Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 12, 2016
Document Release Date: 
July 11, 2001
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
April 1, 1976
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7.pdf1.08 MB
Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 ? Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 S-3808 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE getting more money into an Incumbent's campaign, because this amendment does favor incumbents. For all those reasons, favor WI-pt . President, I hope the Senate will not this amendment, because I think if we open up the flood gates and say this committee ought to go from $5,000 to $20,000, we will have a very difficult time in saying that State committees, county committees, and other commit- tees ought not to be able to do that. Then we will not have a $5,000 limitation on committees, but a $20,000 limitation. After all, how does one justify increas- ing from $5,000 to $20,000 for national committees and not State committees? Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield at that point so that I may ask for the yeas and nays? Mr. CLARK. Yes. Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The. ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- pore (Mr. HANSEN). Is there a sufficient second? There is a ,sufficient second. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. JOHNSTON. I thank the Senator. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I am pre- pared to yield back the remainder of my time. Mr.. JOHNSTON. I yield back the re- mainder of my time. 11 The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- pore. All remaining time having been yielded back, the question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. JOHNSTON). On this question, the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce ghat the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH), the Senator from Indiana (Mr. HARTKE), and the Senator from Wash- ington (Mr. JACKSON) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Washing- ton (Mr. JACKsoN) would vote "yea." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. HELMS) and the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. YouNC) are necessarily absent. I further announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. STAFFORD) is absent due to illness. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. HELMS) would vote "yea." The result was announced-yeas 64, nays 30, as follows: [Rolloall Vote No. 85 Leg.] YEAS-64 Baker Griffin Pastore Bartlett Hansen Pell Bayh Haskell Percy Bellmon Hatfield Proxmire Bentsen Hathaway Randolph Buckley Hruska Ribicoff Byrd, Robert C. Huddleston Schweiker Cannon Humphrey Scott, Hugh Case Inouye Scott, Cranston Johnston William L. Curtis Laxalt Sparkman Dole Leahy Stennis Domenici Long Stevens Eagleton Magnuson Symington Eastland snnin Mansfield M Cl ll Taft ,ong 0rb rd c e an McClure McGee Talmadge Thurmond Tower Garn Montoya Tunney -Glenn Muskie Weicker Goldwater Nelson Williams Gravel Packwood NAYS-30 Abourezk Clark Metcalf Allen Culver Mondale Beall Durkin Morgan Biden Hart, Gary Moss Brock Hart, Philip A. Nunn Brooke Hollings Pearson Bumpers Javits Roth Burdick Kennbdy Stevenson Byrd, Mathias Stone Harry F., Jr. McGovern Chiles McIntyre NOT VOTING-6 Church Helms Stafford Hartke Jackson Young So Mr. JOHNSTON'S amendment was agreed-to. Mr. CANNON. The President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to. Mr. TAFT. I' move to lay that on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Mr. TAFT.'Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment to the pending sub- stitute by Mr. GRIFFIN. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment. Mr. TAFT. I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 1, in subsection (c) (1) after the word "ballot", add the following: "or certi- fies to the Commission that he will not be an active candidate in the primary". At the end of subsection (c) (1) add the following new sentence: "The prov,Isions of this section shall apply as of the date of enactment." Mr. TAFT. This Is an amendment that had already passed on the first Griffin substitute.and on the bill itself. I am at- tempting now to put it into the second Griffin substitute. As the Members of the Senate who were here will recall, the amendment relates to a limitation on the payout share to the Presidential can- didates. It eliminates candidates who, for two consecutive primaries, have under 10 percent of the vote in those primaries, with the provision that Sena- tor BAYH asked to be included, to the effect that if a candidate wishes to cer- tify that he is not an active candidate, this will not count against him in that primary so far as elimination is con- cerned. I know of no objection to it. It went through by a voice vote originally. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, do I un- derstand correctly that this Is the same amendment to decertify Presidential candidates provided that they do not get a certain percent of the votes in the pri- mary, and this Is the amendment that was offered before to S. 3065 and also to the previous Griffin substitute? Mr. TAFT. The Senator is entirely- correct. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I am willing to accept the amendment. I think it is a good amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- tion is on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration. March 18, 1976 Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President. will the Senator yield? Mr. CRANSTON. Certainly. MODIFICATION OF ORDER TO RE- PORT SENATE RESOLUTION 400 Mr. MANSFIELD. If I may have the attention of the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the order of the Senate mandating the Senate Rules Committee to report Senate Resolution 400 estab- lishing a Standing Committee on Intel- ligence Activities on March 20, 1976, be modified as follows: Senate Resolution 400 be reported forthwith from the Committee on Rules and immediately be referred simultane- ously to the Committee on the Judiciary and to the Committee on Rules; That the Committee on the Judiciary make its recommendations on Senate Resolution 400 not later than the close of business on March 29, 1976 and that the recommendations of the Committee on the Judiciary be referred without fur- ther action by the Senate to the Commit- tee on Rules; and That the Rules Committee report its final recommendations not later than April 5, 1976. Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, may I in- quire- Mr. MANSFIELD. This has been cleared. Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I just wanted to know that, because I happen to be the only ranking member of the Committee on Government Operations here. Mr. - MANSFIELD. I looked for the Senator, but he was not available. He was in a hearing. Mr. JAVITS. I understand. Mr. MANSFIELD. I cleared it with Senators CANNON, HATFIELD, EASTLAND, TmNNEY, HART, BYRD; HRUSKA, RIBICOFF, and SCOTT. - Mr. JAVITS. Has It been cleared with Mr. PERCY, the ranking member? Mr. MANSFIELD. I shall trust the Senator from New York to get him. Mr. JAVITS. I shall not object. I just wanted to know that. Mr. MANSFIELD. I thank the Sen- ator. FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1976 The Senate continued with the con- sideration of the bill (S. 3065) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for its administration by a Federal Election Commission ap- pointed in accordance with the require- ments of the Constitution, and for other purposes. Mr. CRANSTON. I yield to the Senator from Oklahoma for a unanimous-con- sent request. Mr. BARTLETT. I ask unanimous con- sent that Don Cogman of my staff be accorded privileges of the floor during consideration of this measure. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CRANSTON. I send an amend- ment to the desk and ask for its con- sideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 March 18, 1976 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE share the Senator's view that somehow the money that goes through the Sena- torial Campaign Committee or the Con- gressional Campaign Committee is as pure as the driven snow, and the money that comes from individuals who partic- ipate in labor is tainted or business money is tainted. Mr. JOHNSTON. It is not that it is tainted. It is that they have a special point of view and they give their money to promote candidates who share that point of view. Mr. CLARK. I assume if that were the only criterion, the Democratic Commit- tee gives it to candidates that share their view and the Republicans give it to can- didates that share their view. Mr. JOHNSTON. No, that is not so, be- cause any member of the Democratic Caucus, regardless of his view, even if at times it strays from the majority, is en- titled to his share of the money. Mr. CLARK. But it is a Democratic view. They are not giving money to any- body but Democrats or they are not giv- ing money to anybody but Republicans. Mr: JOHNSTON. That may be so, but that, I submit, is under our system of government which, in effect, has en- shrined the two-party system. That is permissible and that is the kind of taint, if the party puts a taint on money, that our system of government envisions and endorses and has run on traditionally. No one out there in America can say because a party gives someone money that there is anything wrong with that. That -is traditional American politics. Mr. CLARK. I think what the amend- ment does and what it says is quite clear. I would like the Senator from Louisiana to correct me if I am wrong. Every single committee in the United States that fails under this law would have a $5,000 lim- itation on the amount that they can con- tribute, with two exceptions carved out by this amendment: The national com- mittees of the two major parties and the congressional and senatorial committees of the two major parties. In those cases they would be allowed to give $20,000 in direct cash plus, in accordance with the present law, the national party. commit- tees would be allowed to spend a mini- mum of $20,000 on their behalf. . That means that we are going to ar- rive at a conclusion where the two na- tional committees can now spend an ag- gregate of $40,000, $20,000 indirect and $20,000 direct, $40,000 minimum. In those States where two cents a voter amounts to more than $20,000, they would be able to spend in excess of that. Mr. JOHNSTON. Will the Senator yield for a question? Mr. CLARK. Yes. Mr. JOHNSTON. How much can those sources now spend, assuming there is a primary, a runoff, and a general election? Mr. CLARK. First of all, let us assume that the primary, runoff, and general election do not occur in at least half of the races in America. We have never had a runoff, to my knowledge, in any place in my part of the country. I do not think one can assume that one automatically gets $5,000 in three elections, I think on the average there will be two elections, and on some occasions three elections. That is direct money. What the Senator is suggesting is that in those cases where there is a primary and a general election we would be able to double that to $20,000. I think it only means the intro- duction of bigger money into politics and greater cynicism about it, particularly when we are doing it for ourselves, par- ticularly when we are doing it to our own committees. As I say, we debated this at length 2 years ago. Maybe the Senate feels dif- ferently about it now, but I feel very strongly that if we were to say that our committees ought to be different, that we ought to be able to give $20,000 instead of $5,000, we would come in for a great deal of justifiable criticism. Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, just one final word. I believe the amendment is well understood. I would like to simply point out that the $20,000 the National Committee may now spend on behalf of a candidate is not inserted by this amendment. That is not changed by this amendment. All this amendment does is increase basically for the sena- torial campaign committees from an ag- gregate of $15,000 in case there are the three elections to a total of $20,000 for however many elections there are. I submit that when we say we are do- ing it for ourselves, what we mean is that we are doing it for any candidate for national office, whether he be a con- gressional candidate or a senatorial can- didate. In that sense, this is not a club amendment, if one wants to call it that. It is not for incumbents; it is for any candidate that the committee may give money to. Mr. ALLEN. Will the Senator yield? Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes, I will yield. Mr. ALLEN. This would cover pri- maries and run-off primaries as well, would it not? Mr. JOHNSTON. That is correct. Un- der the present law, the campaign com- mittee can give $5,000 for the primary, $5,000 in a run-off, and then another $5,000 in the general election, which is a total of $15,000. What this would al- low is to give the .committee some flexi- bility. If the Senator's tough race is the general, he could withhold the whole $20,000 until that time. Mr. ALLEN. How often do either of the committees contribute to a chal- lenger of an incumbent? Mr. JOHNSTON. In the case of the Democratic Committee that is not done. Mr. ALLEN. In other words, this, then, is just for the benefit of incumbents; is that not right? Mr. JOHNSTON. It would also apply to the challengers, I mean in those cases where an incumbent is beaten and a new incumbent is elected. Mr. ALLEN. That is right; in other words, in general elections. But through the primaries, first and second, it would be the incumbent who was taken care of. I have no objection to taking care of in- cumbents, but- Mr. JOHNSTON. Except in cases where you have no incumbents, as in the case of retirees. Mr. ALLEN. But where there is an incumbent, there would be no impedi- S 3807 ment to any incumbent receiving funds, in the general election or primary, either one. Mr. JOHNSTON. The Senator is co rect in the point he makes, in the seno that that is the standard operating pro- cedure under which we have operated, and I see no movement to change it. But the Senator is correct in the point he makes. Mr. ALLEN. I just want us to under- stand what we are voting on. As long as the incumbent is in the picture, he is the one who gets the benefit of the increased amount. Mr. JOHNSTON. Not just the incum- bent. Mr. ALLEN. I say, as long as the in- cumbent is in the picture, though, he would be the one to really benefit. Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, will the_ Sen- ator yield? Mr. JOHNSTON. I yield to the Sena- tor from Ohio. Mr. ALLEN. But is that not true? Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes; the Senator is correct. Mr. TAFT. Is it not true that that de- pends upon what the committee involved desired to do? If the committee involved desired to make other rules, it could make other rules as to the distribution of those donations. Mr. JOHNSTON. That is correct. There is no rule that specifies how a na- tional committee or a senatorial com- mittee is going to spend its money. Mr. TAFT. Well, the Senator is not entirely correct. The Republican sena tonal committee does have certain rule Mr. JOHNSTON. Well, yes. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. JOHNSTON. I yield. Mr. CLARK. I would like to ask the Senator if his amendment would allow the national committee to give more money to a Presidential campaign. Does it increase the limit that may be given to a Presidential candidate? Mr. JOHNSTON. I do not believe so. It is not intended to, and I do not be- lieve that the phraseology is subject to that interpretation. Mr. CLARK. That is the way I would interpret it. Therefore, I wonder if this would not be interpreted, and quite ac- curately, as an amendment aimed only at helping Senators and Members of Con- grees. The Senator seeks to permit those national committees to give us more, but not the President more. We are not rais- ing the amount the national committee can give to a President; that remains the same. _ Mr. JOHNSTON. That is correct. Mr. CLARK.-So it seems to me all we are doing is saying we want to funnel a lot more money into Senate and congres- sional campaigns through giving the na- tional committee a separate contribution limitation, and the same with the cam- paign committees. I do not see how it could be interpreted except that way, as a means of getting more money into oule own congressional campaigns. I think, as the Senator from Alabama has emphasized, it is merely a means of Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 :'.ASS Ins 01v' IP 0ST._ roved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200.160001-7. By 'Walter Pincus Washington Post Staff Writer .ing a new Senate Committee . on Intelligence Activities. =which originally had been `scheduled to pass the Sen- ate this week. has run into :unexpected trouble from two powerful Senate com- intelligence agencies, such telligence Agency, to the -resolution-was sent to the -with an agreement that the committee would make its recommendations by March Judiciary, under the, reso- ,lution as approved by the -Committee last month. is scheduled to lose all author- According to Judiciary :.Con nittec sources, a move -will be made this week by FBI from the jurisdiction of turn it to the exclusive con- trol of Judiciary. .scheduled to discuss the im- on its jurisdiction. A staff 'study. circulated to Foreign hers. suggested the commit- tee may he blocked from -,ettim? CIA witnesses in the future because exclusive ju- risdiction over the agency has been given to the new -committee by the proposed resolution. The Foreign Relations Committee would also be re- quired to give up to the new committee all jurisdiction over the State Department's bureau of intelligence and research. " We don't want to have some bureaucrats. or the White House telling us CIA or the State Department does not have to come and talk about intelligence mat- ters," a. committee aide said yesterday. A third Senate committee, Armed Services, has yet to hold a meeting on its loss of jurisdiction. Two members, Sens. John Tower (R-Tex.). and Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.), have questioned how the military intelligence authority can be divided between Armed Services and the new com- mittee as proposed in the resolution. To date. however, Armed Services Chairman John C. Stennis (D-Miss.) has re- fused to discuss the matter, though his committee's loss of control over CIA and' other intelligence functions has been pointed out to him. "This is not slipping by Sen. Stennis out of ignorance. one staff member said yes- terday. Supporters of, the pro- posed intelligince committee see the opposition of the Ju- diciary Committee as the most serious that has arisen. In 1973. Judiciary set-up a special FBI oversight sub- committee. It had a staff of only one, and it its first year handled only one bill, to provide a 10-year term for the FBI director. Thereafter it became , moribund while the Senate intelligence cony mittee took over investiga- tion of the FBI - This past January, Judici- ary Committee Chairman James O. Eastland (D-Miss.) mittee. The subsequent dis- mittee waa used in the Gov- ernment Operations Coin- diction was expected when review. by April 5. Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA=RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R00020016~001-7 S 4860 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE April 1, 1,916 EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS The pertinent legislative reports of the Department of the Interior and the Office of K K. agement and Budget setting forth Ex- tive agency recommendations relating to 4941 are set forth below: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C., February 4, 1976. Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insu- lar Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This responds to your request for the views of this Department on H.R. 4941, a bill as it passed the House of Representatives, "For the relief of Oscar H. Barnett." We recommend that the bill be enacted. H.R. 4941 would authorize the Secretary of the interior to convey to Oscar H. Barnett, by quitclaim deed or by other appropriate instrument, without consideration, all right, title, and interest of the United States to a certain tract of land in Leage County, Mis- sissippi. Our records indicate that on December 18, 1922, C. W. Triplett, Jr., and his wife pur- posed to convey the 20-acre tract described in the bill to the United States for use as a day school for the Choctaw Indians. The consideration to be paid for the conveyance was to have been $500.00' Through a misunderstanding of the de- sires of the Department of the Interior, the grantors had the deed recorded on December 30, 1922, among the county records of Leaks County, Mississippi, before it had been sub- mitted to the Department of the Interior for approval. In fact, the recommendation made by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs on May 4, 1923, to the Secretary of the In- terior was that the deed of conveyance not be accepted. On May 5, 1923, the Secretary approved the recommendation of the Com- missioner of Indian Affairs, and, thus the d of conveyance was not approved. WIn order for the conveyance to have been Since there was no such approval, title d not pass and the United States acquire no interest in the land described in the bill. The Bureau of Indian Affairs in fact ac uired a nearby tract of land on which it/estab- We understand that Mr. Barnet has owned the 20-acre tract since 1953. We /have no ob- jection to enactment of H. 4941 which would remove any clouds o Mr. Barnett's title that may have been caused by the confused transactions in t? 1920's.. The Office of Manageme t and Budget has advised that there is n objection to the presentation of this re rt from the stand- point of the Administ{ation's program. Assistant Se etary of the Interior. CHANGES N EXISTING LAW In compliant with subsection 4 of rule XXIX of the 'Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committe notes that no changes in ex- isting law ar/ made by the bill, as reported. ORDER FOR ADJOURNMENT TO MONDAY, APRIL 5, 1976 M .ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I as unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today it stand in adjournment until the hour of ,12 o'clock noon on Monday next. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without ~bjection, it is so ordered. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I as into executive session. to consider nominations at the desk. STATE DEPARTMEN The legislative clerk read th nomina- tions, reported earlier today, f- Thomas S. Gates, Jr., of Pennsylva a, Chief of the U.S. Liaison Office of Pe ing, People's Republic of China, with th rank of Am- bassador; Fred O. Pinkha , of Connecti- cut, to be an Assistant dministrator of the Agency for Inter tional Develop- ment; Christian A. Ifa~ rter, Jr., of New Mexico, to be an Assistant Administrator ment; David S. S Columbia, to be i nary and Plenip States of Ameri Carter, Jr., of bassador Extr _ tiary of the Liberia; W' i to be A assad4 Plenipote or. America to Nor Bloom Id, 'of Mi sador xtra~ xtraordinE of t1~ d . United El Ecuat or. considered en bloc. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The nominations are considered and con- firmed en bloc. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I re- quest that the President be notified. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. LEGISLATIVE SESSION Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate re- turn to legislative session. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the.roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ORDER GRANTING PERMISSION TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO. FILE ITS REPORT BY MIDNIGHT, APRIL 3, 1976 Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Budget Committee be granted authority until midnight Saturday, April 3, to file its report on the First Concurre Resolution. The PRESIDING OFFI R. objection, it is so ordered CBudget Without ORDER FOR RE NITION OF SEN- ATOR HASK ON APRIL 5 AND APRIL 6, 19 Mr. ROBE I ask unr - ' . two lead recog Mon.3KY and be pecognizec ted on each o. SENATE RESOLUTION 400-TO ES- TABLISH A STANDING COMMIT- TEE OF THE SENATE ON INTEL- LIGENCE ACTIVITIES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES - ORDER GRANTING AUTHORIZATION TO RULES COMMITTEE TO FILE ITS REPORT BY APRIL 30, 1976 Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Rules and Administration have until April 30 to file its. report on Senate Res- olution 400. May I say that this was unanimously agreed to in the Democratic Conference today. It meets with the ap- proval of all the concerned parties and, I think, in view of the. circumstances which have developed that it is in the best interests of this legislation to do so in this manner at this time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I should simply like to ask the majority leader a question, pre- ceded by a very brief comment. We all very much want meaningful legislation for oversight in the intelli- gence agency, some of us just more re- cently than the distinguished majority leader who, for two decades, has felt the need and seen the necessity with great foresight, but we feel we need to improve oversight by the Congress; we need to reduce proliferation of commit, tees to which intelligence agencies must report and, certainly, try to bring down the amount of time that the director of CIA is required to appear before Con- gress. Mr. Colby in 3 years spent 60 percent of his entire time appearing before Con- gress or testifying, preparing for it or cleaning up afterwards. So I would ask that if this extension of time is granted what the intentions of the leadership are with respect to the priority that this matter may have when once reported out by the Committee on Rules, and I would like to also comment that I am fully conversant with why the Committee on Rules needs this extra time. The time that the Committee on Rules took in the budget reform legisla- tion saved the Congress, saved the Sen- ate, months of debate and time, improved the legislation dramatically, and I feel Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 April 1, 1976 property and preserve niflcance. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE its historical sig- LEGISLATIVE HISTORY H.R. 1466 was introduced by the late Rep- resentative Jerry Pettis on January 16, 1975, and passed the House on October 6, 1975. The Subcommittee on the Environment and Land' Resources conducted a hearing on this pro- posal on February 26, 1976. The Department of the Interior recommended the enactment of H.R. 1466; no opposition to the measure was expressed.' COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Senate Committee on Interior and In- sular Affairs, in open business session on March 23, 1976, by unanimous vote of a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass H.R. 1466, without amendment. COST Enactment of H.R. 1466 will not result in any expenditure of Federal funds. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS The pertinent legislative reports of the De- partment of the Interior and the Office of Management and Budget setting forth Execu- tive agency recommendations relating to H.R. 1466 are set forth below: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C.,-February 17, 1976_. Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and In- sular Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This responds to your request for the views of this Department on H.R. 1468 in the Senate, a bill "To convey certain federally owned land to the Twenty- nine Palms Park and Recreation District." We recommend that H.R. 1466 be enacted. H.R. 1466 conveys one acre of land, more or less, located in the small town of Twenty- nine Palms, California, to the Twentynine Palms Park and Recreation District. This parcel was set aside over 60 years ago as a cemetery for Indians of the Twentynine Palms Band of Mission Indians. The ceme- tery contains remains of the'ancestors of the Twentynine Palms members having Cheme- huevi blood. Under section 2, the land conveyed by the bill shall be used only as an Indian cemetery. and historical museum site for the public, or else title shall revert to the United States Government. , In 1911, under the authority of the Act of January 12, 1891 (26 Stat. 712), for the relief of the Mission Indians in the State of California, the United States purchased the property by warranty deed from the Southern Pacific Railroad Company. The deed shows $5.00 as the purchase price. This land is Indian Affairs. The Twentynine Palms Band of Miss, the cemetery may be preserved., is a political subdivision of the preserved. The appraised position to expend any funds to purchase the site, if itlreceived such land by convey- ance it will beautify the property and pre- serve its historical significance. The Indians' desire is to have this sacred burial ground of their ancestors protected from adverse use. With respect to the wishes of the Band, and in order to protect this cemetery site and its historical significance, we recommend that H.R. 1466 be enacted. The Office of Management and Budget has advised that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the stand- point of the Administration program. Sincerely yours, MORRIS THOMPSON, Commissioner of Indian Affairs. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, Washington, D.C., February 27, 1976. Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and In- sular Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your requests for the views of the Office of Management and Budget on the following bills: 1. S. 101, a bill "To direct the Secretary of 2. S.. 155, a bill "To authorize the Sec tary of the Interior to convey all right, ti a and interest of the United States in d to a tract of land located-in Scotts Blul County, Nebraska, to Robert L. Summervil of Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska" (reque *fed January 3. S. 301, a bill "Relating t lands in the Middle Rio Grande Conse ancy District, New Mexico" (requested J 31, 1975); ,fi 4. S. 1365, a bill "To a horize the Secre- tary of the Interior to c vey to the city of Haines, Alaska, interest of the United States in certain lands" (re ested.June 12, 1975); . 5. S. 2004, a bill "T eliminate a restriction on use of certain 1 ds patented to the city of Hobart, Kiow County, Oklahoma" (re- quested January 3, 1978); 6.-S. 2286, a ill "To amend the Act of June 9, 1906, provide for a description of certain land to be'conveyed by the United States to a city of Albuquerque, New Mexico" quested January 23, 1976); 7. S. 2 8 as bill "For the relief of the city of Yak at, Alaska" (requested January 23, 8.'V2837, a bill "To amend the Act of Au- gus 30, 1890, to except a tract of ground to ted in Carbon County, Wyoming, from i restrictions" (requested January 23, Oscar H. Barnett" (requested January 23, 1976). The Office of Management and Budget con- curs in the views of the Department of the Interior in its reports on' these bills, and accordingly: (a) we oppose the enactment of S. 101, S. 155, S. 301, and S. 2837; (b) we have no objection to the enactment of S. 1365 and S. 2286 if amended as suggested by the Department; (c) we oppose the enact- ment of S. 2004 and S. 2798, although we have no objection to enactment of the De- partment's substitute bills; and, (d) we recommend enactment of H.R. 4941. Sincerely yours, JAMES M. FREY, Assistant Director for Legislative Reference. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW In compliance with subsection 4 of rule XXIX of the Standing Rules of the Sen- ate, the Commttee notes that no changes in existing law are made by H.R. 1466, as re- ported. time, and passed. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD the measure. There being no The purpos to authorize convey by priate in- rui tion, to sear inters of tj tract f land de ibed q ter of r t tiered, -qAQ d a th aw Meridian in Leake County, Miss. BACKGROUND AND NEED Department of the Interior records indi- cate that in 1922, C. W. Triplett, Jr., and his wife purported to convey a 20 acre tract of land to the United States for use as a day school for the Choctaw Indians. The consid- eration to be paid for the conveyance was to have been $500.00. Through a misunderstanding of the desires of the Department of the Interior, the grant- ors had the - deed recorded in the county records of Leake County, Mississippi, before it had been submitted to the Department of the Interior for approval and.acceptance. In fact, the Commissioner of Indian Affairs had recommended against approval of the deed of conveyance. The Secretary concurred wi the recommendation of the ,Commission of Indian Affairs and the deed was no approved. Title did not pass, and the United States acquired no interest in the land. Instead, the Bureau of Indian Affairs acquired a near- by tract of land on which it established the day school. Accordingly, the Department of the Interior )Ias no interest in the 20 acre tract which is the subject of H.R. 4941. The Department of the Interior has indi- cated its understanding that Mr. Barnett has owned the land since 1953 and that the -Department would have no objection to en- actment of H.R. 4941. Th legislation would remove a cloud on Mr. Barnett's title to the land, which was created by the attempted conveyance to the United States by C. W. Triplett, Jr., and his wife. It would not involve payment of any government funds and the government would not be required to warrant title. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY H.R. 4941 was introduced by Congressman Montgomery on March 13, 1975, and passed the House on December 18, 1975. The Sub- committee on the Environment and Land Resources conducted a hearing on H.R. 4941 on February 26, 1976. The Department of the Interior recomended the bill's enact- ment; there was no opposition to the measure. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Senate Committee on Interior and In- sular Affairs, in open business session on March 23, 1976, by unanimous vote of a quorum present, recommends that the Sen- ate pass H.R. 4941, without amendment. COST Enactment of H.R. 4941 wIll not resul in any expenditure of Federal funds. -Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001,-7 Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 April 1, 1976 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE that this legislation is subject to fur- ther strengthening. But I would only be concerned at the le-of time that would elapse, and tre'd~d as a priority matter. Mr. MANSFIELD. The Senator is ab- solutely `correct. The Rules Committee did a stupendous job on the budget leg- islation and because of the time it took and the care it showed we have a good budget committee at the present time which is making its weight felt and is doing an exceedingly good job. I approve without equivocation this proposal which I made to extend the time of the committee to file its report be- cause, on the basis of the facts explained in the Democratic Conference this morn- ing, and there was no other alternative, and the idea is to do a good, thorough, and complete job. As far as the Democratic majority leader is concerned, as soon as it is re- ported out it is his intention, in conjunc- tion with the distinguished Republican leader, to call the legislation up as soon as possible. Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, I would only like to call to the attention of the Senate that just yesterday in the Rules Committee George Bush, Director of the CIA, urged Congress to "concentrate oversight of foreign intelligence activi- ties." Here is the man responsible for carry- ing out this function, he has just been overwhelmingly confirmed by the Senate. I think he is deeply concerned about a maser they would not be parochial. I serve on the Foreign Relations Commit- tee, we have' an oversight responsibility, and we set the ,budget for a segment of the intelligence activities of the State of the Government Operations Commit- A commendable job was done once tee I would like to make a unanimous- again by the distinguished chairman of consent request. the Committee on Government Opera- ORDER AUTHORIZING CALLING UP SENATE RESOLUTION 400 ON MAY 6, 1976 Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the legis- lation is reported from the Committee on Rules on April 30 that it be in order for the leadership to call it up on May 6, which will comply with the 3-day rule and make allowances for the weekend. Mr. PERCY. The Senator from Illinois would be very gratified. Mr. MANSFIELD. I make that request, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. All requests are in order. Mr. RIBICOFF. Mr. President, I com- mend the majority leader for his consist- ent position that the time has come to have proper oversight of the intelligence community. The majority leader has been in back of the church committee's posi- tion and the Government Operations Committee's position from the start. The Government Operations Commit- tee, under mandate from the Senate to report back its action by March 1, was able to do so by February 24, and I want to commend the Senator from Illinois, the junior Senator from Connecticut, and the entire membership of the Govern- ment Operations Committee for its hard work both at the hearings and the mark- up to get this bill out in time. But I do recognize that the Rules Committee was up against a peculiar set of circum- stances. They were supposed to have re- ported back by March 20, but during this intervening period they were engaged on the floor of the Senate in a continuous debate on the Federal Election Commis- SpeakinWas one Member, I would be Sion matter, and it was impossible for the perfectly willing to give up and relinquish Rules Committee to be on the floor man- lation, that responsibility for budgetary matters, and ad that important piece leov ht with the assurance that the State De- having hearings on this oversight partment, the CIA, would fully produce matter. also should take into recess s account on the that the end result of intelligence, and the the Senate will go into Department of Defense, whenever the and return urn the 26th, there the 14th c n Foreign Relations Committee, the Armed period of 2 weeks in which nothing can Services Committee the Judiciary Com- pan , mittee, and that would include also the done. FBI, so that any of those committees I am confident, after conversations would have available to them the end with Senator C they y and Senator RoB- product of intelligence. ERT C. BYRD that t they will do everything But if we all retain our prerogatives to they can to expedite the matter. It is only set the budgetary levels for these various fair that they be given this extra time activities and we do not delegate that to until the 30th of April to work out their the Intelligence Oversight Committee es- thinking and complete their hearings. sentially then I think we have just sim- Under the circumstances, it is a fair re- ply proliferated a'problem. We have scat- quest, and I hope the Senate will go along tered our responsibility, and we have with the request. added another layer on top of another - Mr, PERCY. Mr. President, will the tions, helped in invaluable fashion by the distinguished Senator from Connec- ticut (Mr. WEiciER), *hose expertise and experience in this matter and whose deep-felt feeling go back several years. His experience proved invaluable to the committee in moving us forward to the point that we ultimately reached. Mr. WEICKER. Mr. President, reserv- ing the right to object insofar as the official unanimous-consent request is concerned, I should like to say a few words. First, I wish to make it clear that what follows is not in any way directed toward my distinguished colleague from Connec- ticut, Senator RIBIcoFF, who in every way, both in the sense of personal com- mitment and in the sense of being the chairman of one of our standing com- mittees, has devoted himself to reporting a bill. Neither do the remarks that follow apply to the distinguished majority leader, who has been in the forefront of the fight for oversight; nor to the Sena- tor from Illinois (Mr. PERCY). But I have a few things to get off my chest, and I am going to go ahead and say them be- fore agreeing to this unanimous-consent request and another delay. On March 1, the Committee on Gov- ernment Operations reported Senate Resolution 400 to the full Senate with a recommendation that a permanent standing Senate Committee on Intelli- gence Activities be.established. We all know the list of abuses and trampled constitutional rights which precipitated this action. I will not repeat them. I will only remind the Senate that these transgressions were not committed by our foreign intelligence agencies alone but also, by our domestic law enforce- ment and investigative agencies-the FBI and the IRS. I will only remind the Senate that these transgressions were not an aberation or one shot deal. They had become standard operating pro- cedures. The lesson is that accountability can- not be assured without an accounting process. Congressional oversight is that process in a democracy. Oversight that has constancy, purpose, and legislative power-oversight that is a primary not a secondary responsibility. Oversight that is no longer conducted by a select few whose seniority imposed responsibil- ities compete for time and attention, but oversight by those who have the time and interest that protecting the Consti- tution always demands. This is what was called for yesterday-not tomorrow. g ion o authority we the distinguished Senator from Connec- accountability at the whim of Presidents, would be working the other way. - ticut for the way in which the hearings Senators, or Directors of the CIA but But with the assurance given by the were conducted, for the way the commit- by law. majority leader, the Senator from Ills- tee held to the schedule that was origi- Some would argue that we are over- nois has no objection to the unanimous- nally established. Every Senator was reacting to the heat of the times. I would Cant reauest that hae hall , s,.,..,.a ..._--__ ___ r .. . _ - a y this reason gis- now number 8,. and we would increase Mr. RIBICOFF. I yield. partners. Especially for threason leis it to 10, and instead of working toward Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, I commend lative accountability is mandatory. Not a responsible dele t f by the distin ~~ ?~ ?w cvcayuue cvuiu Vu- a awr MAKER ana I introduced similar leg- guished Republican member serve what was being done. islation 11/2 years ago. Indeed, the dis- Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7 S 4862 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE tinguished majority leader first pro- lutely essential that this body assume the posed a standing oversight committee responsibility of establishing an oversight two decades ago. Had Senator MANS- committee that can really do the job. FIELD been successful in his earlier en- 1: was at the Committee on Rules this deavors, our country might have been morning and I listened very carefully to spared the recent fiasco of these neces- the questions being asked by the dis- sary intelligence and law enforcement tinguished Senator from West Virginia agencies. of Senator CHURCH. I listened to the col- The task which is before the Senate lo< uy. The questions raised by the Sena- is an urgent one. It extends beyond the for from West Virginia were pertinent protection of certain institutions of the questions. Senate and the empires of certain of its The Senator from West Virginia' did Members. No entity of government in, point out weaknesses in our resolution. America can survive without the backing Although we reported out that resolu- of the American people. If you believe tion unanimously, I do recognize the po- in the -CIA, FBI, and so forth we had tential trouble and doubt. I have the ut- best clean up their act and our own. most confidence that our majority whip I would hope my colleagues would re- will address himself to this piece of leg- spond to the tragedies of the past 3 years islation as he did to the establishment with meaningful report. We did not of the Committee on the Budget. We did have a nightmare. It happened. a lot of work on the Committee on the So rather than wait for a lapse of na- Budget in the Committee on Government tional memory and a tragic encore- Operations and it was an improved bill please let us act to secure the future. when it came out of the Committee on, I do not fault the Rules Committee. Rules. They have the misfortune of being the :: am confident that the Committee last act of the stage of delay. Their re- on Rules will apply itself with deep con- quest, is legitimate and so I support tern. I am satisfied that when this reso- them. lulion reaches the floor and the Senate But to those who believe this all too wcrks its will, it will be a good bill, set- will pass-my response is, do not bet on tir..g up a strong and effective intelli- it. gene oversight committee. They have the misfortune of being I again commend my colleague from the last act on the stage of delay. And Connecticut, who" has been a consistent their request is legitimate, so I support and strong fighter for the cause of civil them. To those who believe this all, too; and personal liberties. I hope that when will pass, my response is, "Do not bet on the bill is reported out from the Com- it." mittee on Rules, we shall be able to have Mr. President, I yield the floor. I shall the support of the Committee on. Gov- April 1, 1976 most important pieces of legislation, one of the most salutary landmarks in the legislative process that had occurred in Senate Resolution 400. I am impressed by the desire for cooperation and work- ing together on the part of all whose as- sistance is going to be needed as we de- velop this piece of legislation. I believe confidently that, with the help of Sen- ator RIDICOFF, Senator PERCY, Senator WEICKER, and Senator CHURCH, and other Senators-Sen^'tor HUDDLESTON, Senator NUNN, and others-I could continue to name them, but I shall simply say all of those who have been principals in the development of this legislation thus far and the chairmen of the committees that will be affected: I believe that all of us, working together, our staffs and our- selves, with the Committee on Rules will insure that the legislation that finally comes out of that committee will repre- sent a composite viewpoint that is really a consensus of the various parties join- ing in the effort and will help us to have that broadbased support that I referred to earlier. It is a complex piece of legislation and, as Senator RIBICOFF has very ably stated, it has several areas of concern to many of us. I believe that reasonable men can come together and work to- gether and produce a product that will be effective and workable and will con- stitute something of which we all, at the end, can be proud. not object: Once again, I express my deep er: Anent Operations in its entirety for appreciation to my senior colleague from the proposal that comes out of the Com- SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUD Connecticut (Mr. RiBrcoFF) and for the m:.ttee on Rules. ' SENATE COMMITTEE SYSTEM foresight supplied by the majority leader I am sure that our respective staffs (Mr. MANSFIELD). and ourselves will be working with the Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, under I think, also, it has to be said here Committee on Rules to try. to fashion a the provisions of Senate Resolution 109, this evening that we can sit here, and measure that can have the support of I ask that the following Democratic debate on the smallest of points and con- the overwhelming majority of the U.S. members be appointed to the temporary sume days on picayune matters. And Senate. Select Committee to Study the Senate when it comes to the defense. of the Con- Mr. WEICKER. I thank the distin- Committee System, on the basis of the stitution and assuring that our kids will gu ished Senator. resolution passed on yesterday. have the advantages of a Constitution Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The that gave to us all that we have, appar- I want to express appreciation on behalf Chair, on behalf of the President of the ently we neither have the time nor the of the chairman of the Committee on Senate, appoints the following Senators: attendance to pay much attention. Rules (Mr. CANNON) and on behalf of Senator METCALF, Senator NELSON, Sen- Mr. RIBICOFF. Will my colleague yield myself and others of that committee to ator STEVENSON, Senator BENTSEN, Sena- at that point? the distinguished Senator from Con- tor CHILES, and Senator NUNN to the Mr. WEICKER. I yield to my dis- necticut (Mr. RIBICOFF). That apprecia- ' Select Committee to Study the Senate tinguished colleague. tion is not only for his expressions of Committee System. Mr. RIBICOFF. I say to the Senate commendation with reference to the ef- L that we should appreciate the concern forts that. the committee is making in ORDER FOR PERIOD FOR TRANSAC- Il similar proposals during his entire term lation that will have broad-based sup- t 1 th a t During the hearings my port-hopefully, we can do that-but a e . , in a en colleague from Connecticut expressed, also for his expression of faith and con- Mr: ,..,,i +a,,,o -i., him nnntin?inP Ann- fiience in those of us on that committee. I ask - CClll U1saU u wa. wu a.vv 1. w...., -+-+-- ____- session of Congress, a proposal setting up rr..ent him and the members of the Com- of Senatd nnmmittaa in the field rnittee on Government operations for there be a have been consummated, nod for the transaction of DUU lU lllllOu ,.. ~. v~a.w. vv w++ + ...-., of Watergate and in view of the findings debated on the floor that if, indeed, it The PRESIDING OFFIC of the Church committee, that is abso- . worked, it would constitute one of the objection, it is so ordered. Approved For Release 2001/07/27 : CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7