SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE SENATE COMMITTEE SYSTEM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00735R000200160001-7
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 8
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 11, 2001
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: April 1, 1976
• Content Type: OPEN

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 ,o.ao 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