|
|
|
Become a
Paid Mullings Subscriber!
(To join the FREE mailing list or to unsubscribe Click Here)
Regular Order
Rich Galen Wednesday December 01, 2004
The standard amount of professional hand wringing has been on exhibit this week over the reported failure of the US House of Representatives to bring the intelligence reform bill to the floor for a vote before the 108th Congress expires early next month.
Here are some points which should be considered in the rush to renovate the manner in which the US conducts its intelligence operations:
First, there is the matter of the 9/11 Commission recommendations. Note the word, "recommendations."
The Constitution (Article I, Section 7, Clause 3) gives the President the authority to veto legislation for whatever reason, or no reason at all. And the concept of judicial review - giving the US Supreme Court the authority to, in effect, veto legislation on Constitutional grounds - was established in 1803 when Chief Justice John Marshall wrote the opinion in Marbury v. Madison.
Dear Mr. Mullings:
This is the first day of December. Christmas decorations are up in the stores, holiday music is omnipresent on even heavy metal radio stations, the same geniuses who did the exit polling on election day are stationed outside of Wal-Marts across the country to find out what people are buying and how much they are spending, and you give us MARBURY V. MADISON?
Grinch.
What can I say? I am the product of a liberal arts education from Marietta College (Marietta, Ohio 45750) generally, and Prof. Bob Hill's Con Law class in particular.
There is nothing in the Constitution, in law, or even in custom which grants an appointed group - no matter how highly regarded by the public or themselves - veto authority over legislation being considered by the US Congress.
Second, we have a Speaker of the House who believes in the concept of what is known among Members of Congress as "regular order."
Regular order is the phrase describing the normal operating procedures in the House. If you watch C-SPAN you may hear a Member calling for "regular order" when the time for a vote is being extended waiting for a Member to show up or, having voted, to change his or her mind.
Speaker Hastert believes that the men and women who are chairing the various committees and subcommittees should maintain control over the legislation their committees are considering.
This has not always been the case. Speaker Gingrich, for example, had a group which met regularly to decide on the content and fate of legislation which might or might not have been through the "regular order" of the committee process.
One of the issues in the intelligence bill is the matter of which Executive Department or Agency will have control over certain intelligence assets. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, maintains that certain assets should remain in control of the Secretary of Defense, not in the control of a new �ber-spy.
As an example, let's say there is an intelligence satellite which is positioned over Afghanistan looking for Osama bin Laden. Now, let's say that field commanders in Iraq believe they have a line on Abu Musab al-Zarqari near Fallujah and need satellite imagery to zero in on him.
Who decides whether, when, where, and for how long to move the satellite?
By the time the decision moves up the chain from a commander on the ground in al-Anbar province to Central Command to the Pentagon, then hops across the national security synapse to the new intelligence agency, then back down to the folks with the joy stick controlling the satellite, the French will be our friends again.
Third, there is ample history that legislation is not improved by rushing it through. The debate during the recent election suggested that many on both sides of the aisle believe the speed with which the Patriot Act sailed through the legislative process left the nation with a law which could use some significant tinkering.
Repairing our national intelligence capability is too important to be forced through because of some arbitrary, artificial deadline. It is better - far better - to get it right.
On the Secret Decoder Ring today: The Iraq Flashbacks continue with a link to the 82nd Airborne Saga; Links to the Marbury v. Madison decision and the section of the US Constitution mentioned above, a wistful Mullfoto and a respectful farewell to Secretary Tom Ridge.
--END --
Copyright © 2004 Richard A. Galen
Current Issue |
Secret Decoder
Ring | Past
Issues | Email
Rich | Rich
Who?
Copyright �2002 Richard
A. Galen | Site design by Campaign
Solutions. | |
|
� 
