DEFEAT OF BINGAMAN POLYGRAPH AMENDEMENT BY SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 2, 2013
• Sequence Number: 24
• Publication Date: May 5, 1987
• Content Type: MEMO

.~
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/02 :CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1
OCA 87-1860
5 May 1987
N,EMORANDUM FOR: C/PE/PPG/OS
C/ALD/OGC
C/POL/OS
STAT
SUBJECT: Defeat of Bingaman Polygraph Amendment
by Senate Armed Services Committee
1. On April 30, 1987, the Senate Armed Services Committee
defeated an amendment to the Fiscal .Year 1988-89 Department of
Defense Authorization bill, S. 864, which was offered by
Senator Bingaman on the subject of polygraph use by the
Department of Defense (DoD) Copies of the amendment are not
available. We understand, however, that the amendment would
have directed the National Academy of Sciences to study the
polygraph and/or DoD use thereof and required DoD and the
Agency to cooperate in the study.
2. Although Senator Bingaman could offer the amendment
during Senate floor consideration of the bill, this is not
likely, given the negative vote in the committee.
3. With this action, we understand that there is no
provision currently in either S. 864 or H.R. 1748, the House
version of the DoD authorization bill, with respect to DoD use
of the polygraph. Theoretically, this means that DoD could
implement an unconditional polygraph program. In practice,
however, DoD is not likely to do this. Instead, however, we
understand that Representative Young is considering offering an
amendment during House floor consideration of H.R. 1748, which
would insert in the bill the favorable language concerning DoD
polygraph use similar to that contained in his amendment on
this subject of June 26, 1985 (p. H 5027 from Congressional STAT
Record of that date - attached).
4. We will keep you informed of developments in this area.
STAT
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/02 :CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/02 :CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1
Distribution:
Orig. - Addressees (w/att)
1 -
1 -
1 - OCA Record
1{ OCA~JLEG S~b~ Eile: Polygraph3
1 - OCARead
1 - OCA/T,FY; Chrono
OCA/LDG (5 Icy 87)
STAT
STAT
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/02 :CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/02 :CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1
June ~6, 1985 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE
students who currently attend school
in Highland Falls. .
This amendment has the support of
many of my colleagues, including my
good friend Mr. GILMAN, who for
many Years represented Highland
Falls: Mr. STRATTON, the distinguished
dean of the New York congressional
delegation; the chairman and ranking
minority member of the Labor, HHS,
Education Appropriations Subcommit-
tee, Mr. NATCIiER and Mr. CONTE; and
the chairman and ranking minority
member of the Defense Appropria-
tions Subcommittee, D4r. ADDABBO and
Mr. McDADE. I very much appreciate
the assistance of Mr. HILLIS, a
member of the West Point Board of
Visitors, and the ranking minority
member of the Armed Services Sub-
committee on Military Personnel and
Compensation; Mr. Dlcxrxsox, the -
ranking minority member of the
Armed Services Committee; and par-
ticularly the chairman of the Armed
Services Committee, Mr. ASPIN, iIl of-
fering this amendment on my behalf.?
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
question Ls on the amendment offered
by the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr.
ASPINJ.
The amendments was agreed to.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. DICKINSON
Mr. DICKINSON. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. DICKINSON:
On page 200, after line 4, insert the foliow-
Ing new section:
SF:C. 1050. LIMITED COUNTERIFTELLIf.EKCE POLY-
GKAPH PR(X:RAM.
(a) The Secretary of Defense is authorized
and directed to institute a program of coun-
terintelligence polygraph examinations for
military, civilian and contractor personnel
of the Department of Defense, military de-
partments, and the armed forces whose
duties involve access to classified infortna-
tion.
(b) The program instituted pursuant to
subsection (a) shall provide that, in the case
of such individuals whose duties involve
a::cess to classified information within spe-
cial access programs established pursuant to
section 4.2(a) of Executive Order 12356, a
counterintelligence polygraph examination
shall be required prior to granting access to
such information and aperfodically thereaf-
ter at random while such individuals have
access to such Information.
(c) In the case of individuals whose duties
invoke access to classified information
other than that Information covered in sub-
section (b) of this section, a counterintelli?~
Bence polygraph examination may be re-
quired prior to granting access to such in-
formation and aperfodically thereafter at
random while such individuals have access
to such information.
(d) A counterintelligence polygraph exam-
ination conducted pursuant to this section
sI1a11 be limited to technical questions neces-
sary to the polygraph technique and ques-
tions directed related to espionage, sabo-
tage, terrorism and unauthorized disclosures
of classified Information.
(e) The authority of the Secretary of De-
fense under this section to provide for the
use of polygraph examinations shall be In
addition to any other authority the Secre-
tary possesses on the date of enactment of
this acL to provide for such examinations
under applicable laws and regulations.
Mr. DICKINSON (during the read-
ing). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the amendment be con-
sidered as read and printed in the
RECORD.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Alabama?
There wa.5 no objection.
Mr. DICKINSON. Mr. Chairman, at
this point let me say Lha.t the gentle-
man in the well, the gentleman from
Florida [Mr. YOUNGI is the originator
of the amendment, but I offered it be-
cause Isupport it very much.
Due to the Walker spy ring and any
number of things that have Impacted
the security and the secrecy and our
ability to protect the secrets of this
country, I think it is a very good
amendment. The gentleman from
Florida is more knowledgeable since
he is the author of the amendment,
and I would like to yield to him at this
time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I thank the
gentleman .for offering the amend-
ment in my behalf and yielding the
time to me.
As the gentleman said, this effort is
directed at spy rings like we have just
seen with John Walker and his naval
espionage ring that operated for so
long and compromised our antisubma-
rine warfare capability, we are not
even sure how seriously yet.
In a very dramatic action, Mr. Chair-
man, the House has just overwhelm-
ingly given our Government substan-
tial tools in the battle against drug
abuse and the importation of those il-
legal drugs. This amendment would
give a similar set of tools to those
people to whom we have given our na-
tional security responsibility. In hear-
ing after hearing, those people
charged with that responsibility have
testified that one of the very best tools
that they could have is the ability to
randomly polygraph those persons
who have national security clearances.
Mr_ Chairman, the Army, this
month, said that there were 481 inci-
dents last year in which members of
the Army were approached by KGB
officers to become spies for the Soviet
Union. The Central Intelligence
Agency today polygraphs people who
work for them as a condition of em-
ployment.
In a letter Lo us from the CIA, John
McMahon, the Deputy Director, tells
us that it is a very, very effective tool.
AL NSA, handling some of the most
delicate and sensitive communications
and transmissions, they have poly-
graph authority as a condition of em-
ployment.
^ 2130
Mr Chairman, I repeat, those people
in the military who are working for
defense contractors, who have the
same access to information that the
CIA'has or NSA has, are not subject to
that same polygraph examination.
The Director of the Office of Naval
Inte>ligence testified, after the Walker
case became public, that the very best
tool that he could have in.counterin-
teiligence activity is a random poly-
graph.
Christopher Boyce, an ex-employee
of TRW, convicted of selling secrets to
the Soviet Union, in testimony before
the other body about taking poly-
graphs said:
If I had known this, I would nerer have
considered an act. of espionage.
I have a statement from Stanislav
Levchenko. Stan was a KGB major.
He defected to the United States. Stan
Levchenko authorized me to make this
statement in his behalf:
In my point of view, the use of polygraphs
by the United States Government as a part
of Its security screening of government em-
ployees constitutes a serious obstacle for the
Soviets in their penetration of U.S. Govern-
ment agencies.
Mr. Chairman, there have been
hearings and meetings on this subject
~?rior to the revelation of the Walker
case, and since the revelation of the
Walker case, and those individuals
who have the responsibility for our
counterintelligence activities tell us re-
peatedly that the polygraph program
is one of the best tools that they can
possibly have.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I mentioned the
letters from the CIA and I mentioned
the letters from NSA. There is also a
letter from the Secretary of the Navy
endorsing this concept, but I want to
tell you something else. In private in-
dustry in the United States, this type
of polygraph Is used extensively. I
have a letter here from a gentleman
who is in charge of security for Days
Inn, a motel chain.
Now, Mr. Chairman, he says that
Lheir loss from emloyees exceeded
more than $1 million a year, but was'
reduced in the first year they em-
ployed the polygraph, to only about
$100,000, testifying to the effective-
ness of the polygraph.
I say again, as Christopher Boyce
said, had he known that a polygraph
program would be in place, a coun?er-
intelligence polygraph, he would never
Have considered an act of espionage.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
time of the gentleman from Alabama
(Mr. DlcKlxsoxl has expired.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. DICKIN-
soN was allowed to proceed for 5 addi-
tional minutes.)
Mr. DICKINSON. Mr. Chairman, let
me say before I yield to the gentle-
man, it is inconceivable to me and to
most people outside of Government
that the CIA that handles top secret
and the most sensitive material, they
may require a polygraph. The FBI
may require a polygraph test. Our
other sensitive intelligence-gathering
agencies may require a polygraph test,
but our military, and we have just
seen what has happened with the
Walker spy group, the Army, the
Navy, the Air Force, under today's
laws, they cannot require this poly-
graph test.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/02 :CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/02 :CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1
~~
H 5028 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE June 26, 1985
This simply gives the same tools to Lhe spies If ?
we c
t
.
anno
even subject some length, and I suppose the ration-
the military. How sensitive can you get them to this test? Why are we worried ale of why he discussed it with me. I
when we are dealing with the most
b
a
out them if they are not worried would like to give a little legislative
sensitive subjects that deal with this about us? history on this.
very vital part of the Govcrrunent? Mr. Chairman, I am glad to yield to This comes from the authori~atiun
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is the gentleman ? from California iMr. bill last, year. When an effort was
making a good cast. I would hope that Fnziol.
t}:e Co;nn-,ittce would listen to him, Mr. FAZIO. Mr. Chairman, Iunder- fen~e Dopaitn entlwl ~ocouldnbehgi~rn
because it. is just so much common stand. I am trying to be helpful. I du polygraph tests, tiro gPralema.n from
sense, that I am surprised that. it has not mean to be antagonistic. I am Texas [Mr. Baooxsl strongly objected
net r~h-eady been put into law. looking for some sort of balance here a.nd we arrived at an agreement. in
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentle- so that when we provide this sort of which a limitation was placed at 3,500
man from Florida [Mr. Yourrcl? right to the government, we also look in a test program that was to be com-
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chair- to the individual rights of the employ- pieted in the 1985 fiscal year. That
man, I would like to call to the atten- ees of defense contractors or the Fed- test program is still underway. I tried
Lion of the Committee, we know about oral Government itself.
the Walker case and we know how Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chair- to get some figures on it this after-
mtrch that case has compromised our man, if the gentleman will fold. I will noon. I w?as unable to do so and I
ability to follow the Soviet subma- respond to my colleague that we share would like to engage the gentleman
rines. the same concerns and w?e ran this from Florida in a little colloquy a little
Walker had cryptological access. through Lhe legal department of later. Perhaps the gentleman has
There is a test program prat- those figures, but that is the situation.
place in the Department opDefense al- would be affected by thisuld find that The situation in the Senate is simply
lowing a limited number of poly- Section (d) of the amendment says this. The Senate has extended for I
graphs, but that test program would that a counterintelligence polygraph year only the 1985 current test pro-
not have gotten to the Walkers, be- examinati~ conducted ~'~? The position of the Department
cause it did not authorize the use of this section shall be limit d to techn? of Defense is basically that they feel
clearancelevel. at Walker's security cal questions necessary to the poly- 1 yees whooare trained to administ r
Richard Kampiles-listen to this one lyarelatedhtogespionageusabo agelrter- polygraph tests over and above what
now-Richard Kampiles was anenlist- rorism and unauthorized disclosures of they now have under the training pro-
ed man. Richard Kampiles sold to the classified information. gram. They have about 152 polygraph
Soviet Union for $3,000 the operating We definitely are not looking for operators that administer these tests.
manual for one of our most sophisti- any kind of a witch hunt. We are They tell me they can do about 250
cated overhead sensor systems that trying to pry into someone's personal polygraph tests a year. That would
gives trs advance warning if the Soviets life, so we do limit the use of the poly- equate out to somewhere around the
begin to do something that we ought graph, as the gentleman suggests. 3,500 figure.
to be concerned about. Mr. FAZIO. Mr. Chairman, will the I am told that very little has been
Kampiles, in a position of having gentleman yield for just one additional done on this. The gentleman from
access to that Information, should question. Florida might want to discuss that if
have known that he might have been Mr. DICKINSON. Of course, I am he has some information on it.
polygraphed. pleased to yield to the gentleman from ^ 2140
Now, we do not have the resources California.
to polygraph everybody. We recognize Mr. FAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I am just But I thought I ought to set the
that; but the fact that a polygraph wondering if the gentleman could indi- record straight- That is where the
program is in place will be a strong de- cate who would authorize the decision issue is.
torrent. to proceed on this? There is objection, strong objection
Listen to the words of Christopher Mr. YOUNG of Florida. The amend- to polygraph in general.
Boyce, w?ho was convicted of spying ment directs the Secretary of Defense I expect to support the gentleman
and said he never would have gotten to institute a program of counterintel- from Florida's bill. 1 think it is a good
into espionage had he known there ligence polygraph: recognizing that bill. But I thought it ought to be
was a polygraph program in place. there are man called to the attention of the House
Mr. FAZIO. Mr. Chairman, will the Y People who should be exactly where we are on this issue.
gentleman yield? polygraphed or should be part of the
program, we do not ? have the assets If the gentleman would ansiver, I
Mr. DICKINSON. I would be very and the capability of doing it immedi- would like to ask him if he has any
pleased to yield to the gentleman. ately. The Secretary would have to de- current information on the 1985 tests
Mr. FAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I would termine that, phase in the program, ads and where we are?
like to address a question to the gen- he has the assets or as we make 1,he Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chair-
tleman in the well. assets available- man, will the gentleman yield?
I know we are all concerned about Mr. FAZIO. Mr. Chairman, if I could Mr. NICHOLS. I yield to the gentle-
the problem of espionage and I think indicate, I would only hope that the man from Florida.
we a]] know Lhat there are ways that authority would rest at a very high Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I would re-
we can make more efficient our ap- level, so that it would be something spond by saying my understanding is
proach to finding exatnples where that would be done only under the at this po}nt they have done about 75
people have broken codes and violated most sensitive circumstances. counterintelligence polygraphs. I
our constitutional protections. But Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Well, the would point out, if the gentleman
what protection does the individual Secretary of Defense is the highest would yield further, one of the prob-
have'under the gentleman's amend- level, other than Lhe Commander-in- lems is having the as,5ets available to
ment. Is there any limitation on the Chief. do the counterintelligence polygraphs
kind of questions that might be appro- Mr. FAZIO. Exactly. along with Lhe other ty?pes of poly-
priate to be asked under a polygraph? Mr. NICHOLS. Mr. Chairman, I graphs they are called on to do.
Is there somet}~ing equivalent to a move to strike the requisite number of I recognize, and I think if we suthor-
warrant, perhaps, that would make it words. ize this program, wg are going to have
proper? Mr. Chairman, first I want to tom- to give them probably about 52.5 mil-
Mr?. DICKINSON. Mr. Chairman, Aliment the gentleman from Florida lion, which does not sound like a lot of
before I yield to the gentleman to re- on his amendment and his concern money in the battle against spies, but
spond, let me say, what protection over the security of this country. The they need about E2.5 million next year
does the American citizen have against gentleman has discussed with me at in order to allow them to upgrade
~= Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/02 :CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1 ,
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/02 :CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1
, June ~6; 1985 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE
th^ir training programs to get more
polygraphers in place.
Thrs is a brandnew program. That is
why it. is not underway.
But I would say to the gentleman it
is time that we get started because the
people of America are sick and tired of
us paying for our national defense ef-
forts only to see it stolen or bought
from us by the Soviets and put into
their national defense efforts, which
makes ours half again as costly as it
ought to be.
Ivir. MONTGOMERY. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
N1 r. NICHOLS. I yield to the gentle-
man from Mississippi.
Mr. MOITGOMERY. I thank the
gentleman for yielding and I rise in
support of the Dickinson-Young
amendment.
I would point out to the gentleman
from Alabama that the Secretary of
the Navy was on the Hill yesterday
asking for this legislation and asking
that he tie given the authority to give
polygraphs. And he said that is the
best way for hiln to slow down espio-
nage, not to have another Walker
case. And if the Secretary of the Navy
wants the authority I think we ought
to give it to him.
I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Chairman,
~~: ill the gentleman yield?
Mr. NICHOLS. I yield to the gentle-
man from Louisiana.
R:r. LIVIIr'GSTON. I appreciate the
gentleman yielding and also rise in
support of the Dickinson-Young
amendment.
I would point out in answer to the
gentleman's question that however
many polygraphs actually have been
administered, there are 164,000, give
or take a few, 164,000 people in the
armed services with the very highest
security clearance In the Armed
T~orces of the United States. There are
1.3 million people with security clear-
ances of one sort or another.
Plow when you consider that they
may tta,ve only taken 75 polygraphs
grid they are only authorized to per-
form 3,400 polygraphs, we are Just ba-
sically scratching the surface. We are
not even coming near, and I think the
gentleman's amendment is well inten-
tioned.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. BROOKS AS A SIIH-
STITIITE FOR THC AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
ht R. DICKINSON
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment as a substitute
for the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. BROOKS aS a
substitute for the amendment offered by
Mr. DICKINSON: On page 200, after line 4.
insert the following new section:
(.IMITATION ON USE OF FVNDS FOR CONDUCTING
POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION; REPORT
(a) None of the funds appropriated Pursu-
ant to an authorization of appropriations
~.ontained in this or any other Act may be
used for the purpose of implementing para-
graphs D.8 and 9, D.12.b and g, D.13.c, and
E.l.g of Department of Defense Directive
5210.48, dated December 29, 1984, relating
to polygraph examinations and examiners,
except for the continuation of the test pro-
gram authorized by section 1307 of the De-
partment of Defense Authorization Act,
1985 (Public I.aw 98-525; 98 Stat. 2813). The
total number of persons examined under
the test program in fiscal years 1985 and
1988 may not exceed 3.500.
(b) Not later than December 31. 1988, the
Secretary of Defense shall transmit to the
Committees on .Armed Sen~ices of the
Senate and the Ilouse of Represent.at,ives a
report on the use of polygraph examina-
tions administered by or for the Depart-
ment of Defense during the fiscal year 1888.
The report shall Include
Visclosky
Edgar
Mineta
Walgren
Edwards (CA)
Moody
Warman
Evans cIL)
Morrison (CT)
Weiss
Fascell
Mrazck
Wheat
Fazio
Neal
R'illiams
Feighan
Nowak
Wolpe
FoKlietta
Oakar
Weigh[
Foley
Oberstar
Yates
Ford (MD
Obey
Flank
Ortiz
NOES-281
Alexander
Borskl
Cebey
Anderson
Bosco
Coble
Applegate
Boucher
Coleman (MO)
Archer
Boulter
Combcst
Armey
Breaux
Conte
Arpin
Broomfield
Coughlin
AuCeln
Erown (COl
Courtcr
Bart let[
Broyhill
Craiq
Barton
Bruce
Crane
Bateman
Burton (INt
Daniel
Dates
Byron
Damtemeyer
Bennett
Callahan
Darden
Bentley
Campbell
Daub
Bereuter
Carney
Davis
IIevil]
Carper
Delay
Biaggi
Carr
Derrfrk
Bilirakis
Chandler
DeWine
Bliley
Chappell
Dickinson
Rcehlert
ChapDfe
Dingell
Boland
Cheney
DioGuardl
Boner Studds
Leland Sa7ft
Levine (CA) Synar
Lowry (WA) Towns
Lundine Traticant.
Markey Visclosky
Matsui Waxman
Mineia Wef~
Morrison (CT} Wheat
Mrazek Williams
Oskar Wo)pe
Oberstar Yates
Obey
NOT VOTINO-29
Ackerman Hatcher Rce
Annunzio Hefner Shumway
Beilenson Holt Siljander
Brown (CA) Jones (NC) Vento
Conyers Lott Weaver
Dicks - Luken Whitten
Dixon Mitchell Wilson
,Fish Owens Wirth
Ford (TN) Pepper Wortley
Frenzel Ritter
^ 1050
So the amendment a'as agreed to.
The result of the vote was an-
nounced as above recorded.
s Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Chairman, as
tYfe author of the )Vilitary Family
Services Act, H.R. 1371, I am pleased
today to stand before you and discuss
the great strides a'e are in the process
of making in advancing the cause, and
improving the living standards of the
men and women who serve this coun-
try in uniform, and of the families to
whom they are responsible. This De-
fense Authorization Act contains
many of the key elements in my bill. It
contains programs for, and pledges
equity to the military family; a unit
;~,;, Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/02 :CIA-RDP89T00234R000200270024-1