or to our diplomacy. And it does not dp- dence suggesting espionage or violation Tani ed fates. ~Je never-may h d one. ply to espionage-that already Is a crime. of Federal criminal statute is discovered. and what it would say, in effect, is that But it would apply to the revelation of This, of course, raises the question fin in effect that is classife by wrongdoing if the information were clas- iv e {mar men o a sifted. To reveal the spying on Americans, g whether such investigations may go on a.n execu when there is no substantial evidence then be protected by the force of cri- the opening of their mail, the bugging of suggesting espionage or violation of Fed- na law from isc ostlre. It wol or their phones, or plots to assassinate for- eral criminal statutes. In this connection, the first time ix, our Na on s 2S=-- eign leaders all could put you in Jail. it should be pointed out that to permit make it Illy and subject to criminal The Commission asks that this stat- Investigations of individuals in cases :Penalties for a public official in Govern- ute be drafted with ap~ropria7-_ sa where the national security merely might, gent to d sc ose or par o a con- guards for the constitutional rights of be endangered, and in ways that are not sph'ac,y t Iscose so-cane o cial allaffecte in ividuls, Thl s s a defined runs the same grave. risks of secrets. able, but a conflicting, o Wee ve. ore- abusing the concept of national security The iron of this recommendation Is over avoi s the key issue. which at we found in the Watergate case. that it wo111C1 probab in the future pre- this law would impede the nd o sera- Finally, recommendation No. 22 makes vent the public from knowing about tiny that the Commissian fort makes --- clear that physical surveillance of Agen- trans cessions and violations of the law clear is necessary. cy employees, contractors, or related per- of the kind we are now investigat I g4m How much of the information In the sonnel l whatever that might mean-can before the Senate Select Committee on re oft I wonder was secret or to secret be conducted within the United States telli Renee. onl a ew mon ago? Without pulie . on the written approval of the Director of if hat were the law the last feW years, isc osure mos o e abases dacu- Central Intelligence. it is probably likely that the American mented in the report wou d never have people would never have known, indeed been correc e . e , s aw propOsed I do not believe that the Congress or could not conduct an Investigation to by the Commission, could elpinsure the American people can accept pro- determine, whether their civil liberties t11a1pub1ic scrutiny would never flap p~p posals whereby undefined categories of had been interfered with by the CIA or ggaizi. American citizens can be spied upon, other governmental agencies. I want to emphasize- that we need to their privacy invaded, and possibly their I would, say that that recommendation boa e ro ec e i ima a re constitutional rights suspended, on the- is seriously deficient. It is based on Euro- our potential adversaries Rig we ne.:eCl voucher of the Director of Central-In- pean practice. In many European coun- even more to protect our constitiitJp, i tellige.nce. It is ironic that these provi- tries, particularly Great Britain, they are rights. The burden of proof for more laws sions would go far to legitimize precisely now beginning, to doubt the wisdom of tan we aye a rea v ps ~rii~ne the various abuses cited in the report and their own official secret acts. executive branch. Those h rnak pd which has given rise to such great public Mr. President, once again it seems to s e c r e t s ust prove that they concern. me we have to decide what is important are lus in om-so The Rockefeller Commission would in American life and, above all, it seems am no revealing any secrets when.I - place reliance, on the personnel involved, to me it is our system of freedoms and say that the committee is concluding a on the Inspector General and on a liberties. study of "leaks" to see whether "national beefed-up President's Foreign Intelli- The Government is saying, "Trust us, security" in fact has been endangered in gence Advisory Board to see that such although we have abused these liberties the past. At.this point it seems likely. spying was kept In bounds. All this would in the past, we are now forewarned and that the greatest percentage of leaks con- . be control after the fact, and the only you can trust us in the future." cern political issues that should in. fact positive check would be the Director of i believe that we need trust, but I also he debated In open democratic processes. Central In`_'lligence, who, in the past, think that the exercise of governmental The agencies will be asked to provide has often been a witting handmaiden to power when uncontrolled, when undis- their "damage assessments" of the so- Agency abuses. closed to the public, when unrestricted by called leaks that have occurred in the It seems strange, that with all this clear laws, can be very dangerous in the last several years. - -? - _ --- -- - new Executive machinery, .there is no hands of those who hold it. - In 1970, the Defense Science Board reference to the role of Congress, or in This suspicion goes back to really the found that the volume of classified scien- fact, the public, as the real check on basis of our Constitution. tific and technical information could be . future abusive secret domestic intelli- As. Thomas Jefferson once wrote: reduced by 90 percent. I do net know if Bence operations. This is a fundamental It is the tendency or things that free this percentage would also apply to dip- defect of.the Rockefeller Commission re- dom retreats and Government gains ground. lomatic secrets, but everyone dealing - port: Past abuses are to be remedied only Thus we should not be surprised to with the Federal Government is classify ity for avoiding abuses is left largely in all manner of documents, sometimes to the hands of the institutions which . stories that finally led to the current draw attention to them and sometimes abused their powers in the past. Indeed, exposure of domestic wrongdoings and to cover up, bungling, mistakes, errors of the report recommends giving them more the long-overdue Senate inquiry, the judgment, or just plain embarrass- explicit authority to investigate Ameri Commission has no trouble coming up ments-not to mention misdeeds, and can citizens. with proposals supporting legislation for crimes. Mr. President, running through the an official secrets act. It endorses the Now, this is a pretty convenient device lockefeller Commission report, following idea of a statute which would make it- for protecting one's power and image. I the recital of some very serious Invasion A criminal offense for employees or for- daresay many of us in this chamber of American liberties and the destruc- -mer employees of the CIA willfully to divulge would like to be able to classify some of to any unauthorised rson classified in- tion of due process with respect to many formation pertaining tope foreign Intelligence the things that we say, once we have had American citizens, there is a series of or the collection thereof obtained during the a chance to think about them. recommendations. course of their employment. (Recommends- The United Kingdom has an-Official In effect, It says we will let the Director tion 21..) Secrets Act of this type a is apriar- see if he cannot do better next time. Unless we are careful about the ways ently being proposed ny the' Roc -e elier There are practically no recommenda- In which we develop our laws, our ad- Commission. The indication,-, are at it tions for legal changes. Most of the rec- ministrative control and the relationship is not wor ing. A few years ago, in fact, ommendations involve internal regula- of those agencies to the Congress, we a royal commission was appointed, tory changes which, in effect, leave the can well once again see the commence- which was headed by Lord Franks, which executive free to do as he pleases despite ment of what can only be described thoroughly considered all of the difficul- a record of very serious transgressions as a secret police here in our own ties which had been encountered in their of American civAd*r d For Release2S 12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RdYob V 3 Mc6. Their conclusion was S 11612 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE June 26,= 1975_. that the law was far to - ~Q9 9 ~ must be th )roughly reed" " ` R 956$ /ib te~kr~.1.1.~dt3~{ 7 Q0~ New w Ham Tr.- Public -_---_- .- - k~.~_the en a rl P 1gPY1 g rTVITTR'... shir p e _ __ DY eniorce- ton againA 4 violation of our constitu- ment of adequate oversl ht a We need Gvoavns CALL tional rights In this society. We must not both a new legislative framework and a Mr- MANSFIELD. loin" President, I compromise this away. The basic ques- new political framework, within which suggest the absence of a quorum. Lion that Dtust be faced is whether the Intelligence operations-take place, The PRESIDING OFU`ICER. On whose recommendations of the Rockefeller The system of accountability must not time? Commission, taken in their entirety, so stop with the President. It must em- Mr. MANSFIELD. To be equally insure proper operation of the CIA that brace the Congress, I hope that -the di The d. we can for,;o the crucial protection af- President's referral of the subject of The PRESIDING OFFICER. clerk will forded all other democratic rights by the assassinations to the Senate is a sign of call the it is so ordered. The clerk will first-amencment of the Bill of Rights. a desire to have the Congress exercise The e roll. As James Madison reminds us- its rightful role in these ultimate and the roll, the roll, and assistant the lollwing lowing G Senators caned The right of freely examining public char- most difficult of responsibilities in Gov- t mn- acter and me+asure, and of free communica- ernment. swered to their names: Lion thereon Is the only effective guardian Any domestic CIA activities must be [Quorum No. 45 Leg.] of every oth,rr right. - - - carefully monitored by the congressional Allen Hart, Gary W. Pastore The Rockefeller Commission, says of oversight bodies. Any wrongdoing must Clark Mansfield Ribicofi the Bill of Rights that these freedoms be brought to the attention of the Con- Griffin Nunn are not absolute. The report states that gress and the congressional oversight The PRESIDING OFFICER. A quorum the first air: endment, as Justice Holmes bodies. And this oversight system, is not present. noted- whether it involves a joint committee, a Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, ) .??6 ti _ e theater and causing a panic." inittees, must be as representative as The Rockefeller Commission appar- even including rotat- ppar- ing membership. The key to increased ently believes that this justifies an Offi- confidence of the American people in our cial Secrets Act. intelligence and investigatory bodies for But a revelations which led to th e th t em o know that their views are in- enate uiry and to the Roc efeller.- eluded in the process by which decisions o ssion have no rove arse. In are made and authority is granted. my view, they are muc c oser to a man Our Founding Fathers were keen ob- truthfully shouting "fire" in' a theater servers of human nature. They knew and thus saving lives. The Official Secrets that the only way power and liberty Act proposegi by the Rockefeller Corn- could coexist was to pit ambition against mission coul3 in effect make it a crimi- ambition. real offense to sound the alarm when our Thus, in the final analysis, relying on t1afiV an our democratic institutions the basic principle of government by ire jeopardized by secret Government checks and balances is the only way to operations. restore the confidence in our intelligence In reviewing these concerns about the agencies so they can get on with their recommen dons o t e Rockefeller basic and vital job. Cmm- fission. am led- object to one In considering this question of con- of the reDO t' s mos r t b asic con 1 lone fid I ence , , am reminded of Thomas Jef- `.C'he Rockef`elle r Commission report ferson's clear exposition on the issue and states a how it relates to the preservation of Th e evident j within thef thi i sco e d p osn- -that fundamental rewri ng o e National Security c Is either necessa Y or appropriate. I believe this is clearly wrong. It S a so U necessary for a on ?ess itself to write the most explicit guidance in law t at it possibly can concerning the ,u o , an a jurisdiction, o the tIA o e ,an ot eo 'Mera, e roves rga ry bodies. is absolutely ap- >rOAri or won resS raw a,iile between what .is proper and what s not, bot at F ome and abroad. We must m e i-rear the coil tions an terms under cis vaTous CTA ac v les can e t; ace an on' w o s sayso. we must e- ing or rep ace such terms as "national ,C,'curt y, sources anmethods," and so For the American people to onceagain ? lave confidence in its Government, and a its intelligence operations, this difficult ask of reconciling liberty and freedom 'n the one hind, and the requirements IX national security and secrecy on the ther, must nct be left solely to the exec- ;tive branch; it must be an act of con- ensus, taken fry the entire Federal Gov- ;?rnment, and in particular, the repre- santatives of the people in Congress. Laws alone are not enough, aswe have emocracy. In the Kentucky Resolution of 1798, he said: It would be a dangerous delusion were Q silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is every the y parent of despotism: free government is founded in jealousy and not in confidence; It is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited Constitution to bind down those h rected to request the attendance of ab- sent Senators. The motion was agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER The . Sergeant at Arius will execute the order of the Senate. Pending the execution of the order, the following Senators entered the Chamber and answered to their names: Abourezk Glenn - Moss -- - Baker - Goldwater Muskie - Bartlett . Gravel Nelson - Bayh . Hansen Packwood Real] Hart, Philip A,. Pearson Bellmon Hartke Pell isentsen Haskell Percy Bides Hathaway - Proxmire Brock Helms Randolph Brooke Hollings - Roth Bumpers Hruska Schweiker Burdick Huddleston Scott, Hugh Byrd, - Humphrey Sc ot t, Harry P., Jr. Inouye W il liam L Byrd, Robert C. Jackson . Sparkman Cannon Javits Stafford Case Johnston Stennis Chi) es Kennedy - - Stevens Church Laxalt Stevenson vn Leahy Stone Culver Culver Long Symington Curtis Magnuson Taft Mathias Talmadge R `spiel McClellan Thurmond Teton McClure Tower iastland McGovern Weicker 7 annin McIntyre , Williams 'gong Metcalf Young bard Mo ale tarn g Morgan - W om we are obliged to trust with power: Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that our Constitution has accordingly fixed - that the Senator from California (Mr. the limits to which and no further our con- - VNNEY), and the Senator from Wyo- fidencemay go. ming . (Mr. McGEz) are necessarily m.. at is -- .. - th Ti: seams t o _-direction In which we must consider the report of the Rockefeller Commission and with which we must approach the task of dealing with the transgressions of Intel- ligence collecting agencies in our society over the past several years. DETERMINATION OF SENATE ELEC- TION IN NEW HAMPSHIRE The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. GARY of death in the family. an the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HAT- Fr n) are necessarily absent. e ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- p re (Mr. LEAHY). A quorum is present. is the parliamentary situation? The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- pore. We are now in the 1 hour of debate preceding the vote on cloture. - Mr. CANNON. What time will the live already seen. ::"Many laws on the statute determination of the untested election i Approve For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP~, MO A ?O6flbq~ pro tem- June- 26; 191 proved For Rek2s ZDU5/'fZi'I~: fA=KI3P77M001 4R 1100190012-0 6281 tors that I am proposing would be self- domestic economy. Instead of imposing that; availability of oil and equipment and supporting, with the company or coun- high prices on the American people, such personnel shortages-not price-are the real try requesting the service paying a USDA a program should emphasize reasonable constraints on production, once the price goes fee. and equitable conservation measures and beyond $7. The Senate Agriculture Committee has - encourage greater competition in deter- The other major opposition to restraining domestic oil prices comes from ideologues In begun hearings on the grain inspection mining the price of oil. Such a program the Ford Administration whose-opposition to scandal. I hope the House will decide to would be compatible with our, effort to `economic action by a democratic government move on this problem soon as well. We reduce domestic energy consumption and' is so great that they see a competitive market cannot allow our grain exports to be expand research and development on where none exists. 'Their concern for free imperiled by corruption, I am convinced alternative sources of energy. enterprise is commendable, but they ignore by - t o that we must act promptly in order to In an excellent editorial published in the facts. Foreign oil prices are set maintain foreign grain customers. the June 24 edition of the New York has risen to the price of doma esti c oil has risen to meet it. That is not competition; Times, Congressman ANDREW MAGUIRE Of that is shared monopoly. And so long as mo- New SELF`-SUFFICIENCY New Jersey addresses the critical issue of nopoly power influences the price of domestic domestic oil prices. His comments merit oil, it must be restrained. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentle- man from Iowa (Mr. BEDELL) is recog- nized for 5 minutes. Mr. BEDELL. Mr. Speaker, in recent months we have heard much discussion in this Chamber about the need for re- ducing our dependence on foreign sources of oil and for attaining greater energy self-sufficiency. There, is little disagree- ment over the importance of these goals. However, securing a consensus on a pro- gram for achieving them is an entirely diff erent matter. The administration's energy program seeks to raise U.S. fuel prices to artificial- ly high levels in order to discourage con- sumption and encourage domestic invest- ment in energy exploration, research and' development. On the international front, administration officials are attempting to secure agreement among the oil-consum- ing nations to negotiate with the oil pro- ducers for a minimum floor price for foreign oil. At home, President Ford has called for the decontrol Of domestic oil prices and the deregulation of natural gas, and has proposed an ERDA budget that places a distinctly top priority on nuclear development and synthetic fuel production. The focal point of the administration's energy strategy is high oil prices. We are all aware of how the OPEC cartel has ad- ministered the international price of oil. In the last 18 months, OPEC has in- creased the price of oil fivefold, and it has just announced that it plans another increase for September. The administration's response to this price fixing has been to advocate the negotiation of a minimum floor price for foreign oil . And , -what is even more dis- turbing, administration spokesmen con- tinue to argue that the price of domestic oil should be allowed to rise to OPEC levels. In my view, this high-price energy strategy is an unnecessarily risky policy that holds ominous implications for the American people and the American econ- omy. Rather than stoically accepting, and indeed even encouraging, high en- ergy prices, we should be implementing a program designed to force down the excessively high price of oil, both foreign and domestic. Higher and higher prices will only prolong the recession and con- tribute to greater inflation while further increasing the profits of the international oil companies and decreasing the pur- chasing power of the American people. What this Nation needs is an energy again this year, with a new President and a new majority in Congress. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES RELATING TO IL- LEGAL CIA DOMESTIC _ INTELI I- GENCE ACTIVITIES - The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a- previous order of, the House, the gentle- man from New York (Mr. BADJLLO) is recognized for 10 minutes. Mr. BADILLO, Mr. Speaker, in recent months, we have witnessed growing pub- lic awareness and concern over invasions of privacy and surveillance of private citizens by agencies of the U.S. Govern- ment. These feelings have been fueled by allegations in the press and sub- sequent information released by various Federal officials - about the extent to which illegal, improper, and unethical activities were engaged in by agencies of the Federal Government in carrying out domestic intelligence and surveillance functions. Last week the public learned of the shocking magnitude of these ac- - tivities when the President finally re- leased the "Report of the Commission on CIA -Activities Within the United States." .. The " statements contained in - the RO MO er ommissiOn s repot , c ar y indicate a persons, in -performing various Intel Fence an Ti ssurveillance ac- tivities on behalf of i~IA. exceedgcl, that agency's lawful authorit and vio- lated the individual rights an liberties o American ci izens as protected by the Constitution and many Federal statutes. These appears to be little question that the conduct of such acts went far beyond that which was vital to protect the na- tional security of the United States. The term "national security" is a broad, vague generality. Its contours should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the first amendment and specific statutes designed to protect individual freedoms and privacy. Based . , p program that will help it gain control of trips dp e?t i ro i is i i o u t conclude that the _ careful reflection, and I commend them The House Commerce Committee has to my- colleagues. adopted a price rollback, authored by Repre- The editorial follows: - sentative Bob Eckhardt of Texas, setting an average price ceiling on domestic oil of $7.50 OPEC AND ITS PARTNERS IN MONOPOLY a barrel. While somewhat more generous to (By Andrew Maguire) the oil industry than the costs of production WASHxNCTON.---The Organization of Petro- justify, the Eckhardt amendment will save leum Export Countries is a cartel -that sets consumers billions of dollars in inflated en- the price of oil produced in the Arab states. ergy costs. The Energy Emergency Act of 1974 it should not, however, set the Brice of directed that the price of American oil would oil produced, and consumed in America. be set in America, not around a conference W_..o Uu4,ne,., a4.,:.,., table of Arab oil producers. President Nixon gy sources; it is political. As OPE yet -another price increase-to the 1973 level for imported oil-i lshing that Mr. Simon. and the ministration still. argue that th oil should rise to - whatever le chooses. considers V6 times, is aston- price of I OPEC mption, all energy - supplies. - But these on which Congress and the Admi agree-neither justify nor require oil prices four times what they Inflation and recession-a disaste economy and for the consumer. needs- stration Four months after the oil emba o, Con- gress passed an energy bill rolling Iack the maximum price of new, domestic it from the $11 OPEC price to $7.09 a bar All. Presi- Because of that veto, we paid $11;T llion more for less domestic oil in 197 han. I,,. 1973. Two years ago the average- price of domestic oil was $3.50 a barrel; a ear later it was $7.05. And as a result, the 1 Indus= try's after-tax return on equity as risen to a level nearly 50 per cent higher. than the business average. If the Ford Administra tion has its way, and all price controls are 'lifted, the price will hit $13 a barrel and more which, combined with Mr. Ford's two $1 tariffs, will cost the economy at least $36 billion. If, instead, domestic oil prices were rolled back to a level closer to what a truly free market would set, we would save about $7 billion a year. Such a rollback would free dollars now wasted in inflated fuel prices to be spent in depressed areas of the econ- omy. The $7-billion figure, developed from Library of Congress studies, assumes the. price of "old oil" is rolled back from $5.25 a barrel to $4.25 a barrel and the price of "new oil" Is reduced from $11-plus a bar- rel to no more than $7 a barrel. This pol- icy would guarantee the oil companies aver- age prices 50 per cent greater than they charged just two years ago. The industry argues that it needs unlim- ited prices and profits as "Incentives" to drill more domestic oil. But industry apologists did not discover $7 to be an inadequate in- centive until after oil prices hit $11. In 1972, the National Petroleum Council estimated the average price would have to rise to $3.65 a barrel by 1975 to stimulate maximum pro- duction Yet as new domestic oil rices have its energy future App Tua dlFp3ail R fea9eff3 eH41n ~63yFK ibJVl i44 FUN 1K 09 R the C.L 01s o5mestic H 6282.. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --HOUSE. June 26, 1975 surveillance activities 'ylgg( iMf fld die ~Y~ E a pte5't ~~Praus~~i didtdfy78UV90t-44MI itit9 fot"cf1C?i ointment of a law. to an extent which a roac lamed-tie committee on Courts, Civil Liberties, and special prosecutor with exclusive 'uris- erosion of constitution overnment, the Administration of Justice has been diction to investigate-and to prosecute I am therefore, both shocked and des- investigating the question of illegal sur- offenses arising out of the CIA's domestic moved at e w o inadequate mea- veillance and has pending before it legis- intelligence and surveillance activities. surer proposed to remedy these abuses, lation which would end the practices of firmly believe that )nirough the including~, the prosecution of any persons - warrantless surveillance techniques. As a establishment of an independent prose- associate wit the or o er v- member of that subcommittee I intend to cutor will the questions raised by the ernment i ence or law en orcement advocate early committee action to bring Rockefeller Commission.: be answered to agencies for acts w is the Rockefeller this legislation to the floor of the House. the satisfaction of the American people Commission states had been "plainly un- Similarly, the House Judiciary Subcom- and restore their trust and confidence in lawful." mittee on Civil and Constitutional our constitutional government. We are told that the CIA conducted Rights, with oversight jurisdiction over The framers of our Constitution, aware illegal mail intercepts, with the knowl- the FBI, has been other questions with of the need to both defend a new nation edge of atleast three Postmasters Gen- respect to the illegal surveillance of and prevent abuses by government, eral, opening, examining and photo- American citizens, including abuses of in- sought to give our society strength and graphing thousands of letters belonging formation and files. Given the evidence security by providing that freedom of to private,litizens and at least one Mem- already obtained by the subcommittee, I speech, press, religion, and assembly ber of the: very body. Yet the Commis- urge my colleagues on that subcommit- should not be abridged. They recognized sion would merely have the President tee to prepare appropriate legislation to that activities to protect our Nation's se- direct such operations be ceased. end such practices., curity at the expense of representative We are told that the CIA collected in- Finall , there is the serious question of government would provide no real re- formation and compiled dossiers on an invests a ion an ossf a rosecu ion curity for our Republic. This thought. wa., thousands of Americans who did nothing of all offenses and violations of any Fed- eloquently expressed in 1937 by Mr. Chie more than. exercise their constitutional eral statute by persons by or on behalf Justice Hughes: right to- dissent. Yet the Commission of the CIA or any other in a el; ce_ or . The greater importance of safeguarding would only have these files destroyed. law enforcement agency of the Federal the community from incitements to the We are. informed that the CIA engaged Government arisin out of the conduct of overthrow of our institutions by force and in a wide variety of illegal activities domestic intelligence' or coun erin i violence, the more imperative 1s the need to against members of. the news media in ence ac ve ies. preserve inviolate the constitutional rights an effort to discover news sources. And President Ford expressed his concern of free speech, free press and free assembly yet the Commission would suggest only about this question urIng his press con- in order to maintain the opportunity for free that guidelines be promulgated by the ference on June 9, 1975, stating iEF at a political discussion, to the end that govern- CIA itself in order to limit the number would "ask the Attorney General s u meat may be responsive to the edwill, . mf the ofreoccurs ence5. all the materials gathered by the Comy people and that changes, if desired, may be obtained by peaceful means. Therein lies the The litany goes on and on,-running the mission on any matter to determine security of the Republic, the very founda- whole garrut of activities from bugging whether ac ion should e'un undertaken tion of constitutional government. (Dr;- and burglary to wiretapping and physical against any in ivi ua s. According o Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, 365 (1937). surveillance, by the CIA alone, by the a story in this morning's Washington I urge my colleagues to review the CIA and the FBI, by the CIA in conjunc- Post, the Attorney General is shocked legislation I have introduced today. I wel- tion with the White House, and finally by the still secret unpublished informa- come their comments and support. The by the CIA enlisting the assistance of tion he has seen on the CIA's activities following is the text of the bill: organized crime in alleged assassination and plans to proceed with an investiga- H.R. 8281 plots against foreign government officials. tion. However, he added that it may take The content of the CIA conducting its 2 or 3 months to decide how to proceed. A bill to provide for, and assure the inde- own house cleaning and putting itself I advocate an immediate investigation pendence of, a Special Prosecutor, and for other purposes back in order would not seem so a usor and take s rong exception to granting t a Be it enacted by the Senate and house of were we able to rely on an equate sYS- A orne~ enera_ an _ Department of Representatives of the United States of Aneer- tem of checks and safe uards to discover Justice the response il.e y or pursuing ice in Congress assembled, actual and tenses. However, this matter. I ca your attention o page SHORT TITLE given the findings o e Rockefeller owe Rockefeller Commission's re- SECTION 1. This Act may be cited. as the Com 2mission. that, the Department of port. It states, with respect to responsi- -special Prosecutor Act of 1975". Justice, the various Postmasters General, bility for the supervision and control of APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL PROSECUTOR and the several law enforcement and m- the CIA: - ? .. SEC. 2. (a) The United States District Court, vestigatiye a eriCies O the execu Ve The Department of Justice also exercises an for the District of Columbia, sitting en bane, branch refrained nom investigating an oversight-role iii roug its power to initiate shall appoint a panel of ,three of its mem- even aCtec: in com lcl y wl -Effe-CIA_ prosecu oLT n for criminal nlsconioucct. For a bers, hereinafter in this Act referred to as conclusive l demonstrates that there is perl~oof over 20 years, oweveran xg - "panel". Any vacancy on the panel shall be not and cannot be sue a system. in ee ment existed Between e De par en o filled in the same manner as the original _U t CIA providing a the appointment. the events of the as sever years have . Justice and the gency was o investigate allegations of raised serious questions about the- will- ~- - (b) The panel is empowered to and shay entries met By ULA employees or agen w ec ta promptly appoint a Special Prosecutor, w:: ingness and ability of the intelligence volved Government money or property or r Of of Speci'. and investigative agencies of the execu- Iii a involve oopera one secur v. I TPow- shall head an co al Prosecuto. occur In five branch to police themselves, let alone ing the investigation, the Agency determined and to fill any v vacaancy y which al that t ere was no reasonable as s- T- the position of Special Prosecutor. initiate-needed reform. lieu a crime had been comWfffU~ , or at (c) Participation in the selection of the Obviously, the Congress must enact operational security aspec prec u e prose- panel shall not in and of itself disqualify a legislation designed to insure that such cu Ion, c se was no. Lie- -- judge in any proceeding in which the Office abuses will no longer be permitted to take par men o us ce. of Special Prosecutor is involved. However, a judge place in our free society. I am hopeful The Commission has found nothing to in- who serves on the panel is li- that the select committees in both the dicate that the CIA abused the function feed from participating in any proceeding ding in House and Senate now conducting their given it by the agreement. The agreement, which the Office of Special Prosecutor Is in- however, involved the A for- volved. own independent investigations of the Agency directly in CIA and cther intelligence and law en- bidden law enforcement activities, and repre- sented an abdication by the Department of SEC. 3. (a) The Special Prosecutor shall be Justice of its statutory responsibilities. compensated -at the rate provided for level ernment v ill call for appropriate legis- IV of the Executive Schedule under section lative action. I trust that the President Under the circumstances, one must 5315 of title 5, United States Code will also forward to the Congress his rec- - question the ability o e ear merit (b) The Special Prosecutor may employ ommendation in this area. However, we of Justice to conduct a proper and ag- and fix the compensation of personnel in the need not delay action while these com- gressive investigation. es O}-Deis Pea- Office of Special Prosecutor as he reasonably mittees undertake their investigations. son that have today introduced egos a- determines to be necessary, without regard Approved For Re ease - P77M00144R001100190012-0 June 26, 1975 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --HOUSE H 6283 to the provisionO*pmve,cJ OtlRaWaswMSit2~1.4 e> t` .DRt717Mwc11t44RMIfMUQ tZ-(W be heard and deter- Code, governing appointments in the com- States Code (relating to immunity of wit- mined by a district court of three judges e+4 ti ve ser d ith t d t h p v ce, an regar w ou ap- o c ter 54 and subchapter III. of chapter 53 of such title (relating to classification and Gen-. eral Schedule pay rates), but at rates not to" exceed the maximum rate for GS-1.8 ,of the General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5. United States Code. (c) The Special Prosecutor may procure personal services of experts and consultants, as authorized by section 3109 of title 5, Unit- ed States Code, at rates not to exceed the per diem equivalent of the rate for 08-18 of the General Schedule section 5332 of title 5, United States Code. (d) Every department or agency of the Federal Government is authorized to make available to the Special Prosecutor, on a reimbursable basis, any personnel the Spe- cial Prosecutor may request. Requested per- sonnel shall be detailed within one week after the date of the request unless the Spe- cial Prosecutor designates a later date. An individual's position and grade in. his de- partment or agency shall not be prejudiced by his being detailed to the Special Prosecu- tor. No person sliali be detailed to the Spe- cial Prosecutor; without his consent. (e) For the purposes of subchapter III of chapter 73. of title 5, United States Code, the Special Prosecutor and. the personnel of the Office of Special Prosecutor shall be deemed employees in an executive agency. JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITY OF THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR SEC. 4- (a) The Special Prosecutor has ex- clusive jurisdiction to investigate and to prosecute in the name of the United States-m- . all offenses or allegations of offenses arising out of the conduct of domestic in- telligence or counter-intelligence activities and the operation of any other activities within the United States by the Central Intelligence Agency or any other intelligence or law enforcement agency of the Federal Government; (2) all violations or suspected violations of any Federal statute by any intelligence or law enforcement agency of the Federal Government or by any persons by or on be halt of any intelligence or law enforcement agency of the Federal Government including but not limited to surreptitious entries, sur- veillance, wiretaps, or illegal opening or monitoring of the United States mail; and (3) such related matters which he con- sents to have assigned to him by the At- torney General' of the United States. (b) The Special Prosecutor is authorized to take any action necessary and proper. to perform his functions and carry out the purposes of this Act, including- (1) Issuing instructions to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other domestic' investigative agencies of the United States for the collection and delivery solely to the Office of Special Prosecutor of information and evidence bearing on matters within the jurisdiction of the Special Prosecutor, and for safeguarding the integrity and inviola- bility of all files, records, documents, physical evidence, and other materials obtained or prepared by the Special Prosecutor; (2) conducting proceedings before grand juries; (3) framing and signing indictments; (4) signing and filing informations; (5) contesting the assertion of executive privilege or any other testimonial or evi- dentiary privilege; (6) conducting and arguing appeals In the United States Supreme Court, notwith= standing the provisions of section 518 of title 28, United States Code; (7) instituting, defending, and conduct- ing civil and criminal litigation in any court; and (8) exclusively performing the functions conferred upon the Attorney General of the which relate to matters wlthin.the exclusive Jurisdiction of the Special Prosecutor ap- pointed under this Act, are transferred to the Special Prosecutor as of the date . on which he takes office. (b) The Special Prosecutor Is authorized to request from any department or agency of the Federal Government any additional files, records, documents, or other materials which he may deem necessary or appropriate to the conduct of his duties, functions, and respon- sibilities under this Act, and each depart- ment or. agency shall furnish such materials to him expeditiously, unless a court of com- petent jurisdiction shall order otherwise. (c) The Special Prosecutor shall keep in- violate and safeguard from unwarranted dis- closure all files, records, documents, physical evidence, and other materials obtained or prepared by the Office of Special Prosecutor. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION SEC. 7. The Administrator of General Serv- ices shall furnish the Special Prosecutor with such offices, equipment, supplies, and services as are authorized to be furnished to any agency or instrumentality of the United States. SPECIAL PROSECUTOR'S TERM OF OFFICE SEC. 8. (a) The Office of Special Prosecutor shall terminate three years after the date the panel first appoints a Special Prosecutor. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of sub- section (a), the Office of Special Prosecutor is authorized to carry to conclusion litigation pending on the date such office would other- wise expire. REPORTS SEC. 9. The Special Prosecutor shall make as full and complete a report of the activities of his office as is appropriate to the panel, to the Attorney General of the United States, and to the Congress, on the first and second anniversaries of his taking office and not later than thirty days after the termination of the Office of Special Prosecutor. REMOVAL OF SPECIAL PROSECUTOR SEC. 111. The panel has the sole and exclu- sive power to remove the Special Prosecutor. The only grounds for removal are.gross dere- liction of duty, gross impropriety, or physical or mental Inability to discharge the powers and duties of his office. EXPEDITED REVIEW PROCEDURE Insofar as any question presented shall have been previously determined by the Supreme Court, notwithstanding that the previous determination occurred In. litigation involv- ing other parties. FUNDING SEC. 12. There are authorized to be appro- priated such sums as are necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act, and, notwith- standing any other provision of law, the Spe- cial Prosecutor shall submit directly to the Congress requests for such funds as he con- siders necessary to carry out his responsi- SEC. 13. If the provisions of any part of this Act, or the application thereof to any person, or circumstances, are held invalid, the provisions of other parts and their ap- plication to other persons or circumstances DISCLOSURE OF MEDI E IN- SPECTION REPORTS A LURE. man from Ohio (Mr. VANnc) is recog- nized for 5 minutes. Mr. VANIK. Mr. Speaker, irr 1972, the Congress enacted legislation to improve the Social Security Act. Many of these amendments were designed to reform the operation of the medicare program. Among these reforms was section 299D providing for public disclosure of survey reports on institutions such as nursing homes, labs, and hospitals. This provision. first passed the Senate in 1970 and was again added to H.R. 1 by the Senate Finance Committee in 1972. As the Senate report stated: At present, information as to whether a hospital, skilled nursing facility, or other organization fully meets the statutory and regulatory requirements relating to condi- tions for participation for medicare and medicaid or whether tt.has significant defl- ciencies is enerall v il bl l t , g y a a a e on y o the SEC. It. (a) The sole and exclusive pro- facility Involved, and certain State and Fed- cedure for the review of the validity of any eral agencies. Physicians and the public, in provision of this Act shall be as follows: general, are currently unaware as to which (1) Any defendant who challenges the institutions have significant deficiencies and validity of this Act in a criminal case or pro- which do not. seeding shall file a motion to. discuss not later than, fifteen days after service of the As a result, the committee pointed out indictment or information. Such motion that- shall be heard and determined by a district The Committee believes that In the absence court of three judges, convened pursuant to of public knowledge about the nature and section 2284 of title 28, United States Code, extent of deficiencies of individual facilities, as soon as possible but in no case later than it is difficult for physicians and the public twenty days after the filing of the motion. to rationally choose among health care (2) Any person who challenges the validity facilities. of this Act in connection with a civil action or proceeding shall do so by motion filed In addition, the committee noted: with the appropriate United States district This-lack of information makes it nearly court. The district court shall immediately impossible to effectively direct (public) con- his exclusive jurisdiction..,. -, 28, United States Code, as'soon as possible DELEGATION but in no case later than twenty days after SEC. 5. The Special Prosecutor is authorized the filing of the motion. to delegate any of his functions to person- nel of the Office of Special Prosecutor, and to determination of the district court of three experts and consultants retained pursuant judges under paragraph (1) or (a) of this to section 3(c) . section, any party may file an appeal from that determination In the United States Su- TRANSFER AND ACQUISITION OF FILES AND - preme Court. The Supreme Court shall ex- - pedite to the greatest extent possible its de SEC. 6. (a) All files, records, documents, ciston on such appeal. and other materials in the possession or- (b) The expedited review procedure of this control of the Department of Justice, or any section shall not apply to any challenge to other department or agency of Government, the validity of any provision of this Act Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO011001900.12-0 Ju3te 26; 19 *proved For R~,1R9?#h1 I ( 7M@~VAF 01-100190012-0 power, Korea would be perceived by luctantly conclude, however, that this Japan as a threat. If that-unfriendly administration has assigned transporta- power were to control the waters between tion proposals a low priority on the list Korea and Japan, that threat would be of its national concerns. - - - real, and Japan would have to make some Since March, my subcommittee has reaction to it. For.. that reason, continued United States interest in an independent South' Korea is important to.Japan. It is also important to another Asian nation, a na-. tion with significant diplomatic interests in common with the United States-the People's Republic. of China. A unified Korea in the hands . of an unfriendly power would also be a threat to China. It would be a gateway to Manchuria, the industrial heartland of China. China Is thus also interested in seeing that Korea is not -dominated by an unfriendly power-and today, unlike 25 years ago, China realizes that the United States is a friendly power, with no desire for - I believe that transportation- will be- hegemony in Asia. come one of the major issues of the sev- own right. It has developed'into a major industrial nation,-with a rising standard of living and with important trade con-. nections to the,United States..; South Korea is an 'example of a. situa- tion where the United States can and should maintain a military committment to an ally. The land forces of South Ko- rea are extensive -and of high quality; and South Korea thus provides the land force element whichis not an appropri- ate American contribution to any pos= sible future conflict arising from North Korean aggression. The United States is enabled by the South Korean develop- ment of adequate land forces to provide to the alliance those forces which, we are- best suited to provide: air and sea forces. Such an arrangement Is appropriate to the best interests and to the capabilities of both parties,: and creates a situation where the advantages of alliance out. weigh any possible disadvantages. It Is thus in our interest to maintain our alliance with Korea, and to make- clear to North Korea, through our dec- larations, our unmistakable resolve to aid our South Korean ally in the event of North Korean aggression. We must never repeat our error, which led to the Korean war of 25 years-ago, of stating that Ko- rea does not constitute an important in- terest of the United States, and of giving the mistakeny impression that we would not use military force to aid South Korea in the event of aggression. South Korea is an important ally of the United States, an ally which continues to maintain its own defense in such a way that the land war aspect of a Korean conflict would not have to fall on us. It Is .thus in our interest in every way to continue our committment to Korea. I have no doubt that we shall do so. GING ON TRANSPORT LEGISLATION S 11699 lished a letter which I wrote concerning the need for a constructive review of U.S. Intelligence efforts and the statutes which underlie, guide, and limit those efforts. Because this subject will be of been promised. a, new_ highway bill, continuing interest to the Senate during Scarcely a week passes that the White the months ahead, I ask unanimous con- House and the Department of Trans- sent that the text of my letter be printed portation do not give us assurances that in the RECORD together with a copy of their proposals are on the way. Now it is Mr. Baldwin's article. .Tune, and nothing has been forthcom- There being no objection, the mate- ing. rial was ordered to be printed in the It is a sad commentary; Mr. President, RECORD, as follows: on the White House and the various INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES: A NEED FOR NEW agencies in charge of transportation. We LAws are moving through an energy scarcity, To THE EDfOR: our rural roads are falling into decay, Hansan Baldwin (Op-Ed May 8) puts his congestion and pollution still clogs our finger on many of the key issues in his call cities, many States are running out of for a constructive examination by the Con- Interstate money, and the administra- gress of U.S. intelligence activities. As a mom- how often. they travel, what kind of transportation they will use, and how they will get to work. Yet there is no leadership . from the executive branch. What we need is a national transpor- tation policy, a sense of transportation investment priorities, which will assure the American people that the most mo- bile Nation on earth will not become immobilized. as our supplies of energy become imperiled. I can no longer wait for the adrninis- tration proposals. Today, I am announc- ing a comprehensive series of hearings on the future of the highway program and the importance of national trans- portation policy. In these hearings, which will center around specific issues, we. will explore indepth the directions of transportation policy for this decade and beyond. Our witness list includes administra- tion witnesses; State, and local officials; citizens' and environmental groups;- transit officials; academicians; and two former Federal Highway Administra- tors.-- We expect these hearings to have an extra dimension, for we are dealing with a set of circumstances unlike any we have faced before. I have informed the witnesses that we do not want to hear a restatement of old arguments; we want to explore the premises underlying our transportation policy and leave our- selves open to a wide range-of options, either to -continue programs which are effective or to restructure the entire highway program. Meanwhile, these witnesses should have the opportunity to review the ad- ministration's proposals. I urge the President, the Secretary of Transporta- tion, and the Office of Management and Bud;end this inexcusable delay and the table so that my subcommittee and the Congress can debate them on the merits ber of the Senate Select Committee to Study Government Operations with Respect to 5n- telligence Activities, i am- convinced that the Senate can make a constructive Investi- gation--and. indeed, that such an investiga- tion is sorely needed. In the aftermath of Watergate and follow- ing a series of shocking revelations of the abuse of power, it is clear that one of t?he most important tasks facing the Congress 18 to determine the proper role of intelligence agencies within our constitutional system of government. Thirty years' experience has proven that the existing legal foundation for our intelligence agencies, eestablished in 1947, is inacjequate. It is necessary to write new laws, to draw new guidelines for our in- telligence agencies. _ That is why Senator Mansfield and I pro- posed in October of 1974 that the Senate es- tablish a select committee to make a detailed ,study of the legal authorities of all U.S. intelligence agencies, foreign and domestic, and of the over-all U.S. intelligence require. ments. It is an astonishiin fact for example that there is no specific authority for aL covert o erations b the C.LA. an here in the law. I th ast it has been ar ue at the President mpow 12Y- t ak_ Security Act -of 1947 to assign "intelligence tions are subsumed under the meaW of "'in- elligen_ce activities." Covert activities of some kind might be, necessary in some future circumstances. There must be sound guidelines consistent -with constitutional guarantees. Moreover, the distinctions between foreign. and domes- tic are-far less clear now than they may have seemed in the years just following World War U. Technological advance, a boon to the agen- cies, has proven to he a threat to constitu- tional guarantees. It is clear that secrecy and open democratic government have proven to be uneasy partners. It is my view that there is a requirement for a thoughtful redefinition of our national intelligence needs. I am convinced that the Select Committee on Intelligence offers the best means of resolving the type of ques- tions enumerated by Mr. Baldwin and in the nonpartisan, thorough and considered way demanded by -the dimensions of the problem. CTIARLZS McC. blATxras, Jr., WASUINCTON, May 8, 1975. OF T11E O ~1~~~ 1s not much doubt it edeasel20 n(1' .: GIA-PIpW, 77rM,,0Q144 Q"9 1 Diet secret police. ,.~ S 1170C CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --SENATE June 26, J9.75-- accurate or irresponsible press accounts and self-serving politicians have greatly dam- aged United States intelligence organiza- tions, Some crippling restrictions already im- posed are now being followed by extensive and num"sous investigations into every facet of intelligence and counterintelligence, which may result in new and dangerous exposure o:: organizations, methods and per- sonnel. One of the most damaging and irresponsi- ble leaks In United States intelligence history-the widely published accounts of the salvag-'ng of the sunken Soviet sub- marine-al:?eady has occurred, with- the media, in the name of freedom, damaging the defense of freedom. Nor is it encouraging that The New York Times allowed the columnist Jack Anderson to trigger its. own actions. The consequent publication by The Times and all other media of a fantastic technological feat and an intelligence coup still incomplete could cause immense potential damage. One need only recall the broken codes of World War II, and, in recent history, the nasty surprises new, Soviet weapons provided in Vietnam and in the 1973 Arab-Israeli war. The current investigations, therefore-un- less they at e to be of great aid and comfort to those win would destroy the system of political fr. edom that makes such investi- gations po:rsible-must concentrate on the constructiv>, not the destructive; on the future, not the past. They must avoid, at all costs, any more public exposure of secret intelligence meth- ods, technilogy or personnel. No intelli- gence organization, even in a democracy, can be a completely open book if it is to be worth it: cost. But there are some key questions that require reassessment. Are them, for instance, too many semi- independent intelligence agencies, each vying for power? Or does each have its im- portant specialized role and does each act as check-ref n on the others? Should ti.e director of Central Intelligence be given more power-to knock heads to- gether, to merge, to allocate tasks? Or would. this continue and expand an already dan- gerous centralization of power? Intelligence and counterintelligence are twins. Wha :, particularly, should be the rela- tionships between the Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation,.- and whoshauld do-what in counterespionage and countei-subversion? It is eas; to dismiss the Communist end radical and terrorist threats as bogeymen; yet the capability of Puerto Rican nation- alists and radical Weathermen to bomb pub- lic places repeatedly without detection-and the ability of so well-known a figure as Patty Hearst to remain hidden in an American undegrounc, speaks badly indeed for present and recent attempts of our intelligence serv- ices to corn tat espionage, subversion or even simple anar ;hy. How does one define the thin line between freedom an-1 license, security and repression the "right -t) know" and irresponsibility? The political exi.remists and fanatics, in pursuit of revolution, believe that the ends literally justify any neans. United States intelligence agencies can never embrace such a concept, without ulti- mately aldi ig the hidden enemy. The adop- tion of such a policy-the ends justifying any means-would subvert our own institutions. Yet there is a nagging problem here; a threat exists and it cannot be met by mouthing shibboleths How should authority over our intelligence services at the top level be exercised? In- telligence Ic. a tool of government; as such it can be t' irned by those who control it to secret intelligence it is clear that only :: handful of Congressmen, picked for ability, judgment and discretion and devotion to the common good, can be kept fully informed. Intelligence-facts, secrets, our own and the opposition's-meariej, today and for the future, security-the difference between, the life and death of a nation. - Granted the need, how then do you keel: intelligence apolitical, freed from the am- bivalent pressures of domestic politics, in a milieu such as Washington, which is high- ly partisan? And, ultimately, the larger question-the unresolved residue of Watergate-how do you curb - executive power without crippling it and how do you operate a democratic govern- ment, or for that matter, any government without secrecy? - FOR FIRST-CLASS AIR FAR Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. yollffeffit, last: month I introducelpOM Il, S. 1698, tc amend the 201T, Revenue Code by eliminating deduction for the first-class component of air travel as ar ordinary and necessary business expense - Recently, there have come to my at- tention two press items supporting this legislation. Mr. President, I ask unani- mous consent that an editorial from the Sacramento Bee and an opinion column from the Louisville Times be printed ir. the RECORD. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD as follows: [From the Sacramento Bee, May 15, 19751 FLYING HIGH Many tax benefits which the government allows as the ordinary and necessary cost of doing business are legitimate and there is no quarrel with them. Others are not-to an extent that may surprise the general tax- payer. Critics contend the definition of "ordinary and necessary"-with a 48-cent tax subsidy for every dollar of deductible business ex- pense-has been stretched beyond the break- Ing point in a number of areas. - Sen. Edward M. Kennedy says the average citizen has been a silent partner at many high-living business functions: The cor- porate host pays half the bill himself but sticks the taxpayer with the other half. The Massachusetts Democrat says it costs the government hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of dollars to maintain the extrava- gant executive in style. Kennedy told the Senate that whatever the complexity of other aspects of the business expense issue, the tax break allowed for first- class air travel is one of the least justifiable and that's why he was prompted to introduce legislation to eliminate it. Based on Civil Aeronautics Board figures, .the bill would bring in an. additional $280 million in tax revenue this year, $342 million next year and as much as $431 million in 1978. Nothing in the bill would prevent the ex- ecutive from flying first class: the additional cost simply would be treated as a nonde- ductible luxury item In a period of concern i..aac 1anut, 'Nov. tine couple seated behind me attracted the attention of my seatmate., a Chicago newspaperman. "Your governor (of Kentucky) and his wife are the only gubernatorial party I've seen not flying first-class, up front," he said in won- der. Ile referred to the fact that Gov. and Mrs. Wendell Ford were happily seated with hot pallol in the less spacious, less gracious-but cheaper--section of the aircraft. Gov. Ford made no big deal about flying economy class;. able or otherwise, for such frugality. a $1 billion state budget, the dollar sav- ard, I believe, for other state employees given their choice, would wing off on order confines of the first-class section. v. Ford is now Sen. Ford and I have ire that taxpayers are subsidizing their first- class travel. They are the business and pro- fessional people on expense account, The ex- pense accounts subsequently become federal tax deductions. And you and I and every other taxpayer help foot the bi.l for those ritzy flights. Sen. Kennedy's bill would allow deduc- tions only for legitimate, business-related flights that are in the coach (or economy) cl ass. . In this time of d,:ep recession, there Is no justification for a loophole In the tax laws that requires thehard-pressed average taxpayer to subsidize the comforts of frst- class airfare for traveling executives," Sen Kennedy said. The senator also noted that outlawing fir=- class flights as deductible expense it.- would produce P. modest, but meaning-Z'. tax saving: An estimated $280 million i... 1975 and up to $431 million by 1978. Sen. Kennedy's bill in no way penalizes businesses. "It is a legitimate business dt sion to travel by air .. ," he said, pointing out that a businessman flying in the coach section gets to his destination at precisely the same time as the person flying first-class. Therefore, he said the coach-class fare "is all that should be allowe3 as a business ta; deduction." - "With the marginal corporate tax rate: 48 per cent, the corporation receives a 4r--- cent tax subsidy for every dollar of deduct- ible business expense," Sen. Kennedy said. "In effect, the ordinary taxpayer picks ul half the tab for every business expense that qualifies as a tax deduction. Every time the waiter brings the billat the end of a martini business-lunch or four-course dinner or evening entertainment, the corporate host pays halt the bill himself, but he sticks the taxpayer with the other half." Congress this year would be wise to tighten up the business-deduction laws to make sure that "business trips" are deductible only if "business," and not pleasure, Is the chief reason for the trips. Numerous other expense account loopholes shoulc?_ be closed. But a good start for this tax reform would be Sen. Kennedy's bill. If it passes, it would no longer surprise a Chicago newsman to see a governor flying economy class, back: there with all the ; ordinary taxpayers. over the enormity of the federal deficit, the MAINE LEGISLATURE ASKS THAT substantial revenues gained by the proposed MEDICARE COVER COSTS OF EYE- tax revision would be especially welcome. GLASSES, PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, [ From the Louisville Times, May 23, 19751 AND HEARING AIDS BACK-SEAT FLYING-KENNEDY WOULD END Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, on behalf JET-SET EXPENSE ABUSES of Senator HATHAWAY and myself, I ask (By Bill Billiteri unanimous consent that a joint resolu- heWch Re~l~at'se'200S` 211,4 ins AILRD~f~-NWOWRO 40 E'190OT24)ie I~eglsiature, mon tors? o ? o the National Governors' Conference at asking Congress to include the cost of 1 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190012-0 U"NSEL 94TIT CONGPdESS 1ST SESSION . R. 8281 IN TILE II() 1TS1E; J I; -N m 26, 1975 All'. I3_ DULO i11t1'0d1W('d t;,c ibllowing bill; which Wl'as referred to the ConI- to iitec on the Judiciary A BILL To provide for, and assure the independence of, a Special Prose- cutor, and for other purposes. 1 Be it (fl((cled b the Seiiatc and House of 2 tiles of the (I,d States of Amer ica in Congress assembled, 3 STI O RT TITLE 4 SECTION 1. This Act way he cited as the "Special Prose- 5 cator ct of 1975". 6 APPOI T1r'rENT (W si'I.CI1.L PROSI;CLProl 7 Sic. 2. (a.) The ITnited States District Court for the S District of (lolllnllria, sitting; en bane, shall appoint a panel of 9 three of its members, hereiusa:fter i(t this Act referred to as 10 "panel". Any vacancy on the panel shall he filled in the same 11 manner as the original appointment. Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190012-0 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144R001100190012-0 1 (h) The panel is can powered to and shall promptly 2 appoint a Special Prosecutor, who shall head all Office of 3 Special Prosecutor, and to fill any vacancy which may 4 occur in the position of Special Prosecutor. i (e) Participation in the selection of the panel shall nut c in and of itself disglualiIv a judge in 'my proceeditn" in which the Office of Special Prosecutor is involved. Tlowever, a judge who serves on the panel is disqualified from parfici- prating in aiiv proceeding in which the Office of Special t) Prosecutor is involved. COMPEWSA'PION ANT) STA1'I1Ni i2 Sr'.('. 3. (,>) The Special 11rosecnhur shall 1 conlpell- sated at the rate provided for level I \ of the h',xeentim Schedule under section. 5 1. 1 of title 5. 1 iiited St ales Cole. 5 (h) Ile Special Prosecutor may employ al;d fix the couipealsation of personnel in the Office of Special Prosecutor 7 as he reasonably determines to he necessary, i, *thout re- Bard to the provisions of title 5, United Suites Code, goy- I ernin, appointments in Ile competitive service, lud with- W) out regard to chapter 51 and subchapter TIf of e inpter 5:; 1 of such title (relatillo to (lassificatioai and General Schedule 1. pay rates) , but at rates not to exceed the maxi warn rate 21 for GFS-1 R of the General Schedule ender sectior ,)332 of 2"t title . , finned Slates Code. 2) (c) The Special Prosecutor clay n wurv er, stud erv- Approved For Release 2005/12/14: IA-RDP77M00144 b01100190012-0 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190012-0 25 3 ices of experts and consultants, as authorized by section 3109 of title 5, 1 iiited States Code, at rates not to exceed the per diem equivalent of the rate for GS-18 of the General Schedule cstahlisl-ed by section a331 of title 5, United States Code. (d) Every department or agency of the Federal Gov- ernniecit is authorized to make available to the Special Prose- cutor, on a r?enubursable basis, any personnel the Special Prosecutor n Lay requcs t. llequested personnel shall be de- tailed within one week after the date of the request unless the Si)ccial Prosecutor designates is later date. An indi- vidual's position and grade in his department or agency shall not be prejudiced by his being detailed to the Special Prosecutor. No person shall be detailed to the Special Prose- cutor without his consent. (e) For the purposes of salwhapter III of chapter 73 of title 5, 1' cited States Code, the Special Prosecutor and the personnel of the Office of Special Prosecutor shall be deemed employees in an. executive agency. JURISDICTION AND AIJTIIOIILrl' OF THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR, SEC. 4. (a) The Special Prosecutor has exclusive juris- diction to investigate and to prosecute in the name of the United States- (1) all offenses or allegations of affenses arising out Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOO144R001100190012-0 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190012-0 1 of the conduct of domestic illteilur('llcc or Coil terintelli- Bence activities and the operation of arty odic activities within. the ITnited States lrv the ('chiral I;,telligence agency or any other iutelligen e or law cliforcerliellt a()etlcv- of the Federal Uoiernllleikt (2) all violations or suspected violat:i.o,is of ally ~ Federal statute by any intelligence or law el forcemellt agency of the Federal Gov.ernnnelit or by al v persons by or on behalf of any intelligence or law ci torccnlent 0 agency of the Federal Governlncllt includin'-r hilt not I limited to surreptitious entries, surveillance, w retaps, or illegal opening or monitoring of the I nited S iltcs mail; ,3 and 1 (3) such related matters which lie consel ts to have assigned to him by the Attorney General of 'I United U States. =1 (b) The Special Prosecutor is authorized tl take any action necessary and proper to perform his fun ?tions and carry out the purpose's of this Act, incln(Iin;.-- ~l) (I ) issuing instructions to the Federal Ih read of li-vestigalion and other domestic investigativ agencies s.;, of the United States for the collection and deliN try solely to the Oflice of Special Prosecutor of inforn .ltion and '14 evidence bearing on matters within the jurisdiction of the Special Prosecutor, and for safeguarding the integ- Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190012-0 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190012-0 r 1 lily and inviolability of all files, records, documents, 2 physical evidence, and other materials obtained or pre- 3 pared by the Special Prosecutor; 4 (2) conducting proceedings before grand juries; 5 (3) framing and signing indictments ; 6 (4) signing and filing iriformations; 7 (5) contesting the assertion of executive privilege 8 or any other testimonial or evidentiary privilege; 9 (6) conducting and arguing appeals in the United 10 States Supreme Court, notwithstanding the provisions 11 of section 518 of title 28, ITnited States Code; 12 (7) instituting, defending, and conducting civil and 13 criminal litigation in any court; and 14 (8) exclusively performing the functions conferred 15 upon the Attorney General of the United States under 16 part V of title 18, United States Code (relating to irn- 17 munity of witnesses), with respect to any matter within 18 his exclusive jurisdiction. 19 DELEGATION 20 Si~,c. 5. The Special Prosecutor is authorized to dele- 21 gate any of his functions to personnel of the Office of Spe- 22 cial Prosecutor, and to experts and consultants retained 23 pursuant to section 3 (c) . 24 TRANSFER AND ACQUISITION OF FILES AND INFORMATION ApproveeFor Rel=1 ' -AUk'}i/41 CI`b`F2~ M 01` 1` i~1?~t er ma- 11.11. 8281----2 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190012-0 it terials ill the possession or control of the Dep 11,1111011t Of 2 Justice, or any other departrneut or agency of 1 1 rnnicut, v laieh relate to matters ;vithili the e..el:rsive jut rli~?tiozl of 4 the Special Prosecutor appointed under this pct. are trails- 5 (erred to the Special Prosecutor as of the (late on vt lricll he In takes office. 7 (fir) 1'1ie Special Prosecutor is a n thorized to re(1ue,t 8 from :rny department or agency of the . 'edera l Govern- t) ment any additional files, records, documents, or other ma- 0 tenmil,; wliieh he may deem necessary or appropl mite to the 11 eou(ir~r~t of his duties, functions, and responsibilities 1.111der 42 this Act, and each department or agency shill furnish i ,lle11 material, to him expeditiously. unless a C0art of CoCTr- 14 potent jrir'i,(lretioli shad older otherwisc. 1.5 (1?) The Special Prosecutor shall k gip inviolate and snfe- t.t6 guard from unwarranted disclosure all tiles, ree girds, doen- 1.7 meats, physical evidence, and other ri:aterials ootained or IS ,ire1>rrrcd by the (it7iec of pedal Pro ecutor. l9 GE I:h.vL SO I('ES 1 1)1LI: l IT) TTO-N ?0 Sr?c1. T. The Adnihiistrifor of (enc:al Servie(- shall fur- 31 nisli the Special Prowecnb0r with, ,i;ch O{Dices, e(liripment. 22 supplies, and services as we ai(thorizc,l to he f u Ii,hed lo any agency or rristi'iinientality of the I nited Stata's. ,24 SI E('IAL I'h0SECI'TOU'S TEh ;I (DF OFF11 I; a 5 Xppro 'e4 IF0r'l re 6(2006/ ;r1 *icfa4R?R717N906r144F~Q01r1fl0190012-0 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190012-0 7 1 nate three years after the date the panel first appoints a 2 Special Prosecutor. 3 (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), 4 the Office of Special Prosecutor is authorized to carry to eon- 5 elusion litigation pending on the (late such office would otlier- 6 wise expire. 7 REPORTS 8 Si,c. 9. The Special Prosecutor shall make as full 9 and complete a report of the activities of his office as is 10 appropriate to the panel, to the Attorney General of the 1.1 United States, and to the Congress, on the first and second 12 anniversaries of his taking office and not later than thirty 13 days after the termination of the Office of Special Prosecutor. 14 REMOVAL OF SPECIAL PROSECUTOR 15 SEC. 10, The panel has the sole and exclusive power to 16 remove the Special Prosecutor. The only grounds for removal 17 are gross dereliction of duty, gross impropriety, or physical 18 or mental inability to discharge the powers and duties of 19 his office. 20 EXPEDITED REVIEW PROCEDURE 21 SEC. 11. (a) The sole and exclusive procedure for the 22 review of the validity -of any provision of this Act shall be 23 as follows : 24 (1) Any defendant who challenges the validity of Approved For Release 2005/112/14: CIA-IDP77M00'144I 0011OU119001 2-8 a mo- Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190012-0 8 I bon to discus not later than fifteen days ( tier service 2 of the iudi(-tlueut or information. Such motion shall be heard and determined l)y a district court of t: rce judges, .r . _ convened pursuant to section 22S4 of title 28, 1`nited 5 States Code, as soon as possible but iii no case later than twenty days after the filing of the motion. (2) Anv person who challenges the validity of this Act in connection with a civil action or proceeding < shall do so by motion filed with the appropriate - nited 10 States district court. The district court ,hall iaunediately 11 certify such motion to he heard and determined by a 12 district court of three judges convened pursuant to see- 1.3 tion 2284 of title 28, United States Code, as soon as possible but in no case later than tvyenty day- after the fi I.i11g of the motion. 16 (3) Not later than fifteen days after the determina- 1 r Lion of the district court of three judges under paragraph 18 (1.) or (2) of this section, any party may file an appeal 19 from that determination in the United States Supreme 20 Court. The Supreme Court shall expedite to lie greatest 21. extent possible. its decision on such ;!ppeal. 22 (1)) The expedited review procedure of this section shall not apply to ally challenge to the validity of any provision. of this Act insofar as any question presented sllal! have been 25 pret~c~1'v1~ll~a~13j'2b~/'1Y'c'~1A~#1~7~1?2~D0190012-0 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190012-0 9 1 ing that the previous determination occurred .in litigation 2 involving other parties. 3 FUNDING 4 SE.C. 12. There are authorized to be appropriated such 5 sums as are necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act, 6 and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Special 7 Prosecutor shall submit directly to the Congress requests 8 for such funds as lie considers necessary to carry out his 9 responsibilities under this Act. 10 SEVERABILITY 11 SEC. 13. If the provisions of any part of this Act, or 12 the application thereof to any person or circumstances, are 13 held invalid, the provisions of other parts and their ap- plication to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190012-0 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190012-0 N y (D r; Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190012-0