Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 9, 2016
Document Release Date: 
December 14, 2000
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
November 23, 1971
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP80-01601R001300370002-9.pdf1.77 MB
Approvedk For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001300370002-9 November 23, 1971 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE S 19521 r. DOMINICK. I ask for the yeas and Several Senators addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. objection, it is so ordered. GRAVEL) . The Chair recognizes the Sen- ator from Missouri. Mr. MANSVIELD. Mr., President, will the Senator yield? Mr. SYMINGTON. I yield to the Sen- ator from Montana. , nay ? The RESIDING OFFICER. Is there ' a suffic nt second? There is a sufficient , second. The ye and nays were ordered. ! The PR ? MING OFFICER. The ques- tion is on a eeing to the amendment as modified of e Senator from Colorado. The yeas a a nays have been ordered, and the clerk 11 call the roll. . The legislati clerk called the roll. Mr. BYRD o West Virginia. I an- nounce that the? enator from Indiana I (Mr. HARTKE) , the enator from South -0: Dakota (Mr. McGo aN), and the Sen- ator from Maine (Mr. usicie) are nec- ersarily absent. ? I further announce t t the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH is absent on ? official business. Mr. GRIFFIN. I announ that the Senator from Maryland (Mr. ALL), the Senator from New Hampsh (Mr. OtrrToN), the Senator from Ne York (Mr. JAvrrs), and the Senator rom ? Maine (Mrs. SMITH) are necess 1y absent. The Senator from South Dakota ( MUNDT) is absent because of illness. The Senator from Illinois (Mr. PERCY) is detained on official business. The Senator from Ohio (Mr. SAXBE) is , absent on official business. If present and voting, the Senator from fi Illinois (Mr. PERCY) and the Senator from Maine (Mrs. SMITH) would each , vote "nay." The result was annoUnced-L-yeas 59, , nays 30, as follows: . [No. 393 Leg,' YEAS-59 Aiken Fannin Nelson . Alien Fong Packwood" Allott Gambrell Pearson Baker Goldwater Pell Bayh Griffin Ribicoff Bennett Gurney Schweiker )3entsen Hansen Scott Bible Hollings Sparkman Boggs Hruska Spong Brock Hughes Stafford Brooke Humphrey Stevens Buckley Inouye Stevenson Case Jackson Taft Cook Jordan, Idaho ? Talmadge Cooper Kennedy , Thurmond 1 Cranston Magnuson Tower ; CurtiS Mathias Tunney Dole McGee Weicker . Dominick McIntyre ' Williams Ervin Miller . NAYS-30 ' Anderson Fulbright Mondale Bellmon Gravel Montoya Burdick Harris Moss /Byrd, Va. Hart Pastore I 1 Byrd, W. Va. Hatfield Proxmire ' Cannon Jordan, N.C. Randolph Chiles Long Roth Eagleton Mansfield Stennis Eastland McClellan Symington Ellender Metcalf Young NOT VOTING-11 Beall Javits PercY ' Church McGovern Saxbe Cotton Mundt Smith Hartke Muskie rEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS, 1972 The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill (HR. 11731) making appro- priations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1972, EXECUTIVE SESSION and for other purposes. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, may unanimous consent that the Senate go We have order? into executive session, to consider cer- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The tan nominations at the desk. Senate will be in order. Senators will take The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without their seats, and attaches will leave the objection, it is so ordered. Chamber. INTELLIGENCE?THE GREAT WASTE IN -----corrrnmer Mr. SYMINGT-O-V?Mr. President, a premise to these observations, and the amendment which I thereupon plan to offer to this military appropriation bill, isizass,d on a _belief that-the SenataiLas moral intarestra in the ouastion of the overall structure and functioninur ence apparatus as is the House of Representatives. in' eits:SIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator send his amendment to the desk, so that it may be reported? Mr. SYMINGTON. The amendment is ,at the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: . On page 49, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following: SEC. 743. None a the funds appropriated In this Act in excess of $4,000,000,000 may be available for expenses by the Central Intel- ligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and the Defense Intelligence Agency, and for intelligence work performed by or on behalf of the Army, Navy, and the Air Force. Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, one notes that earlier this month, in its re- port to the House, the House Committee on Appro riations made the following serva ons; and inasmuch as those ob- servations confirm both our own think- ing and our findings over recent years, I will read them into the RECORD at this point: The Committee feels that the intelligence operations of the Department of Defense have grown beyond the actual needs of the Department and are now receiving an inor- inate share of the fiscal resources of the epartment. Redundancy is the watchword in many in- elligence operations. The same information s sought and obtained by various means' and y various organizations. Coordination is less effective than it should e. Far more material is collected than is es- sential. Material is collected which cannot be eval- uated in a reasonable length of time and is herefore wasted. New intelligence means have become avail- ble and have been incorporated Into the I am sure that Judge Allen will program without offsetting reductions in old ? 1 his So Mr. DommicH's amendment, asprocedures. important office with great abMt and modified, was agreed to. honor. As noted in this House report, their Mr. DOMINICK. Mr. President, I move conclusions were based on extensive to reconsider the vote by which the? hearings?let us note also that last year amendment was agreed to. ? LEGISLATIVE SESSION this Ho e troi ? ??: ? - 011111Miliam e LDwAppraved Rel ease. 2001103#041t? MAEIR LT:rui :f.43 , Fe 4 1.,:ren n ? " ? the Mr. GtO motion on the tanle. unanimous consent tnat tne bena e r eepar m- o , The motion to lay on the table was turn to the consideration of legislatio wine procesings were included in th agreed to. bus1nes publio r0.22.S.d. U.S.? COURTS The assistant legislative clerk read the following nominations, which were fa- vorably reported earlier today by the Committee on the Judiciary: James S. Holden, of Vermont, to be a U.S. district judge for the district of Vermont. Ralph V. Scalera, of Pennsylvania, to be a U.S. district judge for the western district of Pennsylvania. Clarence C. Newcomer, of Pennsyl- nia, to be a U.S. district judge for the e tern district of Pennsylvania. arles M. Allen, of Kentucky, to be a S. district judge for the western dist t of Kentucky. Alf d T. Goodwin, of Oregon, to be a U.S. rcuit judge for the ninth circuit. Levin Campbell, of Massachusetts, to be a S. district Judge for the dis- trict of achusetts. Mr. M FIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the nomina- tions be con dered en bloc. The PRES SING OFFICER. Without objection, the nominations are consid- ered and con med en bloc. Mr. MANSF LD. Mr. President, I ask that the Preside t be immediately noti- fied of the confi ation of these nom- inations. The PRESIDIN e OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ? dered. Mr. COOPER. President, I am very glad that the ? ate has confirmed this evening Judge C arles M. Allen of Louisville, Ky., to b a U.S. district judge for the western 'istrict of Ken- tucky. The nomination of J dge Allen by President Nixon has rece ved wide ap- proval in Kentucky. By rea on of educa- tion, experience as a prac cing lawyer and as an elected circuit ? urt judge, a court of general jurisdic on in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, dge Allen has superior qualifications. He s a man of fine and respected family ba ground, of the highest integrity, and he i held in high regard by the bar, his co eagues of the judiciary and by the pe pie a ? Louisville and Jefferson County. s 195APProved For Rele ae8Raftt4N4AelciAditaeao-ateniRo oI 30037000M 3 1 and later that day?Saturday?a mem- ber of that organiza,tiorir delivered the White House press release to my home, stating.that the press release was all_the Agency knew about -it- af the.-time. It is clear to anyone familiar with the executive branch that this reorganiza- tion: First, could be turning over the intelligence operation to the military? exactly what the National Defense Act of 1947 took careful steps to prevent? and second, places policy control of intel- ligence in a new committee in the White House, headed by the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs,' Mr. Kissinger, on this committee sit both the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as the Deputy Secretaries of State and Defense. This gives Executive privilege to the final policymakers, and therefore, except for the power of the purse, enables said policymakers to, in effect, ake the entire question of intelligence out of the hands of Congress. The fact that I do not think such a development is right or proper, Mr. President, is the basic thrust of the amendment that I am offering this eve- ning. I thereupon made a short talk on the floor of the Senate delineating this ex- traordinary development, and protesting that such a major change incident to our overall security should not be made without the knowledge let alone the ap- proval, of anybody in the Senate; and I ask unanimous consent that this talk be ' inserted at the end of these remarks. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (See exhibit 1.) Mr. SYMINGTON. The Chairman of the newly formed White House Intel- ligence Committee, Dr. Kissinger, there- upon called me and said I was right, that the change should have been discussed with the proper committees of Congress, that the reorganization details had been handled by Mr. George Shultz, and that e, Kissinger, would arrange for Mr. hultz to come down and talk to me During these hearings, the then As- sistant Secretary of Defense, now Secre- tary of the Army, Secretary Froehlke, who had been directed by the Secretary of Defense to review the intelligence pro- grams, also testified that he was sur- prised to find that there wps no Pamrtre- hensi 'nvento of DOD intelligence assets. He thereupon s a ed a he concurred with the committee's expressed ? concern about duplication in the intelli- gence cOmmunity. In addition, this report states that the committee expects to review the in- telligence program In total during the hearings on the fiscal year 1973 budget request. rts aluiter_esto&Senate committee's. we cart find no comparable interest on their part with respect to the billions appropriated annually for intelligence. Back in 1966, as a member of both the CIA Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee -and also the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I became concerned that, because of their lack of knowledge of certain 'intelligence mat- ters bearing on foreign policy, members of the Foreign Relations Committee were not in a position to make intelligent judgment of certain U.S. policies over- seas. Accordingly, I presented this situ- ation as I saw it to the then chairman of Armed Services, the late Senator Russell. t the be innin of t ess, in Januar 196 Chairman Russell In- vi e. ree members o ic s i Re- lations CommittEe?t_n_eitrith_tha CIA SubconurnEreeilmed Services, which committee also included members of the Senate Appropriations Committee. This arrangement presumably continues, but _ the members of the Foreign Relations Committee participate as a matter of grace, not of right. I say presumably be- cause in any case said CIA Subcommittee has not mef-ca-------this year, ana troth what I understand does nor-plan to meet. Darrkiltuanarkun_lastazeekpf military appropriations by the Senate Defense ApproprWions anagonmittee. . then- ton wig Made .2Ltb_e_mjag4illion dol- ton on the grounds the President felt lar appropriation _requests contained in this way, or felt that way. Now let me about it. this bill for-in--6-grorthe some Trififelli- repeat how the President feels about this I thanked him for his call, but said I gence operating or/and adviso roups matter, according to this article: - felt any such a briefing should be given in the executive-branc of this overn- President Nixon's "major complaints are to the committees, not to an individual ment. faulty nitenipmace, runaway budgets and a Member. That is the last I have heard of As an ex officio member of Appropria- disparity between a glut of facts and tor, was told by a staff member?who obviously does know abotit it?that he could not tell the Senator even the amount or anything else about this, seems to me a shocking and unprece- dented situation. I have never heard of this before, except from the executive branch. I have never heard of a member of a Senate staff telling a Senator that he could not tell him what he knew about the relevant business of any committee. ? Mr. SYMINGTON. I thank the Sena- tor for his contribution. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Does the Senator know of any precedent for this? Mr. SYMINGTON. I do not. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Did the Senator ever have this experience before? Mr. SYMINGTON. No; I did not. Mr. FULBRIGHT. That is what I mean. This is the only time I have ever heard of it. Mr. SYMINGTON. This means that these billions of dollars of the taxpayer's' money are being authorized and appro- priated by the Senate with the knowledge and approval of just five of its Members. a result of tbair.,3,7,Koar_inie_sliga- tion-1969-71?of our worldwide trea- ties and commitment, both staff ta ems of the Senate Subcommifte- ciTire-eTher-Ws?C?ind Commilments AbToad of the Foreign Relatione ram_ mittee found heavy duplication?there- fore, waste?of the taxpayers' money, in the ir_ritsatgenee.fielT;?and, perhaps even more important, they found many con- ditions which were not known by those on the Senate committees designated to review our military and political policies arid position with other countries. The cover story in a recent issue of Newsweek magazine confirms this confu- s and waste, and details general dis- satisfaction with much of it. The arti- cle states that President Nixon's "rriajor complaints are faulty intelligence, run- away budgets, and a disparity between a glut of facts and a poverty of anal- ysis." . Mr. President, several times today on the floor, people have justified their posi- tions because of being the ranking mem_ poverty or analysis. ber of the Armed Services Committee, This article also asserts: after the subcommittee meeting LgAllgii. Bureaucracy has transformed what began n the staff olAppropriations to ask in gen- as an amateurish happy few into a sprawling - made?namely, that the present setup SI ? a- intelligence conglomerate encompassing more tions_?.. tide went on: to shape intelligence estimates.!' The ar- ? but I was told that, except for the than a dozen government agencies, 200,000 gives "the military considerable power ffe-senioThembers et tile Senate Ay- employees and a budget of some se billion a ir_ pi=717firg-Cbmmittee, they had n year. ins r____Luele Whenever you're working on a problem - As one Member of the Senate, despite billion dollar intelligence appropriations, my committee assignments I do not that the military is deeply interested in?be- billion it's affecting one of their programs, even to the other members of the Ap- know whether those figures are accurate or their war in Vietnam, or something?and p r o._,Iic(Tg3rCn9-6n iiiIrt e _ or inaccurate, too large or too small, you're not saying what they want you to say, President, will E n . rliAr ti lts month, the news media the browbeating starts: the delaying tactics, . the Senator yield for a question? began calling n_._le._..D7.1ng.___W;zelit a the pressure to get the report to read more like they want it to read, in other words. In- ? That is such a shocking statement that major reorganiza on in the intelligence , I thought some attention should be field that had just been announced by fluencing intelligence for the benefit of their ? called to it. ??this Government. I told them the truth? own operation or activity. Mr. SYMINGTON. lam glad to yield that I knew nothin abouT A former member of the CIA establish- to the able Senator. ?The press carr e a story about this ment, in a reply to these statements pub- Mr FULBRIGHT The statement the? aation the next morning,I there- lished in the same issue of that magazine, In a recent article in the U.S. News 8,z .World Report, - ritt,en by the former Ex- ecutive Assistan ctor a very serious charge was S I 9 aurnimimmatea. ? - I. Bondi:ppm:wed, kier Reitesaera20 Ofe4 t:h0M-ROFIEFOt-Obf8bli 0 0 an o o 2-9 k AFfs roved For ReggleRiRla1d0T3A.04RiegA-31/PAR1401 R001 30037000219523 November , 1971 In both the Senate and the House there are subcommittees of both Appropriations and Armed Services. In the Senate, members of the Foreign Relations Committee are invited to join briefings of the other subcommittees. And then states: I ., 'I submit that there is no federal agency of our government whose activities receive closer scrutiny and "control" than the CIA. Based on the facts presented above, the reverse of that statement is true in my opinion, and it is shameful for the Amer- ican people to be so misled. There is no Federal agency of our Government whose activities receive less scrutiny and control than the CIA; and the same is true of , ther intelligence agencies of the govern- t. ent who reportedly receive billions of dollars more each year than, does the CIA. I have the greatest respect for the five members of the Senate Appropriations Committee who alone of all Senators know the detail 8 of this multibillion-dol- lar authorization and appropriation. But I do not believe that they, and they alone, should render final decision on both said authorizations and appropriations with- out the knowledge, let alone the approval, of any other Senators, including those on the Armed Services Committee ,who are not on this five-member Subcommittee of Appropriations, and all members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The latter committees have fully as much interest in our military and polit- ical activities in foreign lands as do mem- bers of this Appropriations Subcommit- tee; in fact, the heads of the CIA in for- eign countries operate under the super- vision of the Ambassador; and those Am- bassadors report to the Secretary of State. As a matter of fact, and as anybody knows who has traveled around in these foreign countries where we are at war or In what might be called partial peace, the heads of the CIA in these countries oper- ate under the direct supervision of the ambassador, and those ambassadors re-- port to the Secretary of State. Today we all know this Nation faces serious fiscal and monetary problems. Our economy is in grave trouble and one of the chief reasons for this condition has to do with our vast military expendi- tures at home and abroad. , With that premise, apprehension about this situation can only be increased by the fact the reorganization announced earlier this month by the White House in turn increases the influence of the military in le 01 u a on o in e i- gence_estilhati. in the DefenseThEpartment when the NA- Trollai 6ecurity Act of 194'7 assed? frific mom ore e passage of that bill foiT-Secretary Patterson?and-Th-Ea- rire-know-this is-met/rWriat rreside 71-TilifiEifil-riChTS advisers, for the obvious realons,-altempted to avoid. -Tfle--7ordirivg-ETC-thself ,makes th poinK raSlaiiranim-ous consent that this wording be printed in the RECORD at the conclusion of my remarks. The PRESIDING OrViCER (Mr. SPONG). Without objection, it is so or- dered. (See exhibit 2.) this arialy7retft7friarPtintill Mr. SY M. ? ? _eft en unneesssamslollar_s_ will be added to the clefense budget be- cal"?TsTiffirtbudgelbthasedanIntelligenee I ati-rxiiites of the plans, program& and production of the possible enemy; and have been higher than these of the civilians. anowledge?intelligence--about the plans and programs of the possible enemy is generally considered to, be at least as important as ahy other factor in the formulation of the defense budget. As but one example of that importance, there follows a colloquy between the dis- tinguished present chairman of the Sen- ate Appropriations Committee and former Secretary of Defense McNamara, during the defense appropriations hear- ings of 1967: Senator ELLENDER. What part does the State Department take in 'making decisions that have resulted in the programs you are pre- senting to us now? Secretary MCNAMARA. That State Depart- ment is informed of, but does not affect my recommendations as to what ought to be done. Senator ELLENDER. Are your recommenda- tions 'founded solely on what you get from the JCS? Secretary No, sir; they are not. The JCS are, of course, the principal military advisers to the President bylaw, and of much more importance they are actually his mili- tary advisers because of their experience. But the national intenate_s are faken in ? ? hen as well as.? ler information. Again, in that this year the CIA Sub- committee of the Armed Services Com- mittee has not met once, it would appear there is now even more secrecy in the handling of intelligence funds;? and this at a time when there is a steadily rising chorus among the people of this country for less secrecy. Apparently some people believe that the very word "intelligence," in itself, requires that all these, billions should only be authorized and appropriated in such great secrecy. To me, this does not wash. We author- ' ize and appropriate, through the proper congressional committees, tens of bil- lions of dollars annually for the other , component parts of the military. There is nothing secret, foi? example, about the constantly referred to cost of a nuclear aircraft carrier, or the cost of the C-5A, or the cost of the main battle tank; but knowledge of these costs does not mean that either the Congress or the American public have been informed, in case of a war, how, along with our military personnel, it is planned to utilize these weapons. That would be getting into war plans, something which should be studiously avoided. B the overa* cost_gL ntememire does not- in any7way entail the ? so -.te a., I' w e various intellioups funclion, or plan W112Petlen 7EFS1-70-urd'There be greater danger to national security in making public overall intelligence costs than in making public other overall security costs? ( I am certain in my own mind that we '171r---:f" 1 ?41101-' II 4 killed?if pressures, combined_with_un- waid-Serfeeid not been, chara,ez teristic of our_intelligence knowledge and aetiVities -an -that -country- because our political and military actions were ap- proved by the Congress on the basis of misinformation and a lack of informa- tion. In summary, 'therefore, I do not be- lieve the Senate can meet its responsibili- ties, or exercise its "constitutional pre- rogative" if this bill is approved under these circumstances; therefore, I offer this amendment which has been read at the desk and which provides that the Senate impose a ceiling on the amount of funds in this bill that can be expended for intelligence activities during the fiscal year in question. Responsible news media continue to assert to the American people that the cost of intelligence to the American tax- payer now runs to between $5 billion and $6 billion. I do not believe that figure is necessarily correct, but if it is correct, it but confirms the many informed reports we have had about duplication and waste. I now ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. EXHIBIT 1 CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT OF INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (statement by Senator Stuart Symington) Last Friday the White House announced that the President had ordered a reorganiza- tion of the intelligence community. I ask unanimous consent that their press release to this end be placed in the Record at the conclusion of these remarks, As renorted by the press, the Administra- tion's plan creates an "enhanced leadership role" for the Director of the Central Intelli- gence Agency, turns more of the operating responsibility for that Agency over to the Deputy Director, and creates or reconstitutes a variety of boards, comtnittees and groups who are charged with important responsi- bilities within the intelligence community. The reported aim of the reorganization is to improve the "efficiency and effectiveness" of United States intelligence activities; and nress comments on this move incleide ref- erences to alleged concern over the size and cost of intelligence operations; also to gen- eral unhappiness about various specific in- telligence estimates. Such reports have been officially denied, but it is acknowledged that this reorganization is the result of "an ex- haustive study" of the United States intel- ligence activities. It could be that the reorganization an- nounced last week by the White House is a constructive move. In recent years there has been a growing belief that there was heavy dunlication and therefore waste within the overall intelligence community. Unfortunately, however, it has been imnos- siple for the public, or even concerned members of Congress, to obtain enough information on this subject for informed judgment. ? By the same token, it is equally impos- sible to determine, at least at this time, whether the organization changes now de- creed will accomplish their stated purposes, or to determine what will be their prac- tical effect. One thing is clear, based on the manner in which the reorganization was handled and announced; namely, the Executive Branch does not consider either the orga- nization, or the operation, of the intelli- gence community to be matters of concern iteMialdita=fatwiheith vitt: Approved For Release 200.1/03/04 ? ciA,Rogoim,F00130WQM219 23, 1971 S 19524 CONGREssioN AL -Kai) Congress regarding this reorganization, or That at no time shall the two positions of even any advance notice of what had been the Director and Deputy Director be occupied decided. simultanecrusly by commissioned officers of In 1917 the Central Intelligence Agency, the armed services, whether in an active or was established by act of Congress. Its powers retired status. and duties are specified by law. Its Director Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, if and Deputy Director are subject to con- firmation by the Senate. the Senator from Missouri will yield I do Last year the Congress appropriated an not have a copy of the Senator's amend- amount estimated by the press to be be- melt but I made a note as it was read, tween five and six billion dollars for the It states: activities of this agency and the other corn- The Central Intelligence Agency, the Na- ponent parts of the intelligence community. tional Security Agency, and the Defense In- As one member of the Senate, I will not telligence Agency, and for intelligence work accept the proposition that the Congress' performed by or on behalf of the Army, Navy, role in organizing the intelligence commu- and the Air Force. nity ended twenty-four years ago with the passage of the National Security Act, or . Now would the Senator break that that our only current and continuing respon- down into, say, the intelligence that is ability is to appropriate whatever number acquired by a photorecon flight, one, or of billions of dollars the Executive Branch the intelligence requests so as to handle this work. ? Mr. SYMINGTON. May I ask the Sen- Last Saturday, when: I learned from the ., s press about this intelligence reorganization, ator if he is peaking on my time or on as ranking member of the Senate Armed the time of the opposition? Services Committee I wrote the Chairman Mr. GOLDWATER. I am not sure that of that Committee, requesting hearings either I oppose it. I want merely to find out how by the full Committee or by the CIA Sub- deep the Senator wants to go. committee, of which I have been a member Mr. ELLENDER. I yield 5 minutes to for some fifteen years. In that letter I pre- the Senator from Arizona. sented the fact that this Subcommittee has The PRESIDING OrrICER. The Sen- not met once this year. This latest reorganization on the face of ator from Arizona is recognized for 5 it raises questions about past, present and 'minutes future performance of our multi-billion dol- lar annually intelligence community; ques- tions such as If it has been inefficient, what and where were its deficiencies? In what sense does it need to be more "responsive?" What is implied about the past by the reference in the press release to the objec- tive of insuring "strengthened leadership" in the future? The White House announcement offers gence we are discussing here and some neither answers to these questions, nor ex- ,f which applies to intelligence needed planations of the remedies which have now of been unilaterally decreed. to Conduct a battle. But the thing that In order to understand properly said action disturbs me is, is there any way to alio- by the Executive Branch, Congress should cate Or to determine the cost of that kind know the answers to such questions as the Of intelligence? following: Mr. SYMINGTON. I say to the Sena- How is the leadership role of the Director tor I do not know. No doubt millions of of the Central Intelligence Agency "en- Americans have seen the chart in News- hanced" by the creation of a new and obvi- ously more powerful supervisory committee week magazine, however, a chart called chaired by the Advisor to the President for , "The United States Intelligence C0111- National Security Affairs, on which new munity." It does not give figures for that Board not only sits the Attorney General agency which, to the best of my knowl- but also the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs edge, spent by far the most money, but of Stall? it does say in the chart that the Army Has this new White House committee been has 38,500 intelligence staffers and a given authority or/and responsibility which heretofore was the responsibility of the budget of $775 million; that the Navy CIA; and Whieil the Congress, under the NS- has 10,000, It does. not give the Navy Menai Security Act, vested in the Agency? money; that the Air Force has 00,000 How can the integrity of the intelligence staffers with a budget of $2.8 billion. It roduct be assured when responsibility for says the Central Intelligence's budget is Mr. GOLDWATER. I thank the Sena- tor from Louisiana for yielding me this time. What disturbs me, as the Senator knows as well as anyone else in this Chamber, the Army and Navy, the Air Force and the Marine Corns are always, constantly, engaged in obtaining battle- field intelligence and information, some of which applies to the kind of intelli- the very elementary type of intelligence- gathering that involves a patrol sent out for intelligence purposes? Mr. SYMINGTON. The figure I state In the amendment is too high, according to some?$4 billion. Mr. GOLDWATER. I am not arguing with the Senator about that. I am in- clined to agree with him, but I think the amendment would be better?and better understood?if we did net get down to the nitty-gritty of 1 and 1 is 2, at the sergeant or the private level, who Is sent out to undertake a photo recon- flight. I am speaking here to their problems and their costs. The question I had is: How far down the hole do we go before we stop? Mr. SYMINGTON. Let me answer my able friend in this way. We had staff men go in certain areas of the world and they found great duplication. They found the Intelligence units of the CIA, the De- partment of Defense, the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force all directed to particular intelligence, tremendous duplication, therefore waste. If it is clarification that the able Sen- ator wants, that is what I want?namely, what we are doing month after month with these gigantic sums of money being expended in the intelligence field. If we are going to have a Congress that means anything, prerogatives, the proper Senate committees ought to be informed. Mr. GOLDWATEH.. I am not arguing with the Senator. The PRESIDING 0141010ER, The time of the Senator has expired. Mr. E'LLENDER. Mr. President, I yield the Senator, from Arizona 1 additional minute. The PRESIDING OFFICER, The Sen- ator from Arizona is recognized, for 1 additional minute. Mr. GOLDWATEA. Mr. President, lack of redundancy is the secret of what to my opinion is the best intelligence of the world, the British Intelligency Agency. We have three separate groups that keep piling in an input of redundancy, and each of them becomes a problem of de- termining which are the most valid. I thank the Senator from Missouri. Mr. SYMINGTON'. Mr. President, again the House Appropriations Com- mittee, this month, said: The committee feels that the intelligence operation of the Defense Departrrient is grow- ing beyond the actual needs of the depart- merit and are now costing an inordinate share the most critical aspects of intelligence $750 Million. It says the Defense Intern- analysis is taken out of the hands of career gence Agency has a budget of $100 mil- of the fiscal resources of the department. professionals and vested in a combination$700 Redundancy is the watchword of any intelli- of military professionals and the White House lion and spends an added million through Armed Forces. Then it goes into gence operation. The same information staff? sought to be obtained by various members additional agencies?Six of them, no fig- and various organizations is naturally less ures. effective than it should be. I am a member of Armed Services, an Naturally that stimulated my interest ad hoc member of Appropriations' a in trying to get at the facts. member of the CIA Subcommittee, and a Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, I want to speak after the Senator from Louisi- member of the Foreign Relations Com- mittee, and I would like to know what ana. However, will the Senator yield me Is going on in this vital field. 2 minutes for the purpose of asking a When we read that $6 billion is being question on that point? spent on intelligence, that may be bil- Mr. ELLENDER. I yield 2 minutes to lions of dollars too high, but I would like the Senator from Mississippi. to know something about it. Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, I refer Mr. GOLDWATER. The thing I am to the same sentence that the Senator iltisfOMMATV giajekedilAspeet to the intelli- 40' a i 'IP Ake Navy, and the EXHIBIT 2 CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY SEC. 102. (a) There is established under the National Security Council a Central In- telligence Agency with a Director of Central Intelligence who shall be the head thereof, and with a Deputy Director of Central In- telligence who shall act for, and exercise the powers of, the Director during his absence or disability. The Director and the Deputy Director shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate from among the commissioned of- cersitethe armed ericesovehether in an troved ,or eleseiOltalf dividus civilian life: Provided, owev/ 0 I's ? Novembh%romci For ReLemaRiNA/CeiRWPWAlfpl R001300370002119525 Air Force. The Senator does not mean to include what we call tactical intelligence that is done at the level of a battalion? Mr. SYMINGTON. No. Mr. ST.ENNIS. He does not mean where a colonel would order a captain to go out and patrol for the purpose of seeking out and getting prisoners to try to get Intelligence about the enemy. Mr. SYMINGTON. I would not want to Include the battlefield, but I do want to include all military operations of the Central Intelligence Agency. The Sec- retary of Defense stated, in open session: We have no Pentagon military operations in Lace. I believe that is true because he said it. This means the Central Intelligence Agency is running the war in Laos, and if so, the Foreign Relations Committee and the Armed Services Committee ought to know at least something about It. Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, for one illustration, the Senator's amendment refers to what are in the budget items here for the Central Intelligence Agency, the 7Tat1onal Security Ageney, and the Defe use Intelligence Agency. That is the primary references and inclusions that are in the Senator's amendment. The? PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired. ? ? Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, I yield 1 additional minute to the Senator from Mr. SYMINGTON. No intelligence unit should evade the purposes of my amend- ment by delegating some of the work they would normally do to the Army, the Navy, or the Air Force. ? Mr. STENNIS. I agree. Mr. SYMINGTON. I feel that with- out reservation because in this article they state: Bureaucracy has transformed what began as an amateurish happy few into a sprawl- ing intelligence conglomerate encompassing more than a dozen government agencies, 200,000 employees and a budget of some $0 billion a year. Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, I thank? the Senator. We will come back to that point later. [know that the Senator from Louisiana wants to speak now. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. SYMINGTON. I will be glad to yield on my own time to the Senator from Arkansas. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, I would like to say that the distinguished Senator from Missouri has opened the door on one of the great issues for the country and for the Congress. The Senator is quite aware that he has touched on a very sensitive nerve because billions of dollars of intelligence funds are contained in this appropria- tion. No one can tell where in this bill those funds are. When they read a line item and find that there is so much for aircraft, or for a carrier, those may or may not be the real amounts. This practice gives rise to questions about every item in the appropriation. I want to ask the Senator why he thinks it is necessary to keep secret the amount of money to be allocated from this ap- propriation ppraipeiling ()PROW Agency. Everyone knows what the NSA does. They read about it in the newspapers. Why is it necessary? What purpose is served by keeping it secret? Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, I do not know. Mitch of it slips out. r'For example, on March 31, 1971, in the Senate Armed Services Committee hear- ing, I asked the question: On page 2 of the congressional data sheet the last item on the table of aircraft procure- ment program is "classified projects" $579,- 800,000, requested for 72. This is almost one- th of the total aircraft procurement re- uest. Would you please tell us briefly what re the major projects in this category. General Crow replied: Because of classification, it can only be rovided in oral briefing. That exchange was declassified and then made a matter of public record. In the published hearings last year of the House Appropriations Committee, then Assistant Secretary of Defense now Secretary of the Army, was plenty critical of the intelligence setup. He said the cost of all military intelli- genceivTh.=E=EZElja- rotict riz"illion; and that was pu lish I want s- lative history we do not counter what we are trying to do, namely, get the facts. /91E?FULISRIGHT. Every 111118 an ap- prorifialibii-FolielMong, we are told that the Russians are out-distancing us every- where. We are told this by the same Sen- ators. It is like the swallows coming back to Capistrano. And I wonder how that can be because ,v,ze mend a lot more money he Russians spen One explanation may be that we devote so much of the money in this bill to nonmilitary items such as intelligence. That may be an ex- planation. It has always been a puzzle to me why we get so little in hardware for our money. We are told that we are a second-class power, that we do not have as many airplanes or ships as the Rus- sians. We hear this all the time. Either we are, or we are not, as strong as we say. Certainly we spend plenty of money. Are hearings held in the Commit- tee on Armed Services on this issue? Has the Senator ever attended any hearings on the question of the activities of the National Security Agency? 4yivrimaTcim We were briefed by the Director of the Central Tnt,euigerwe Agency twice, the full committee, last Janu r ? and then a ai Mr. FU . pia he discuss how much was silent by the National Secu- rity Agency? Mr. SYMINGTON. I asked but he did not know. Mr. FULBRIGHT. He does not know? Mr. SYMINGTON. He does not know about the others, only his own in any detail. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Is he not the head of what is referred to as the intelligence community? Mr. SYMINGTON. He is the chairman of the National Security Council Intelli- gence Committee. sentence. I I _I ? ? ? ? ? tit ? Halrna 3R ? MI ? * I I ? ? this new reorganization, should it not b Mr. Helms? Mr. SYMINGTON. That is what we are trying to find out. It is all plenty fuzzy. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Was there no tes- timony on the question of intelligence in the Committee on Armed Services that the Senator knows of? Mr. SYMINGTON, No. Mr. FULBRIGHT. And the Commit- tee on Armed Services does not author- ize anything specifically for intelligence? . Mr. SYMINGTON. There is no au- thorization in any way to pass upon in- telligence activities in the Committee on Armed Services. The able chairman of the committee is in the Chamber. He could so verify. Mr. FT,ILBRIGHT. How long has the Senator been a member of that commit- tee? Mr, SYMINGTON. It will be standing 20 years next January. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Would not the Sen- ator have heard of such hearings if they took place? Mr. SYMINGTON. I would think so. Mr. FULBRIGHT. The Senator hears of all hearings that take place in the Committee on Foreign Relations. Is that correct? Mr. SYMINGTON. Yes. Mr. FULBRIGHT. What is the motive or reason for keeping secret the amount of money being spent, for example, by the National Security Agency, which I suspect is the largest operation? Why is the amount of money secret? I am not talking' about who their spy is, if they have one. Why do they insist on secrecy about the amounts? Mr. SYMINGTON. I do not know. , Mr. FULBRIGHT. Do they think the Russians do not know we have the Na- tional Security Agency? ,Mr. SYMINGTON. The worst spy we ever discovered was probably in the Na- tional Security Agency, a sergeant who ? was leading a gay and double life, a spy who, when caught, killed himself. The point of my amendment is to em- phasize that we in the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations do not have anything like the necessary facts to properly allo- cate the increasingly limited resources of this country between international and domestic programs. Mr. FULBRIGHT. In this overall ques- tion the Senator spoke about secrets, and there are classes of secrets, of course. The Senator talks about battlefield secrets. Nobody is asking how many men are being sent out on a foray into enemy territory. We are interested in the amount of money that goes into this bill for intelligence because it is a very large amount, I have not heard any suggestion, any legitimate reason, why that amount should be secret, other than one last sug- gestion. Is this just a way to cover up expenditures so there can be no account- ing to the public or Congress? Mr. SYMINGTON. There are no five gentlemen anywhere? Mr. FULBRIGHT. That is not the question. Mr. SYMINGTON. Let finish my . ratgawydas,gififilib,b oariegifalkaanitUnnitz, S 19526 Approved For Rele,g9t,ChysqgqIii, gR,AUB.0525?PitR00130820704102AW3, 1971 than these four and one lady. But this executive session about the authoriza- funded from many different appropria,- Protest of mine is against the system, tiori?a-nd-approprrgibriof moneys in tions included the bill. not the people involved. thiriairligence category. Mr. President, as I said, this is a rath- Mr. FULBRIGHT. I hope that the Sen- -M17"COOPEA.-I would make one coin- er ticklish subject. It is a subject that I ti n is ment .,do not care to discuss in the open. I be- lieve that the Senator from Missouri (Mr. SYMINGTON), and, as a matter of fact, any other Senator on the committee who desires to be briefed by the Defense De- partment or by the Central Intelligence Agency may be briefed. We request it at times. There is nothing to stop the Sena- tor from Missouri (Mr. SYMINGTON) or the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. STEN- NIS) from calling Mr. Helms before the committee to give them an idea of what he is doing. But this matter of justifying the amount of money asked in order to carry on intelligence has been for years. confined to a few people, became of the sensitivity of the sUbject. I am very hope- ful that that method can be continued. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President,- will the Senator yield for a question? Mr. ELLENDEH. In I minute. When I first became one of the live, I attended these hearings. The late Sen- ator Russell was then chairman of the committee. I attended the hearings and took a - good deal of interest in them. After hearing both the Defense Intel- ligence as well as the CIA requests, I thought that there was somewhat more money asked for than needed. So my first effort as a member of the five was to re- duce the number of people engaged in intelligence: As I recall, we asked that the number of persons engaged in cer- tain intelligence activities be reduced by 5,000, and that was done. Mr. President, I wish to say that this year, instead of trying to reduce the number of persons, we actually reduced ator does not infer uw.t my based on any suspicion about any Mem- It is always a matter that is trouble- ber. some because it could involve security, Mr. SYMINGTON. No. but it is a fact we learned during the Mr. FULBRIGHT. If the Senator wants last several years that without the to raise that issue let the say that I have knowledge of Congress our country has the greatest respect for the Senator from become involved in pressures that led to . Louisiana and I am willing to turn the a long and costly war. whole Senate over to him and go home Mr. SYMINGTON. The Senator is so because he has the experience. I am as right. That is one of the primary reasons fond of him as I am of any man in public for my amendment. 1 life. That is not the question. Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, I yield Mr. SYMINGTON. I agree. myself 5 minutes. Mr. FULBRIGHT. The Senator from The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Louisiana is a Member of this body and ator from Louisiana is recognized. has been for a long time, and I am sure Mr ?FLIZ,N_DER Mr. President, I re- he does not take the position he sho pass on all issues that come here because he has had long experience. That is not the system. I do not understand why the overall amount for these activities has to be secret. Mr. SYMINGTON. Neither do I. Mr. FULBRIGHT. It is a very bad practice because it casts doubt on this whole appropriation. When you look at an item in this bill you wonder if it is really the amount of money for the A-14, for example, or if, it is for the NSA. One cannot tell what it is. ? Mr. SYMINGTON. The Senator is cor- rect. Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, will followed all these years. the Senator yield? I would hesitate to have these programs Mr. SYMINGTON. I yield to the able submitted to the committee of the whole Senator from California. because of the highly sensitive nature of Mr. CRANSTON. Are there references the material that come before us. In In the appropriation bill to funds for order to justify the amounts asked, we intelligence uses? are told the reasons why it is needed. Mr. SYMINGTON. No. My fear is that if this material were the amount of money requested. Mr. CRANSTON. How are they pro- made widely available, we would do harm I wish to point out that I have dish vided for; by padding other categories? to our own intelligence operations., Of Cussed this matter with Mr. MAIION, who Mr. SYMINGTON. I am not sure I course 'these intelligence operations are is chairman of the House Appropriations have enough knowledge to answer. Pre- a very important part of our overall de- Committee. We discussed together what sumably yes. fense. ought to be done to reduce the amount Mr. CRANSTON. What is the Sena- I do 'not understand the extent of the a money that was requested for Intel- tor's answer on what is provided to the amendment of my good friend from Mis- ligence. I gave him a few ideas of what intelligence cominunitv? souri. The amendment reads: I proposed to do. SYMINGTON. I have heard so The Central Intelligence Agency, the Na- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time many varying facts that is another pri- tional Security Agency, and the Defense In- of the Senator has expired. mary reason I introduced the amend- telligence Agency, and for intelligence work Mr. ELLENDkat. I yield myself 3 more ment. . performed by or on behalf of the Army, minutes. . 44.r, CRANSTON. The Senator has no Navy, and the Air Force. I wish to say that he not only listened ized or appropriated by Congress and the that in any way could be considered re- Mr. SYMINGTON. I have no estimate estimare? the purpose of the amendment is that motely accurate. Senator yield? as these appropriations or the money spent in these intelligence functions are not known and are not directly author- Mr. COOPER. Mr. President, will the gence gathered, whether it be tactical or not, is gathered either by the CIA or the Defense Department. Well, of course, much of the intelli- This? method of appropriating funds to me, but adopted some of the ideas I gave him. So the House reduced the in- telligence request by $320 million, and the by $70 million more, making a total re- Senate committee reduced the amount duction for this year in the amount cut back a good deal more than the cut for these intelligence activities has been Mr. SYMINGTON. I yield. asked of $390 million. Mr. COOPER. Do I understand that I think that is a substantial reduction in effect for at least 20 years that I know is seen fitting. s as tee and by the House after careful hear- in our intelligence. I want to pledge to the Senate that as a member of the five, I shall continue to look more deeply into this matter, in the hope of being able to made this year. These cuts were made by our commit- the Senate and Congress should actu- of, since I have been on the committee. We Ave wile sit on this committee hear the testimony of those applying for funds The funds are justified to us We ask. many questions. None of this 'info a- tion is in writing, nor is it recorded, but it is simply given to us and we weigh it and then recommend Lppropriation \ . Senate, that the Senator wants to make it _a_raa ter af_preceetrit and right that ally authorize and appropriate these \ ---Irh e PRESIDING Ove'ICER. The time CIA. I would hesitate to suggest that ings of Defense Intelligence as well as the funds? lair. SYMINGTON. That is. correct. of the Senator has expired. more Senators and more Members of thei is specific the Senator yield for a question? M" ELoreLENDER. I yield myself 5 min- House be involved in this sensitive work. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President a matter of right, I believe there are cer- le will A.s 1 tain committees, the Committee on ut: I gret that the Senator from Missouri saw fit to introduce this amendment. Of course, I am opposing it. I have been in the Senate for 35 years. I have been on the Committee on Appro- priations for about 22 or 23 years. Ever since I have been on that committee, all the appropriations affecting our sensi- tive intelligence program have been handled by only a few Members of the Senate and a few Members of the House. Twenty years ago we started out with two Members. That number has been increased to five, who are chosen from the Committee on Appropriations. That has been the method that has been Armed Services and the Committee on There no appropriation for Mr. ELLENDER. I yield. PareiApViticeedtlebtftglaWein2Otolionnt ir . at-ig151580-01601R001300370002-9 They bre N ovembeiNT Tipp For RMmgannieM_D_FstlfR,H01 ROO 1 30037000259/9527 ? Mr. FULBRIGHT. This intelligence covers a lot more than intelligence gath- ering. Does it not also cover, for exam- ple, the cost of the organizalion of the war in Laos, supported by the CIA? Would that not be included in this same amount of money? It is financed through the CIA. This is no secret. It has been published. Mr. ELLENDER. I saw it publicized? Mr. FULBRIGHT. Perhaps the Sena- tor does not agree to it, but it has been published. But supndse, as a hypothetical case, that it is carried on by the CIA. Would not that operation be carried in this. amount? Mr. ELLENDaat. For that activity? Mr. FULBRIGHT. Yes, for the man- power. It has been stated that the CIA has 06,000 there. It is no secret. Would the Senator say that before the creation of the army in Laos they came before the committee and the committee knew of it and approirdd it? Mr. ELLENDER.Wbably.. so. . Mr. FULBRIGHT. Did the Senator approve it? Mr.?ELLENDER. It was not?I did not know anything aboUt It. MT: A7L1310- the whole idea of Congress declaring war is really cir- cumvented by such a procedure, is it not? Mr. ELLENDER. Well, Mr. President, I wish to say that? Mr. FULBRIGHT. Is it not? Mr. ELLENDait. No; I do not think so. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Well, if you can create an army and support it through the CIA, without anyone knowing about it, I do not know why it is not. That is a hypothetical question I am asking. Mr. ELLENDER. I understand. But, Mr. President, I wish to say that I do not know. I never asked, to begin with, whether or not there were any funds to carry on the war in this sum the CIA asked for. It never dawned on me to ask about it I did see it publicized in the ewspapers some time ago. f Mr. FULBRIGHT. Well, this has been I publicized often. But the CIA has many large operations. They operated a revo- lution in Guatemala some years ago, and threw out the government. But does not the Senator think Congress ought to know? Mr. ELLENDER. W let Congress change the rulea, if it so delis, Let Congress designate--nion- the _five we have. But I would-like to see it_pro- ceed in an orderly fashion, the same as it has in the past; "and-rif?tin- guislied SenatEir frorli-75 Mr. FULBRIGHT. Let me ask, why does the Senator seem to think it is so necessary to keep secret the operations in Laos, as opposed to Vietnam? We have great publicity on Vietnam; why does the Senator think it has to be secret, the operation in Laos? Mr. ELLENDER. It is apparently not secret, since the Senator knows about it. I think the Senator from Missouri (Mr. YM] NGTON) has sent some investigators lout there and secured a lot of informa- ion that he made public. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Well, the news- account, and then we sent the people out there to check on it, it was so amazing. Mr. SYMINGTON. Ajx.,__Presirlent if the abl hairman wil ield published any 0 ? 01 ? along this line thaLwas _nnt cleared first. --Yrr-FULBRIGHT. One of the reasons why this committee was created was as a result of reading in the newspapers just such stories, because it was incredible that we were supporting an army of 36,- 000 and paying for it without knowing about it. The PRESIDING 0.rae10ER0 The Sen- ator's time has expired. Who yields time? Mr. ELLENDER. I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from North Dakota. Mr. FULBRIGHT. I wonder if the Sen- ator would give us the reason why this sh WA all be secret. ..Mr----YeUlga. Mr:. President, I have served on this Intelligence Subcommit- tee on Appropriations for 5 or 6 years, and this is the first time I ever attempted to defend what the CIA or any intelli- gence agency does. In order to do it, you would have to document your case, and one cannot document intelligence and pying. Spying is a dirty business, but it is a business every nation in the world engages in. Russia does a bigger job of It than we do. You cannot disclose secret Information. But it is very valuable to us. It was very valuable to know, when we had the showdown with Cuba, just what the Russians would and would not do. This five-member committee was not publicized or listed until about 3 or 4 years ago. The House of Representatives does not list their names yet. You always have to have some secrecy In Government. For example, when the atomic bomb was developed, if there had been more than 10 people in the House and Senate who knew about that, it would have been public knowledge. But this was one of the best kept secrets in history. You have all kinds of intelligence. For example, the satellites are intelligence- gathering vehicles. Would a weather satellite be an intelligence-gathering ve- hicle? It could be a part of military in- telligence. That knowledge is very im- portant to them. Does the Symington amendment include this? As to all these press stories we read and hear, this is an interesting subject to write about, of course. People like to read them. I do, too. And if you want to read something very interesting and authori- tative where intelligence is concerned, read the Penkovsky papers. Penkovsky was a Russian spy who became very dis- illusioned with.the Russian Government, and told us all he knew about Russian Intelligence, and he was caught. He knew he was going to be caught eventually, and he was caught and killed. But this is a very interesting story, on why the intelligence we had in Cuba was so important to us, and on what the Rus- sians were thinking and just how far they would go. For the life nf inP_Lcautiot unde f mnney 'we spend for intelligence would have to do with the Come:fitters FnrPign Re- papers published the information before lations or Armed Services. that We wexiirrted to the sit /aim when I first vow otillWeas eaU0410310,,..._ 4r: ieloURDPEIONO 0 " intelligearet. So far as I am concerned, there_ is no_ObTeZtro-fito that corrinilttee from whycnintel1inilble -Mr. FULBRICiFIT. No; I am not inter- ested in the spies and their mistresses, and the GolcIfinger type of thing. But here is a vast amount of money. I gave one illustration. Does not the Senator think it is our responsibility to know about the kind of activity in Laos, which I am quite certain is going on? In fact, I know it. But we were first alerted through the newspapers of the army there. The Senator says it was a tremendous thing to keep the atomic bomb secret. As a matter of fact, suppose it had been known we were making one, what would have been the harm in that? It was not the secrecy that was significant, it was the fact that we succeeded. I do not know why the secrecy was all that important. If they had known we would have it in advance, it is quite possible that we would not have had to drop it. I do not. know; that is a speculative matter. But). I am not impressed with the argument that it was so important to keep it secret, other than perhaps as far as the techni- cal thing was concerned. When Roosevelt asked for 50,000 air- planes, everyone knew we were going to build 50,000 airplanes. We did build them, and used them. But this secrecy and classification has become a god in this country, and those people who have secrets travel in a kind of fraternity like a college secret society, and they will not -speak to anyone else. Yet the Senator wants us to appropriate the money and Vote for the bill. I want to say that I find it very difficult to vote for a measure as to which I do not know whether the amount involved is $5 or $10 billion. When I think about what a poor, second-class Nation we are said to be militarily, although we spend twice as much as the Russians, it occurs to me that it may be $20 billion, for all I know. I cannot understand why it is so im- portant to be secret. As the Senator said, we know that the Russians do it, and the Russians know that we do. Everyone knows that we monitor their shots, just like they monitor ours. We all do the same thing. There is no secret about that, except that we do_not know what we are spending on it and how auld-Ut I.:_ltag...2EQ....alsa_cici-uat-Irrinw about the opera ? ? ? - .l hence gathering. unusual that we have an agency called an intelligence agency out operating a war. That is like the Penta- gon. It is not gathering intelligence in Laos; I submit it is organizing and pay- ing for a war. It is running airlines and paying for them. That is not intelligence gathering at all. Mr. YOUNG. Is the Senator talking on his time or mine? Mr. FULBRIGHT. I just ask the Sen- ator, why should that be a secret? I really do not know. If we hire citizens of other nations to do in am o la, what our oa-sca people are fori2jelaen..to_da_byjaw...eloes the Senator think that is good? -TErPRESIDING 0.eaoi-CER. The Sen- tee10001601067000 2148 time? Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001300370002-9 S 19528 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE iv ovemver 23, 1971 Mr. ELLENDER. I yield 1 more I will not go into any further details last several years. It haajjeen_reducing minute. on that. That is just one illustration. its budget- carries on its job in a Mr, YOUNG. I read in the magazines As I say, you cannot begin to go into professional way, in the finest way. y.. if and newspapers where the CIA was sup- this matter. But the question has been There is n intelli ence posed to be hiring soldiers in Laos. If raised about the secrecy, why the secrecy, some kind. I call it a p an, and we are they hired some there, I am not op- and I refer now to section 6 of the going into it now. That came out of the posed to it. The British have hired sol- amendments to the National Security White House. We can argue about that, diers for 500 years. If someone was hired Act. The amendments were passed in make fun of it. But intelligence is not a , to interrupt the movement of goods and 1949, as I recall. My time will be up laughing matter. We are going into that equipment down the Ho Chi Minh Trail, almost by the time I read this special fully now. I was not advised about it I am not opposed to that. section. This is the law that Congress beforehand. I do not expect anybody to Mr. FULBRIGHT. Maybe it is a good Passed at that time for the security sys- give me a great deal of attention, but I thing, but why the secrecy? I am not now tern we were trying to set up. wish the chairman of the Armed Serv- saying that it is good or bad. I am asking, Section 6. In the interests of the security ices Committee and the ranking member why should it be so secret? of the foreign intelligence activities of the had been advised about it, and Appro- . Mr. YOUNG. You can find out that United States, and in order to further mi- priations. But they were not. But we are poflemtheinst ttithlee, ptrhoavtisothoef Dseirceteiotonr 400f3(Ccle)h.tiai going into it now. much without knowing the amount of money they, are appropriated. The Intelligence shall be responsible for protect- My impression is that we are talking amount of money is Certainly not so ing intelligence sources and methods from about someone being kicked upstairs and Important as the amount of intelligence. 'unauthorized disclosure, the agency shall be denied authority- and some other fellow The Senator can get thatas well as I can. exempted from the provisions of section 654 put in. I do not know whether that is Mr. FULBRIGHT. If the money in of title v . . . true or not, but I do not believe it is. l . liere for intelligence is $20 billion, I think As I recall hurriedly, this relates to the elms does not think_so. But we are get- ting to the bottom of it. As soon as I that is very important for the Senate to disclosures. Some of these titles have heard this, I called him up and told know. been repealed, but this is the -blanket The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who that was put on it then. him: yields time? You are the only man who has. been ap- . . . and the provisions of any other law proved by the committee and the Senate to Mr. ELLENDER. I yield 10 minutes to which require the publication or disclosure be Director of the CIA. You are the only man the Senator from Mississippi. of the organizations, functions, names, ape- we approved, and you are the only man, so Mr. FULBRIGHT. Could the Senator ? cial titles, salaries, or numbers of personnel far as I am concerned, who is going to be its say what percentage the committee cut employed by the agency. 'rector, until we do something about it. the budget? Would he say they cut the budget 20 percent, or 10 percent? Mr. ELLENDER. We cut the budget $390 million. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Is that 20 percent, or 10 percent? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- ator from Mississippi is recognized. Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, for what length of time am I recognized? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- ator from Mississippi is recognized for 10 minutes. Mr. STENNIS. May I ask what time remains to the two sides? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The re- maining time is 13 minutes on each side. Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Louisiana for yielding to me. Mr. President,'to try to settle a matter such as this, involving our activities all over the world?open and secret?with 45 minutes of debate to a side, to me, is tragic. I want to underscore that to every Member of this body, and with great re- spect for the author of this amendment. He and I really have rather good feelings for each other, I think. __Yr. SYMINGTON. We certainly do. r Mr. STENNIS. I think it is a great tragedy, and I would like the elected leaders of this body to hear what I am saying about that. It is absolutely impos- sible even to begin to state the facts, much less argue or explain the proce- dures about this matter. It is tremendous. It is perhaps the most important work we do in all the national security ele- ment. There has been talk about it not being That is the ban of secrecy that was put on it when we enacted this law. That Is indicative of what Congress thought about it?suspended all the other re- reqUirements, and all laws, and so forth. Further: Provided that in referring to this section, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget shall make no reports to Congress in connec- tion with the agency under sections 047 . . of title V. . That was with all deference to the deputy. I want a civilian in control of that agency, for my part. We had to ap- prove this man. He assured me that his dominance over it, his effectiveness, his powers over, it will not be diminished - one bit. He told us that today. We had a hearing on this matter. That is just touching the high points. But we are going into it, and we are going to analyze it and study it and have I understand that that is a reference an investigation?if one wants to use to personnel, and I do not know what that word?if necessary. We do not take else. Those sections have been repealed these things lightly. The stakes are too a little, changed a little, reenacted, and high. . so forth. f Now, about these other agencies. Sen- But there is the secrecy. It was in the ators know what they get into. I am not atmosphere of this ? guideline that men going to delineate any more. I mentioned such as Styles Bridges, former chairman the U-2. I do not like some things about of the Appropriations committee some intelligerice. As has been said, spying is Members of the Senate knew him; the spying. But if we are going to have an late Senator Russell?many of the Sen- intelligence agency, we have to have an ators knew him; Leverett Saltonstall; intelligence agency, and it cannot be run and a good number of others worked out as if you were running a tax collector's.. a plan, trying to carry out their func- office or the HEW or some other such tions. They worked out a plan whereby department. You have to make up your this matter would be taken care of. mind that you are going to have an in- la_gpsdnes,s _talking about trying to telligence agency and protect it as such, keep something secret from me other and shut your eyes some and take what aria ol.'seiriebodY else Tryin?tg_EFro- is coming. tect this country. It. is in that spirit that This is a great deal of money here. I this matter has bee1,1- eied on?naLa want to refer now to the last few words pleasant duty, by any Yneans. I will get in the Senator's amendment. I do not Olit anytime someone holding a responsi- know how far down the line that lan- ble position in the Senate. such as our guage goes, but I think it goes much h leader, says wo_h as been selected and farther down the line of intelligence Who will talc.eln.V j;11e,ae. _ ---;-= than anything we handled in the method e thin I have we talked about. . seen come before the Senate, to han e it That language is broad enough. to go this way. I have no criticism of my ifiend to tactical intelligence. Every military Itemized in the bill. Vic' i you ever ape the here. But that is the gravity of it. It can unit in the field has an intelligence offi- U.-.21temiz.eflAti_any_anpropriation bill? be proved by other sections of the law. cer. In Vietnam they have to go out?we Of course not. But it was throne') the The whole Central Intelligence Agency have heard the Senater tell about it?we U-.2 til a t we aat?th? ?IAA voLuahle_Le. is brought into focus here. I want to say send a major or a captain out with a formatiqn that perhaps we pair have that I have been watching them for quite patrol to try to take prisoners, and the gotten-. It saved us hundreds of millions a while. This Agency is conducted in a prisoners are quizzed, to try to find out oufs tdoolalrafperre d tpeirikteil tt eirse geaizotTimil* motiVISPINVOlt?htthsatlasnog:tagoef g g ?, inbiAppipyp,di For Re 919I actitop_m2,94pgi R001300370002-96 activity: tactical patrols. But it is not a budgeted item in the bill or in any of the matters I have been talking about. We would not know where to start. I do not know how much these tactical intelligence activities cost. It is not a budgeted item. There is no way to cal- culate it. That is part of running the Army. That is part of running the Navy. Think, for example, about the big sums of money that must have been spent in Korea on such tactical intelligence. Ad r. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, will the Senator from Mississippi yield for a question? . Mr. STENNIS. I do not yield at thit time. This is all so tragic?so little time I have to yield to any Senator?I can talk to l3enators about this matter in the cloakroom, or in their offices, or in my office, but here tonight, in just a few minutes on this ending matter, I am not going to use my time to try to answer questions that way. I say again, I wish the leaders were in here?they are busy somewhere else?so that I could try to impress upon them the necessity for fur- ther time. I did not hear the unanimous consent request about the limitation. I was handling another matter then. It will take hours and hours fully to explain this matter, so that this body could intel- ligently pass on it. The Senator is giving an absolute figure here which, according to the interpretation, is far, far beyond what the Senator would intend to do. So in the last 10 seconds here, let me warn about the necessity that the only thing to do now is to vote this amend- ment down, and then take up the cudgels and the problem again and work it out some other way. Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, I am impressed with the observations of the chairman of the Armed Services Com- mittee, his stating this amendment is not drawn properly, and so forth. I wish his interest in the subject had developed to the point where he had held just one meeting of the CIA subcommittee this year. To show the lack of respect the execu- tive branch has for the Senate, there was not one Senator who was approached in any way before the White House made this basic, major reorganization of our entire intelligence apparatus. Mr. STENNIS. We will attend to that oneBenator_teo. Mr. SYMINGTON. As a longtime member of the Committee on Foreign Relations, as an ad hoc member of the Appropriations Committee and the rank- ing member of Armed Services, I re- spectfully plead with my colleagues to allow me to receive in executive ses- sion enough intelligence information to in turn form an intelligent judgment on matters which so vitally affect our se- curity; and so I can vote in committee and on the floor of the Senate on the basis of the facts. There have been sev- eral cases where I have not been able to do that in the past. In my opinion, this lack of disseminated information has cost the country a great deal of treasure and a number of American lives. Now, to the CRANSTON) , and then 1 minute to the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FUL- BRIGHT). Mr. CRANSTON. I would like to ad- dress some questions to the distinguished chairman of the committee. The chair- man stalest. that he never wou=ave thought of even asking about CrEMTias bklInitia_conduct,_the_war_iia_Laos I am sure I never would have thought to ask such a question. But it appeared in the press that perhaps that was hap- pening. I would like to ask the Senator if, since then, he has inquired and now knows whether that is being done? Mr. ELLENDER. I have not inquired. Mr. CRANSTON. You do not know, in fact? Mr. ELLENDER. No. Mr. CRANSTON. As you are one of the five men privy to this information, In fact you are the No. 1 man of the five men who would know, then who would know what happened to this money? The fact is, not even the five men, and you are the chief one of the five men, know the facts in the situation. Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. CRANSTON. The Senator stated that $390 million has been cut. I applaud that action. Could the Senator tell me what figure in this bill is cut by $390 million, or is there no figure that has been cut specifically? Mr. ELLENDER. No specific figure. Mr. CRANSTON. What is the total figure appropriated?the total amount appropriated by the bill? Mr. ELLENDER. The total of the bill as reported is $70,242,513,000. Mr. CRANSTON. When we run through the bill, we find that there is allocated money for pay and allowances, for individual clothing, for subsistence, for interest on deposits, for retirement pay, for travel, for operation and main- tenance, for medical and dental care, for welfare and recreation, for medals and awards, for emblems and other in- signia, and then an itemization for the hiring of people, and miscellaneous items such as procurement of aircraft, procure- ment of naval vessels, leasing of build= tags, the purchase of milk, itemized fig- ures on expenses of prisoners, figures for each of those, and so forth. Is the way these items are handled inflated, or bloated, in fact?some of them, at least ?that will cover up what is in this bill for intelligence? Mr. ELLENDER. Yes, the Senator is correct?some of it. Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, I yield 1 minute now to the Senator from Arkansas. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. TALMADGE) . The Senator from Arkansas is recognized for 1 minute. Mr. FULBRIGHT. The Senator from Mississippi, whom we all respect so greatly, I think "maatesteth too much.? All the amendment does is simply to put a ceiling on the overall amount which may be expended for intelligence activi- ties. The amendment has nothing to do with secrecy. It does not in any way seek to make public any of the State secrets . s comments a on an see w p on Mr. ArrlitietfletaidtarianetitilkOntitiaan ct'O ivireaman tro to say fi limita- Sen ? merely trying to ,put a ceiling on intelli- gence expenditures. It is also rather odd thatatjaeenator om Mississippi said telligence, and yet the ehairman_of the that we ca it $39kmillion What was the orieinal atiounrfroin which the cut was made? The overall amount to which the Senator from Missouri (Mr. SYMINGTON) refers is the same thing the Senator from Louisiana, who knows what he is talking about and, as chairman of the commit- tee, spoke to this body about. Yet the Senator from Mississippi says he has no idea what is spent for intelligence. The Senator from Louisiana knows what total he is talking about when he says it was cut $390 million. The Sena- tor from Louisiana certainly has some figure in mind. He was not talking about sergeants going out, looking for booby traps. He had some total figure in mind. It is strange that the chairman of the Armed Services Committee has no idea what the Senator from Louisiana is talk- ing about. Mr. STENNIS. Will the Senator from Arkansas yield at that point? Mr. FULBRIGHT. I do not yield to the Senator on my time. The Senator re- fused to yield to me. The Senator from Mississippi has tried his best to obfuscate this matter. If he is as serious about this thing as he says he is?and I think this is a serious matter, as a matter of fact, the most serious thing we have before us-. I do not, think it is tragic to bring it up. So why do we not have an executive ses- sion and talk about it at length? If the Senator from Mississippi would like to have an executive session, we could talk about it all day, sometime next week, when we return after Thanksgiving. , We talk about intelligence. It is no secret from anyone that we a-re waging war in Laos and have been for a long time. Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, fol- lowing the thought of the Senator from Arkansas, if _the_alaleaelaairMAI.I.P.. 1.?.:12.nro- priations, the Senator from Louisialca (Mr. ELLENDER-) and 'tTie?able Chairman of the Armed Services, the Senator-from MisSiSsippi..(MraSTmsans)a_wilt_agree__to a secret session next week, so we could discuss this matter more thorougnIY7I win-Withdraw my amendment tolifar rniSk th-e-SMTator-from -Louisiana- and 'the Senator from Mississippi if they would agree to such a session? Mr. ELLENDER. Answering for my- self, I wouid lign--to complete this bill. If the Senator desires toetalkaahout it after the bill is completecLineexaantive-ses- sion, that is all right with me. But I would nor-warint to interfeie with the final passage of the bill. Mr. SYMINGTON. Why not let the bill wait until we get more facts about the many billions of dollars involved? Mr. ELLENDER. As I have said, we agreed on the time for the Senator to discuss the amendment. I am very anx- ious to complete the bill today if possible. Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, there has been much criticism of the time lira, the Senator referred to Hi it ti d I themajorityhi Yt?ii s 1953A0 pp, roved For ReleseNEMMi cgtap800 simpipo o 1 3ovezomr923, 1971 Lion. But I did finally agree. I also agree Mr. SYMINGTON. One of the great The Senator from South Dakota (Mr. with the Senator from Mississippi that surprises of my life was to find out how MUNDT) is absent because of illness. there should not be a limitation on time. much of the money in this intelligence The Senator from Illinois (Mr. PERCY) But if we want to proceed I ask unani- ? budget actually goes to the Central In- is detained on official business. inous consent we have another 2 hours. telligence Agency. The Senator feels the a The Senator from Ohio (Mr. SAXElE) Mr. GOLDWATER,. I object. situation in Laos is very wrong. We is absent on official business. The PRESIDING OeVICER. Objec- could talk about other situations. If present and voting, the Senator tion is heard. Who yields time? Mr. FULBRIGHT. T.e aSenator rP- from Illinois (Mr. PERCY) and the Sena- Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, hoar mings me_e_Lsomatlabag.about_Mr....Helnis tor from Maine (Mrs. Salmi) would each much time remains?MrT- _. ,Telaartts hasalaggralarabetter with the vote "nay." " The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Crari-gress than arayasither _intellie,ence The result was announced?yeas 31, ator from Missouri has 5 minutes re- irlilio-Travadeala.T.-would_putr.him nays 56, as follows: . maining.afathea top. -.Thea-recentareorg,anization [No. 394 Leg.] Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, I looks like araegartate_aurhylr. Helms in YEAS-31 Say to my colleagues that I have been - lai'v*--or of tilep. pa it a g o n , and this what I Bayh " Hart Burdick ll tfield Nelson how much money we were actu- rfr. SYMINGTON. I do not either, Byrd, W. Va. Hughes .? C Humphrey Inouye Kennedy Magnuson Mansfield , Metcalf , Mondale Montoya ? told in confidence different figures con- do no Ike-- _ cerning ally expending on national intelligence, moving into the hands of the military. Chiles As a result of people going into foreign Mr MATHIAS. Mr. President, the old Cooper lands we now know that much of what saying that some may apply to this Cranston we are doing is both costly and unwise, amendment is that one should not stir Puitertit , actions we would have undertaken if we muddy water. For the Senator from Mis- Gravelg had had the right information. As the souri has focused our attention on water Harris Senator from California pointed out, if that is not only muddy, but actually we had had more information on certain murky. Many Members may be reluctant important issues, we would have made to stir this water for fear of what they different decisions. may find. I think we cannot delay much All this amendment does is say we can- longer in turning our attention in this direction for fear that what is there may evade our examination and our concern. But I find it intolerable that we should 4W:wt.-to debate and decide this ques- tien withaalach a complete lack of firm facts and reliable information, and with the limitation of time and freedom of expression that is necessary under exist- ing conditions. Under the circumstances, I feel unable to support this amendment at this time. Lavould-aupports however, a motion to hold an executive session at airearry oate Ej.winch the whole issue coua bet'll-Orhtfully considered. An alternative to an executive session of the whole Senate miglatjap a joint meeting :...of the Foreign_ Relations and amount of money we spend than we were Arnie at the time when the program developed. piiiiiii6.-te condifions that would- pe?Tinit adequate itiVestigatiela thoutleopard- It is important that the Senate, as a izingasecuaity. While proper security is whole, understands what the intelligence a national requirement, yet the Congress program is. I would think the Senate must have the facts in order to resolve would welcome an opportunity to have the issues that are embodied in the re- this explained. It would satisfy curiosity arts of a secret war in Laos and other about this matter. covert activities alleged to be conducted occAalltoisotrhgaant Iizdeoannoatrsmeey,Ap.nvayrteh we shoUld pass appropriations for the anOdnecnoLtulicetthain full-scale 1-1 sl acta lweo:aiers in ne Lmaaosst. reason otnr oNovphsy, by one or another of our intelligence le fought, has to be declared by Congreos. et Congress did not know about the ? agencies. having expired, the question is on agree- 1 to the amendment of the Senator from Missouri. Clm this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk wiff call theyoll. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time '. Yet people of this country think we have democracy in which a war, if one is to . The assistant legislative clerk called war in Laos until it was well underway. the roll; Today, while the war is known to. Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. I an- everyone, there still is no official ac- Mr. that the Senator from Indiana knowledgement. There is nothing in this (Mr. HARTKE) , the Senator from South bill to indicate how much money we will Dakota (Mr. McGovaaar) , the Senator spend in support of the army in Laos. It from Maine (Mr. MusKie), the Senator will be many millions Of dollars. I do not from Louisiana (Mr. LONG), and the Sen- see how we could support an army of the ator from Utah (Mr. Moss) are neces- size we do without that much money. sarily absent. I do not see what is wrong with know- I further announce that the Senator ing these things. This is an operation. from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH) is absent on This is not intelligence. It is the differ.; ence between the 11-2 and the affair in official business. the Dominican Republic, and upsetting Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the the go tan t aplaterieg Maybe the Senator from Maryland (Mr. BEALL) , gross ought to know about them so that Maine . not spend more than $4 billion on intel- ligence this fiscal year. I would hope that the Senate would agree. Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. SYMINGTON. I yield. Mr. aIgHT. ?Mr. President, I agree with what the Senator from Missis- sippi said about the importance of this. He said that we cannot dispose of all of this in a few minutes. I agree. " This amendment is a very important amendment. It seems to me that when this matter was brought up before, we did have an executive session and did discus S the matter. Today we are much more critical of the dServicesCommittees under ap- these r iaase2CISM zsYrivRIMIZETAV :Ma it can decide. sent. Aiken Allen Allott Anderson Baker Bellmon Bennett Bentsen Bible Boggs Brock Brooke Buckley Byrd. Va. Cannon Cook Curtis Dole Dominick Beall Church Cotton Hartke JavitS Pell Proxmire Randolph Ribicoff Stevenson Symington Tunney Williams NAYS-36 r Eastland ."" Miller Ellender Packwood Ervin Pastore Fannin Pearson Fong Roth Gambrell Schwelker Goldwater Scott Griffin Sparkman Gurney Spong Hansen Stafford Hollings Stennis Bruska Stevens Jackson Taft Jordan, N.C. Talmadge Jordan, Idaho Thurmond Mathias ,? Tower McClellan Weicker McGee Young McIntyre NOT VOTING-113 Long Percy McGovern Saxbe Moss Smith Mundt Muskie So Mr. SYMINGTON'S amendment was rejected. Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was rejected. Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed .---------- TJNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENTS MANSFIELD. Mr. President, it has been a long and hard 3 weeks. I know that ome Senators are getting tired. Some ?ould like to put the bill over until tomorr w. Others?I believe a majority- would Ii e to finish it tonight. It is in, understanding that as of now We have o ly one amendment in conten- tion, and tl e distinguished Senator from New Ramps ire (Mr. McIaryau) has in- dicated that e would be willing to agree to a limitatio of 20 minutes. I ask unani us consent that the Sen- ator from New ampshire be allotted 15 minutes and th t the manager of the bill be allotted 5 Mutes on that amend- ment. The PRESIDIN Or ICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered. - Mr. MANSFIELD. . President, I ' understand that anotl er possibly con- tentious amendment wi not be offered, mitt,Mmeith n amendment shed Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNO ) and by the