Marne L. Levine Bio ("Meandered with a sense of purpose")

Year Dates Position Company Primary Cartel Relationship

1993 1993 MBA Harvard University Larry Summers, Sheryl Sandberg

1993 1993-2001 Understudy Larry Summers, Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, Sheryl Sandberg

2001 2001-2003 Chief of Staff to Larry Summers Harvard University

Larry Summers, Mark Zuckerberg, James W. Breyer, Accel

Partners, Ping Li, James Swartz, Reid Hoffman, Peter Thiel,

Harvard Crimson

2003 Jun 22 MarriagePhilip J. Deutch, son of disgraced former C.I.A. director

John M. Deutch (1995-1996), CitiGroup Director

2004 2004-2005 Product Manager Cibernet Corporation Unknown

2006 2006-2008 Dir. of Product Mgmt. Revolution MoneyAOL, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanely, Citibank, Deutsche

Bank

2009 Jan 21 Chief of Staff to Larry Summers National Economic Council Larry Summers, Barack Obama

Special Assistant to President Barack Obama for

Economic Policy The White House Larry Summers, Barack Obama

2010 Jun 24 Vice President for Global Public Policy Facebook Larry Summers, Sheryl Sandberg, owners

2013 May 01 Director Chegg Kleiner Perkins, funder

2014 Jan 01 Director National Endowment for Democracy U.S. Dept. of State, donor

2014 Oct 07 Chief Operating Officer Instagram Larry Summers, Marc Andreessen, directors

This statement made to the Washington Post on Dec. 6, 2012 is a lie. Levine very evidently follows the orders of Larry

Summers and Sheryl Sandberg.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/postlive/marne-levine-ive-meandered-with-a-sense-of-purpose/2012/12/06/9a1d796c-3fb7-11e2-ae43-cf491b837f7b_video.html

See enlarged timeline on next page.

Harvard MBA

U.S. Department of Treasury Larry Summers, Secretary

Harvard University Chief of Staff to President, Larry Summers

Cibernet Unknown

Revolution Money Director of Product Management

Nationa Econom c Council Chief of Staff to Larry Summers

Facebook VP of Global Public Policy (Jun. 24, 2010)

Instagram COO

Direct relationship to Larry Summers, Sheryl Sandberg

Direct relationship to Larry Summers crony (Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley Citibank, Credit Suisse, AOL)

Marne L. Levine bio (to Washington Post (2010) about her bio: "Meandered with a sense of purpose")

The timeline proves that her “meandered” statement is a lie. Her career is a straight line of Larry Summers orders.

https://youtu.be/P-MUFB7Qs9E

“Marne is a lackey for Summers & the Cartel.”

Jul. 18, 2010 Leader v. Facebook trial began Jun. 24, 2010

Leader v. Facebook judge replaced with

fresh Obama nominee, Leonard P. Stark, same

day Marne L. Levine joined Facebook

Jun 22, 2003, Married Philip J. Deutch, Jun. 22, 2003, son of John M. Deutch, disgraced former C.I.A. Director (1995-1996) ; Citigroup, director; James P. Chandler crony

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Meet-Facebook-s-New-DC-Schmoozer-2463453.php

Nicholas Carlson, provided by

Published 4:00 am, Friday, June 25, 2010

Facebook made Washington insider Marne Levine it's first vice president of global

public policy yesterday.

Till then, Marne worked as the chief-of-staff for National Economic Council head Larry

Summers.

# ACCORDING TO WASHINGTON LIFE, SHE'S MARRIED TO PHILIPDEUTCH "A MANAGING DIRECTOR OF PERSEUS, LLC, AWASHINGTON, D.C. AND NEW YORK CITY-BASED PRIVATE EQUITYFUND. DEUTCH FOCUSES ON VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTING IN THEENERGY AREA."

Image: Washington Life

State Department stonewalls Hillary's Facebook connections Meet Facebook's New DC Schmoozer - SFGate

http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2015/12/state-department-sto... 1

ACCORDING TO REALCLEARPOLITICS, SHE HAS A 3 1/2-YEAR-OLDAND A 9-MONTH-OLD.

This is not actually Marne's kid.

Image: vauvau on flickr

# SHE DONATED $4,600 TO PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGNS IN 2008 -$2,300 TO HILARY CLINTON AND $2,300 TO BARACK OBAMA

State Department stonewalls Hillary's Facebook connections Meet Facebook's New DC Schmoozer - SFGate

http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2015/12/state-department-sto... 2

Image: The White House

SHE USED TO BE DIRECTOR OF PRODUCT MANAGEMENT AT STEVECASE'S STARTUP REVOLUTION MONEY.

Image: Asa Mathat | All Things Digital

DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, SHE WORKED AT THETREASURY DEPARTMENT AS DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FORBANKING AND FINANCE IN THE OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRSAND PUBLIC LIAISON.

State Department stonewalls Hillary's Facebook connections Meet Facebook's New DC Schmoozer - SFGate

http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2015/12/state-department-sto... 3

SHE GRADUATED FROM MIAMI UNIVERSITY IN OXFORD, OHIO.

SHE HAS AN M.B.A. FROM THE HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL.

State Department stonewalls Hillary's Facebook connections Meet Facebook's New DC Schmoozer - SFGate

http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2015/12/state-department-sto... 4

Image: AP

ACCORDING TO HER NEC BIO, "FROM 2001-2003, MS. LEVINE SERVEDAS CHIEF OF STAFF FOR HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESIDENTLAWRENCE SUMMERS WHERE HELPED MANAGE OPERATIONS OFTHE UNIVERSITYS 14,000 EMPLOYEES AND $2.4 BILLION OPERATINGBUDGET."

Image: AP

SHE GOES OUT ON THE TOWN! HERE'S A PIC FROM SOCIETYMAGAZINE WASHINGTON LIFE...

State Department stonewalls Hillary's Facebook connections Meet Facebook's New DC Schmoozer - SFGate

http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2015/12/state-department-sto... 5

...AND ANOTHER FROM WASHINGTON LIFE

Join the conversation about this story »

© 2016 Hearst Communications, Inc.

State Department stonewalls Hillary's Facebook connections Meet Facebook's New DC Schmoozer - SFGate

http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2015/12/state-department-sto... 6

Something about Marne [Levine], Jun. 26, 2010 awesomedc.com / archive.org

https://web.archive.org/web/20100629064837/http://awesomedc.com/2010/06/26/something-about-marne#more-10449 Accessed Jan. 02, 2016 Page 1

Something about Marne

June 26, 2010 by Elias Shams

Here are more information we digged out about the new facebook’s vice president of global public policy babe, Marne Levine, who just left her top position as the National Economic Counsel at the white house. I blogged about her yesterday.

According to Washington Life, Marne is married to Philip Deutch “a managing director of Perseus, LLC, a Washington, D.C. and New York City-based private equity fund. Deutch focuses on venture capital investing in the energy area.”

Something about Marne [Levine], Jun. 26, 2010 awesomedc.com / archive.org

https://web.archive.org/web/20100629064837/http://awesomedc.com/2010/06/26/something-about-marne#more-10449 Accessed Jan. 02, 2016 Page 2

She donated $4,600 to presidential campaigns in 2008 – $2,300 to Hilary Clinton and $2,300 to Barack Obama.

She used to be director of product management at Steve Case’s start-up Revolution Money.

Something about Marne [Levine], Jun. 26, 2010 awesomedc.com / archive.org

https://web.archive.org/web/20100629064837/http://awesomedc.com/2010/06/26/something-about-marne#more-10449 Accessed Jan. 02, 2016 Page 3

During the Clinton Administration, she worked at the Treasury Department as deputy assistant secretary for banking and finance in the office of legislative affairs and public liaison.

She graduated from Miami University in Oxford, Ohio.

Something about Marne [Levine], Jun. 26, 2010 awesomedc.com / archive.org

https://web.archive.org/web/20100629064837/http://awesomedc.com/2010/06/26/something-about-marne#more-10449 Accessed Jan. 02, 2016 Page 4

She has an M.B.A. from the Harvard Business School.

According to her NEC bio, “From 2001-2003, Ms. Levine served as Chief of Staff for Harvard University President Lawrence Summers where helped manage operations of the universities 14,000 employees and $2.4 billion operating budget.”

Something about Marne [Levine], Jun. 26, 2010 awesomedc.com / archive.org

https://web.archive.org/web/20100629064837/http://awesomedc.com/2010/06/26/something-about-marne#more-10449 Accessed Jan. 02, 2016 Page 5

She goes out on the town! Here’s a pic from society magazine Washington Life…

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

Facebook snags White House economic adviser Levine as global policy head

Filed under DC Tales, social media Tagged with washington, white house, startup, facebook, Washington DC, Steve Case, d.c, barack obama, Marne Levine, National Economic Counsel, Office of Legislative Affairs, Public Liaison, vice president of global public policy, Philip Deutch, Perseus, presidential campaign, Hilary Clinton, Revolution Money, Clinton Administration, Treasury Department, deputy assistant secretary, banking, finance, Miami University, Harvard Business School, Lawrence Summers

About Elias Shams Serial Washingtonian Entrepreneur in Telecom & Social media space and love Washington, DC

Marne Levine The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/postlive/marne-levine/2012/11/21/0ec44f94-33fa-11e2-9cfa-e41bac906cc9 story.html Page 1

Washington Post Live

Marne Levine

November 21, 2012

Vice President, Global Public Policy, Facebook

Marne Levine is Vice President, Global Public Policy and

oversees the company's efforts to educate governments and

non-governmental organizations on its plans, products and

Portrait of Marne Levine, Vice President of Global Public Policy, Facebook. (Photo by Tim Coburn) (Tim Coburn/Facebook/Tim Coburne)

Marne Levine The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/postlive/marne-levine/2012/11/21/0ec44f94-33fa-11e2-9cfa-e41bac906cc9 story.html Page 2

policies to foster understanding and support for innovative

technologies like Facebook.

Marne has substantial government experience working on

international issues and particular sensitivity to navigating

policy challenges in an Internet company. She joined Facebook

from the Obama Administration, where she served as Chief of

Staff at the White House National Economic Council. In that

role, she helped coordinate the development of domestic and

international economic policy along with the strategies for

communicating these policies to stakeholders.

Previously, Marne helped launch an online peer-to-peer

payment platform, and helped manage its privacy and

compliance issues. She also served as Chief of Staff for Larry

Summers when he was President of Harvard University. She

began her career at the United States Department of Treasury,

where she served in the Office of Legislative Affairs and Public

Liaison.

Marne has a Bachelor's in Political Science and

Communications from Miami University and an MBA from the

Harvard Business School.

0 Comments

Search All NYTimes.com

FACEBOOK TWITTER GOOGLE+ EMAL SHARE

WEDD NGS/CELEBRATIONS

WEDDINGS/CELEBRATIONS; Marne Levine, PhilipDeutchPublished: June 22, 2003

Marne Lynn Levine, a daughter of Dr. and Mrs. Mark Levine of

Shaker Heights, Ohio, was married last evening to Philip Joseph

Deutch, a son of Samayla D. Deutch of New York and John M. Deutch

of Belmont, Mass. Rabbi Stuart A. Gertman officiated at the National

Museum of Women in the Arts in Washington.

Ms. Levine, 32, is keeping her name. She is the chief of staff to

Lawrence H. Summers, the president of Harvard. She graduated from

Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. Her father is a plastic surgeon at

Associates in Ophthalmology in South Euclid, Ohio. Her mother, Teri

Levine, is on the board of the Cleveland chapters of the American Red Cross and the

Jewish Community Federation.

Mr. Deutch, 38, is a managing director and venture capitalist at Perseus, a venture capital

and leveraged buyout company in Washington. He graduated from Amherst and received

a law degree from Stanford. His mother is a lawyer in New York. His father, who was the

director of Central Intelligence from 1994 to 1996, is an institute professor at M.I.T.

The bridegroom is a stepson of Patricia Deutch and of Richard Sigal. His previous

marriage ended in divorce.

Photo (Ralph Alswang)

MOST EMAILED

Log in to discover more articlesbased on what you‘ve read.

What’s This? | Don’t Show

1. Natalie Cole, ‘Unforgettable’ Voice, Dies at65

2. PAUL KRUGMAN

Privilege, Pathology and Power

3. George Lucas Criticizes Latest ‘Star Wars’Installment

4. 15 Ways to Be a Better Person in 2016

5. Gun-Friendly Texas Is Getting EvenFriendlier

6. On the Market in New York City

7. MODERN LOVE

Single, and Surrounded by a Wall of Men

8. Lighting Up the Night, and the New Year

9. Saudi Arabia Puts 47 to Death, IncludingProminent Shiite Cleric

10. How Jeb Bush Hopes to Save HisCandidacy

© 2016 The New York Times Company Site Map Privacy Your Ad Choices Advertise Terms of Sale Terms of Service Work With Us RSS Help Contact Us Site Feedback

HOME PAGE TODAY'S PAPER V DEO MOST POPULAR

WORLD U.S. N.Y. / REGION BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY SCIENCE HEALTH SPORTS OPINION ARTS STYLE TRAVEL JOBS REAL ESTATE AUTOS

FASHION & STYLE DINING & W NE HOME & GARDEN WEDDINGS/CELEBRATIONS T MAGAZINE INTERNATIONAL DINING INTERNATIONAL STYLE

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

GOOGLE+

EMA L

SHARE

PR NT

REPR NTS

Log In Register Now HelpSUBSCRIBE NOWU.S. Edition

WEDDINGS/CELEBRATIONS - Marne Levine, Philip Deutch - NYTimes

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/22/style/weddings-celebrations-marne-levine-philip-deutch html 1

This is a beta version of NNDB

Search: for

AKA John Mark Deutch

Born: 27-Jul-1938Birthplace: Brussels, Belgium

Gender: MaleReligion: JewishRace or Ethnicity: WhiteSexual orientation: StraightOccupation: GovernmentParty Affiliation: Democratic

Nationality: United StatesExecutive summary: CIA Director, 1995-96

Former CIA Director, lost a PowerBook containing government secrets.

Wife: Patricia Lyon Deutch

University: BA History and Economics, Amherst College University: BS Chemical Engineering, MIT (1961) University: PhD Physical Chemistry, MIT (1966) Professor: Chemistry, Princeton University (1966-69) Professor: Chemistry, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1970-77) Administrator: Chairman, Department of Chemistry, MIT (1976-77) Administrator: Dean of Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1982-85) Administrator: Provost, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1985-90) Professor: Institute Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1990-)

CIA Director (1995-96)US Defense Department Under Secy. of Defense for Acquisitions/Technology (1993-94)US Energy Department Undersecretary (1979-80)US Energy Department Director of Energy Research (1977-79)

Member of the Board of Citigroup Member of the Board of Raytheon (1998-) Member of the Board of Schlumberger (1997-) Member of the Board of Cummins Member of the Board of ARIAD Pharmaceuticals (1997-?)

Boston Museum of Fine Arts TrusteeBilderberg GroupBill Bradley for PresidentBretton Woods Committee

NNDB M

Yanqu

John

Requires Flash 7

Related

AmericanGlobal

Jewish-APoli

Helix

John Deutch 01/02/2016 3:59 PM

http://www nndb.com/people/216/000029129/ 1

Carol Moseley Braun for PresidentCouncil on Foreign RelationsForum for International Policy TrusteeFriends of Dick LugarFriends of HillaryGephardt for PresidentGorbachev Foundation Senior FellowHillary Clinton for PresidentNew Leadership for America PACNixon Center Advisory CouncilObama for AmericaPsi Upsilon Fraternity Amherst CollegeResources for the Future Board of DirectorsMishandling Classified Materials pled guilty (19-Jan-2001)Pardoned For unauthorized retention of classified material by President Clinton (20-Jan-2001)

NNDB MAPPERCreate a map starting with John Deutch

Requires Flash 7+ and Javascript.

Do you know something we don't?Submit a correction or make a comment about this profile

Copyright ©2014 Soylent Communications

John Deutch 01/02/2016 3:59 PM

http://www nndb.com/people/216/000029129/ 2

This is a beta version of NNDB

Search: for

US GOVERNMENT OFFICE

Head of the Central Intelligence Agency. See also CIA Deputy Director and CIA employee.

Official Website:http://www.cia.gov/dci/

23-Jan-1946 10-Jun-1946 Sidney Souers

10-Jun-1946 1-May-1947 Hoyt Vandenberg

1-May-1947 7-Oct-1950 Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter

7-Oct-1950 9-Feb-1953 Walter Bedell Smith

26-Feb-1953 29-Nov-1961 Allen W. Dulles

29-Nov-1961 28-Apr-1965 John McCone

28-Apr-1965 30-Jun-1966 William F. Raborn

30-Jun-1966 2-Feb-1973 Richard Helms

2-Feb-1973 2-Jul-1973 James R. Schlesinger

4-Sep-1973 30-Jan-1976 William Colby

30-Jan-1976 20-Jan-1977 George H.W. Bush

9-Mar-1977 20-Jan-1981 Stansfield Turner

28-Jan-1981 29-Jan-1987 William Casey

26-May-1987 31-Aug-1991 William Webster

6-Nov-1991 20-Jan-1993 Robert M. Gates

5-Feb-1993 10-Jan-1995 James Woolsey

10-May-1995 15-Dec-1996 John Deutch

11-Jul-1997 11-Jul-2004 George Tenet

11-Jul-2004 22-Sep-2004 John E. McLaughlin (acting)

22-Sep-2004 5-May-2006 Porter Goss

30-May-2006 12-Feb-2009 Michael V. Hayden

13-Feb-2009 1-Jul-2011 Leon Panetta

6-Sep-2011 9-Nov-2012 David Petraeus

8-Mar-2013 -- John O. Brennan

Do you know something we don't?

NNDB MA

Early 90s HCulture Touc

Requires FlashJavascrip

Bibliograp

NNDB has thousand

bibliographpeople

organizatschools,

general tolisting mor50,000 boo

120,000 otheof referencemay be accethe "Bibliog

tab at the tmost pages

the "RelaTopics" boxsidebar. Plea

free to sugbooks that mcritical omi

CIA Director 01/02/2016 4:00 PM

http://www nndb.com/gov/234/000043105/ 1

This is a beta version of NNDB

Search: for

COMPANY

Formed by the merger of Citicorp with Travelers Group in 1998.

Official Website:http://www.citigroup.com/

Industry:Banking

Ticker:NYSE:C

Corporate headquarters:New York City

Sales:$3.6B (2007)

Employees:350000 (2008)

EXECUTIVES

Name Occupation Birth Death Known for

Shaukat Aziz Head of State 6-Mar-1949 Prime Minister of Pakistan

Ajay Banga Business c. 1960 CEO of Citibank Asia/Pacific

Winfried Bischoff Business 1941 Chairman of Citigroup

Erin Burnett TV Personality 3-May-1976 Squawk on the Street

Lisa M. Caputo Business 1964 EVP at The Travelers

Janet M. Clarke Business c. 1952 Clarke Littlefield LLC

Pete Dawkins Football 8-Mar-1938 Winner, 1958 Heisman Trophy

Robert E. Denham Attorney 27-Aug-1945 Partner, Munger, Tolles & Olson

Dinyar S. Devitre Business c. 1946 CFO of Altria, 2002-08

Robert Druskin Business c. 1947 CFO of Shearson Lehman Brothers, 1984-91

Jay S. Fishman Business 4-Nov-1952 CEO of Travelers

Steven J. Freiberg Business c. 1957 Global Consumer Group, Citigroup

Brenda J. Gaines Business c. 1949 CEO of Diners Club NA, 2002-04

Keith W. Hughes Business c. 1946 Vice Chairman of Citigroup, 2000-01

Rajive Johri Business c. 1950 First National Bank of Omaha

Thomas W. Jones Business 1949 President of TIAA-CREF, 1993-97

NNDB MA

UK Line of Su

Requires FlashJavascrip

Bibliograp

NNDB has thousand

bibliographpeople

organizatschools,

general tolisting mor50,000 boo

120,000 otheof referencemay be accethe "Bibliog

tab at the tmost pages

the "RelaTopics" boxsidebar. Plea

free to sugbooks that mcritical omi

Citigroup 01/02/2016 4:01 PM

http://www nndb.com/company/677/000053518/ 1

Tom Katis Military ? Co-Founder, Triple Canopy

Sallie L. Krawcheck Business c. 1965 CFO of Citigroup, 2004-07

Jacob J. Lew Government 29-Aug-1955 Obama's White House Chief of Staff

Robert I. Lipp Business c. 1938 CEO of Travelers Property Casualty, 2001-04

Marjorie Magner Business 1949 Former Citibank executive

Deryck Maughan Business c. 1947 CEO of Citigroup International, 1998-2002

Raymond J. McGuire Business 1957 Citigroup M&A executive

Heidi G. Miller Business c. 1954 EVP at JP Morgan Chase

Glen Moreno Business 1943 Chairman of Pearson

Nancy S. Newcomb Business c. 1946 Former Citigroup executive

Lyndon L. Olson Diplomat 1947 US Ambassador to Sweden, 1998-2001

Peter R. Orszag Government 16-Dec-1968 Beltway economist

Vikram Pandit Business 1957 CEO of Citigroup

Charles O. Prince Business 13-Jan-1950 CEO of Citigroup, 2003-07

John S. Reed Business 1939 CEO of Citibank, 1984-2000

William R. Rhodes Business 15-Aug-1935 Vice Chairman of Citigroup

Lowell W. Robinson Business c. 1949 COO of MIVA, Inc.

Robert E. Rubin Government 29-Aug-1938 US Treasury Secretary, 1995-99

Renato Ruggiero Politician 9-Apr-1930 Director-General of the WTO, 1995-99

David S. Schechter Business c. 1975 Icahn Capital LP

Louis B. Susman Diplomat 19-Nov-1937 US Ambassador to the UK

Mary Alice Taylor Business c. 1950 CEO of HomeGrocer.com, 1999-2000

Stephen R. Volk Attorney c. 1935 Vice Chairman of Citigroup

Sanford I. Weill Business 16-Mar-1933 CEO of Citigroup, 1998-2003

Robert B. Willumstad Business c. 1946 CEO of American International Group, 2008

CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS OR DIRECTORS

Name Occupation Birth Death Known for

C. Michael Armstrong Business 18-Oct-1938 CEO of Comcast, 2002-04

Alain J. P. Belda Business 23-Jun-1943 CEO of Alcoa

Winfried Bischoff Business 1941 Chairman of Citigroup

Timothy C. Collins Business c. 1956 Private equity, Ripplewood Holdings

George David Business 7-Apr-1942 CEO of United Technologies

Kenneth T. Derr Business 4-Aug-1936 CEO of Chevron, 1989-99

John Deutch Government 27-Jul-1938 CIA Director, 1995-96

Robert L. Joss Educator c. 1941 Dean, Stanford Business School

Andrew N. Liveris Business ? CEO of Dow Chemical

Anne M. Mulcahy Business 21-Oct-1952 CEO of Xerox, 2001-09

Vikram Pandit Business 1957 CEO of Citigroup

Richard Parsons Business 4-Apr-1948 CEO of Time Warner, 2002-07

Roberto Hernández Ramírez Business 1942 CEO, Banco Nacional de Mexico

Lawrence R. Ricciardi Business 14-Aug-1940 General Counsel for IBM, 1995-2002

Judith Rodin Educator 9-Sep-1944 President of UPenn, 1994-2004

Robert L. Ryan Business c. 1943 CFO of Medtronic, 1993-2005

Diana Taylor Business c. 1955 NY Superindendent of Banks, 2003-07

Citigroup 01/02/2016 4:01 PM

http://www nndb.com/company/677/000053518/ 2

Franklin A. Thomas Attorney 27-May-1934 President of the Ford Foundation, 1979-96

PAST BOARD MEMBERS OR DIRECTORS

Name Occupation Birth Death Known for

Kenneth Bialkin Attorney 9-Sep-1929 Mergers & Acquisitions lawyer

Keith W. Hughes Business c. 1946 Vice Chairman of Citigroup, 2000-01

Ann Dibble Jordan Educator c. 1939 Professor, University of Chicago

Klaus Kleinfeld Business 6-Nov-1957 President and COO of Alcoa

Dudley C. Mecum Business c. 1935 Capricorn Holdings

Charles O. Prince Business 13-Jan-1950 CEO of Citigroup, 2003-07

John S. Reed Business 1939 CEO of Citibank, 1984-2000

Robert E. Rubin Government 29-Aug-1938 US Treasury Secretary, 1995-99

Robert B. Shapiro Business 4-Aug-1938 CEO of Monsanto, 1995-2000

Sanford I. Weill Business 16-Mar-1933 CEO of Citigroup, 1998-2003

Robert B. Willumstad Business c. 1946 CEO of American International Group, 2008

EMPLOYMENT

Name Occupation Birth Death Known for

Thomas C. Foley Business 9-Jan-1952 US Ambassador to Ireland, 2006-09

Richard Kovacevich Business 30-Oct-1943 CEO of Wells Fargo, 1998-2007

Paul F. Walsh Business c. 1950 CEO of eFunds

EXTRANEOUS

Name Occupation Birth Death Known for

Mukesh Ambani Business 19-Apr-1957 India's richest man

Gerald Ford Head of State 14-Jul-1913 26-Dec-2006 38th US President, 1974-77

Richard J. Harrington Business c. 1947 CEO of Thomson Corporation

James M. Kilts Business 10-Feb-1948 CEO of Gillette, 2001-05

Anne-Marie Slaughter Government 27-Sep-1958 Director of Policy Planning, State Dept.

Morris Tabaksblat Business 1937 Chairman of Reed Elsevier, 1999-2005

James Wolfensohn Business 1-Dec-1933 World Bank president, 1995-2005

Lorenzo H. Zambrano Business 1945 CEO of Cemex

Do you know something we don't?Submit a correction or make a comment about this profile

Copyright ©2012 Soylent Communications

Citigroup 01/02/2016 4:01 PM

http://www nndb.com/company/677/000053518/ 3

This is a beta version of NNDB

Search: for

CRIME

Presence on this list implies merely that, to the best of our knowledge, charges were filed against the people in question, or insome cases, a civil suit. It is not meant to imply guilt, and in fact many of the individuals listed may have been foundinnocent of said charges or claims. Some details of the charge in question can often be found inside the specific profileslinked.

Name Occupation Birth Death Known for

Sandy Berger Government 28-Oct-1945 National Security Advisor for Bill Clinton

John Deutch Government 27-Jul-1938 CIA Director, 1995-96

Wen Ho Lee Victim 21-Dec-1939 Allegedly spied for China

Bradley Manning Military 17-Dec-1987 Pled guilty to releasing classified documents

Do you know something we don't?Submit a correction or make a comment about this profile

Copyright ©2013 Soylent Communications

NNDB MA

McCain, Palithe CN

Requires FlashJavascrip

Bibliograp

NNDB has thousand

bibliographpeople

organizatschools,

general tolisting mor50,000 boo

120,000 otheof referencemay be accethe "Bibliog

tab at the tmost pages

the "RelaTopics" boxsidebar. Plea

free to sugbooks that mcritical omi

Mishandling Classified Materials 01/02/2016 4:03 PM

http://www nndb.com/crime/142/000137728/ 1

This is a beta version of NNDB

Search: for

EVENT

Name Occupation Birth Death Known for

Elliott Abrams Government 24-Jan-1948 Asst. Secy. of State involved inIran-Contra

Mehmet Ali Agca Assassin 9-Jan-1958 In 1981, shot Pope John Paul II

Arius Religion 256 AD 336 AD Founder of the Christian doctrine ofArianism

St. Athanasius Religion 298 AD 2-May-373 AD Patriarch of Alexandria, 328-373 AD

Kofi Awoonor Poet 13-Mar-1935 Rediscovery

Francis Bacon Philosopher 22-Jan-1561 9-Apr-1626 Novum Organum

Nathaniel Bacon Politician 2-Jan-1647 26-Oct-1676 Bacon's Rebellion

Candy Barr Performance Artist 6-Jul-1935 30-Dec-2005 Exotic dancer from the 1950s

Belisarius Military 505 AD 565 AD Byzantine general

Blackbeard Criminal c. 1680 22-Nov-1718 Infamous pirate

Lenny Bruce Comic 13-Oct-1925 3-Aug-1966 Multiply obscene comic

Hubert de Burgh Judge ? 1243 Chief Justiciar of England

Sebastian Cabot Explorer 1476 1557 16th century Italian/English explorer

Julius Caesar Head of State 13-Jul-100 BC 15-Mar-44 BC Roman Dictator 45 BC until 44 BC

Luís de Camões Poet c. 1524 10-Jun-1580 Os Lusíadas

Luis Posada Carriles Terrorist c. 1928 Cuban terrorist in US custody

Fidel Castro Head of State 13-Aug-1926 Dictator of Cuba for almost fiftyyears

Ahmed Chalabi Government 30-Oct-1944 Prominent on the Iraqi ProvisionalCouncil

Hugo Chavez Head of State 28-Jul-1954 5-Mar-2013 President of Venezuela, 1998-2013

Henry Cisneros Politician 11-Jun-1947 Secretary of HUD, 1993-97

Roger Clinton Relative 25-Jul-1956 Black sheep in Clinton family

Thomas Cochrane Military 14-Dec-1775 31-Oct-1860 Rear Admiral, invented the smokescreen

Oscar Collazo Assassin 20-Feb-1914 21-Feb-1994 Attempted assassin of Truman

Henry Cowell Composer 11-Mar-1897 10-Dec-1965 New Musical Resources

Thomas Dangerfield Criminal 1650 1685 English conspirator

Eugene V. Debs Labor Leader 5-Nov-1855 20-Oct-1926 Labor leader ran for President fivetimes

Martin R. Delany Activist 6-May-1812 24-Jan-1885 Black nationalist

John Deutch Government 27-Jul-1938 CIA Director, 1995-96

Alfred Dreyfus Victim 9-Oct-1859 12-Jul-1935 Dreyfus Affair scapegoat

Jubal Early Military 3-Nov-1816 2-Mar-1894 Confederate General

Edgar Atheling Royalty c. 1051 c. 1126 King of England 1066

NNDB MA

dubya ranch

Requires FlashJavascrip

Bibliograp

NNDB has thousand

bibliographpeople

organizatschools,

general tolisting mor50,000 boo

120,000 otheof referencemay be accethe "Bibliog

tab at the tmost pages

the "RelaTopics" boxsidebar. Plea

free to sugbooks that mcritical omi

Pardoned 01/02/2016 4:04 PM

http://www nndb.com/event/695/000054533/ 1

W. Mark Felt Government 17-Aug-1913 18-Dec-2008 Watergate's Deep Throat

Leo Frank Victim 17-Apr-1884 17-Aug-1915 Innocent man, lynched by mob

Frederick the Great Royalty 24-Jan-1712 17-Aug-1786 King of Prussia 1740-86

Leopoldo Galtieri Head of State 15-Jul-1926 12-Jan-2003 Invaded Falklands, ran death squads

Giuseppe Garibaldi Military 4-Jul-1807 2-Jun-1882 Privateer, Italian hero

Yakubu Gowon Head of State 19-Oct-1934 Dictator of Nigeria, 1966-75

Merle Haggard Country Musician 6-Apr-1937 Okie From Muskogee

Armand Hammer Business 21-May-1898 10-Dec-1990 Soviet agent of influence

Patty Hearst Victim 20-Feb-1954 Kidnapped by SLA

Robert Hersant Publisher 30-Jan-1920 21-Apr-1996 Le Papivore

Jimmy Hoffa Labor Leader 14-Feb-1913 30-Jul-1975 International Brotherhood ofTeamsters

H. Guy Hunt Politician 17-Jun-1933 30-Jan-2009 Governor of Alabama, 1987-93

Chun Doo Hwan Head of State 18-Jan-1931 President of South Korea, 1980-88

Peter H. Irons Activist 11-Aug-1940 A People's History of the SupremeCourt

Edward Kelley Paranormal 1-Aug-1555 1-Nov-1597 Notorious forger and alchemist

Abdul Qadeer Khan Physicist 1935 Father of Pakistani nuclear bomb

Hans Heinrich Lammers Government 27-May-1879 4-Jan-1962 Chief of the Reich Chancellery

William Laud Religion 7-Oct-1573 10-Jan-1645 Archbishop of Canterbury, 1633-45

Robert E. Lee Military 19-Jan-1807 12-Oct-1870 Confederate General

G. Gordon Liddy Government 30-Nov-1930 Watergate criminal, talk-show-host

Susan McDougal Criminal 1955 Whitewater scandal

Bud McFarlane Government 12-Jul-1937 Iran-Contra figure

Russell Means Activist 10-Nov-1939 22-Oct-2012 American Indian Movement

Jim Morrison Singer/Songwriter 8-Dec-1943 3-Jul-1971 Lead singer and songwriter, TheDoors

Samuel Mudd Doctor 20-Dec-1833 10-Jan-1883 Physician who treated Lincoln'sassassin

Nikon Religion 7-May-1605 17-Aug-1681 Reformer Patriarch of Moscow

Richard M. Nixon Head of State 9-Jan-1913 22-Apr-1994 37th US President, 1969-74

Titus Oates Criminal 15-Sep-1649 12-Jul-1705 Popish Plot

Felice Orsini Assassin 1819 13-Mar-1858 Attempted assassin of Napoleon III

Sean Penn Actor 17-Aug-1960 Fast Times at Ridgemont High

Albert Pike Military 29-Dec-1809 2-Apr-1891 Confederate general, Freemason

Jerzy Popieluszko Activist 23-Sep-1947 19-Oct-1984 Priest murdered by Polishgovernment

Marc Rich Criminal 18-Dec-1934 Pardoned by Clinton

Keith Richards Guitarist 18-Dec-1943 The Rolling Stones

Slick Rick Rapper 14-Jan-1965 Eyepatch-sporting rapper on Def Jam

Dan Rostenkowski Politician 2-Jan-1928 11-Aug-2010 Congressman from Illinois, 1959-95

Antonio López de SantaAnna

Military 21-Feb-1794 21-Jun-1876 Hero of Tampico

Robert Smalls Politician 5-Apr-1839 23-Feb-1915 Slave elected to Congress from SouthCarolina

George Steinbrenner Baseball 4-Jul-1930 13-Jul-2010 Owner, New York Yankees

Fife Symington Politician 12-Aug-1945 Governor of Arizona, 1991-97

Pardoned 01/02/2016 4:04 PM

http://www nndb.com/event/695/000054533/ 2

J. Parnell Thomas Government 16-Jan-1895 19-Nov-1970 HUAC chairman, took the Fifth

Iva Toguri Radio Personality 4-Jul-1916 26-Sep-2006 Never actually was Tokyo Rose

Randy Travis Country Musician 4-May-1959 Country music artist, has 25 top tenhits

Caspar Weinberger Government 18-Aug-1917 28-Mar-2006 Iran-Contra figure pardoned by Bush

Philip D. Winn Criminal 1-Feb-1925 HUD scandal figure pardoned byClinton

Roh Tae Woo Head of State 4-Dec-1932 President of South Korea, 1988-93

Sir Thomas Wyat Poet 1503 6-Oct-1542 Introduced sonnet to England

Peter Yarrow Singer 31-May-1938 The Peter in Peter, Paul, and Mary

Do you know something we don't?Submit a correction or make a comment about this profile

Copyright ©2013 Soylent Communications

Pardoned 01/02/2016 4:04 PM

http://www nndb.com/event/695/000054533/ 3

Why Did Former CIA Director John Deutch Endanger America's Most Vi... 01/02/2016 4:10 PM

http://www.wrmea.org/2001-july/why-did-former-cia-director-john-deut... 1

Why Did Former CIA Director John Deutch Endanger America's Most Vi... 01/02/2016 4:10 PM

http://www.wrmea.org/2001-july/why-did-former-cia-director-john-deut... 2

Why Did Former CIA Director John Deutch Endanger America's Most Vi... 01/02/2016 4:10 PM

http://www.wrmea.org/2001-july/why-did-former-cia-director-john-deut... 3

Why Did Former CIA Director John Deutch Endanger America's Most Vi... 01/02/2016 4:10 PM

http://www.wrmea.org/2001-july/why-did-former-cia-director-john-deut... 4

graphicAmong Americans pardoned today byoutgoing President Clinton were,clockwise from left: Henry Cisneros,Patricia Hearst, Susan McDougal, RogerClinton

ALSO

List of presidential

pardons

CNN.com AllPolitics allpolitics.comwith

TIMEGO

MAIN PAGEWORLDU.S.WEATHERBUSINESSSPORTSPOLITICSLAWSCI-TECHSPACEHEALTHENTERTAINMENTTRAVELEDUCATIONCAREERIN-DEPTH

QUICK NEWSLOCALCOMMUNITYMULTIMEDIAE-MAIL SERVICESCNNtoGOABOUT US

CNN TVwhat's onshow transcriptsCNN Headline NewsCNN InternationalaskCNN

EDITIONSCNN.com AsiaCNN.com Europeset your edition

Clinton's final day includes pardons, newmonument and note for his successor

January 20, 2001Web posted at: 5:03 p.m. EST (2203 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- PresidentClinton, just hours before leavingoffice, pardoned more than 130people, including Whitewater figureSusan McDougal, former Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros, ex-CIA chiefJohn Deutch and publishing heiress Patty Hearst.

The president pardoned his brother, Roger Clinton, who had been convictedon a cocaine charge in the 1980s after cooperating with authorities, andformer Gov. Fife Symington of Arizona, a Republican whose conviction forbank and wire fraud was overturned on appeal. Prosecutors had sought arehearing in the case.

Deutch had been under investigation by the Justice Department formishandling secrets on a home computer. Hearst was kidnapped in the 1970'sand then went to prison for bank robbery.

Cisneros entered a plea agreement as part of an investigation into payments tohis ex-mistress. McDougal, the Clinton's business partner in the Whitewaterland venture, was convicted of loan fraud and spent almost two years inprison for refusing to testify against Clinton before a federal grand juryempanelled by Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr.

Another Whitewater figure and former lawpartner of Hillary Rodham Clinton, WebsterHubbell, was not pardoned. Hubbell, who servedin a top Justice Department position in Clinton'sfirst term, had to resign and spent 15 months inprison for tax evasion and mail fraud.

No pardons for Milken or Peltier

The president also denied a pardon for financier Michael Milken, the 1980s"junk bond" king who served 22 months for swindling investors of $1 billion,and Leonard Peltier, convicted in the deaths of two FBI agents in 1975.

Federal law enforcement and security enforcement officials urged thepresident to deny a pardon for Milken, an outspoken cancer survivor andgenerous philanthropist. FBI agents had protested the possibility of pardoningPeltier after learning his name was on a list of those being considered.

Cisneros, former San Antonio mayor, Clinton's closest friend among his earlyCabinet appointees and a rising political star when his career was unhinged byscandal, was convicted in a cover-up controversy involving payments he

ALLPOLITICSLieberman to announce

U.S. terror task force to nearlydouble in size

FBI lawyer at center of 9/11 flapwins White House award

Democrats question GOPchoice for budget post

GOP moves to finish spendingbills

Vermont lawmakers pickgovernor

(MORE)

TOP STORIESN. Y. plans to heal skyline

Stocks rise on Case departure

Lieberman's presidentialannouncement today

New arrests may be linked toUK ricin scare

(MORE)

BUSINESS

Playing for Iraq's jackpot

Coke & smoke bite Dow

Sun Microsystems posts tinyprofit

(MORE)

MARKETS 4:30pm ET, 4/16DJIA 144.70 8257.60NAS 3.71 1394.72S&P 10.90 879.91

SPORTSJordan says farewell for thethird time

Shaq could miss playoff gamefor child's birth

Ex-USOC official says athletesbent drug rules

CNN.com - Clinton's final day includes pardons, new monument and not... 01/02/2016 4:15 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/20/clinton.pardon.02/ 1

made to his ex-mistress.

Deutch, who stepped down as CIA director in 1996, had been considering adeal with the Justice Department in which he would plead guilty to amisdemeanor charge of keeping classified data on his home computers.

Hearst was kidnapped in the 1970s in Los Angeles by a domestic terroristgroup known as the Symbionese Liberation Army and was convicted of laterparticipating in a bank robbery with her abductors. She served part of herprison sentence before it was commuted by President Jimmy Carter.

Also denied a pardon was Jonathan Pollard, an American serving a longprison term for spying for Israel.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu personally appealed toClinton for clemency in that case.

Governors Island declared a national monument

Before leaving office, Clinton also designated another monument, theGovernors Island National Monument, in New York City, and announced therelease of $100 million to fund 1,400 more police officers.

In keeping with tradition, the former president left a hand-written note for hissuccessor, Jake Siewert, former White House press secretary told CNN.

Siewert and John Podesta, former White House chief of staff, both left notesfor the men who will hold their jobs in the Bush administration, Ari Fleischer,the new White House press secretary, and Andrew Card, President Bush'schief of staff.

The outgoing president also made a decision about an ongoing domesticmatter, whether or not the differences between Socks the cat, and Buddy thedog, could be resolved.

Apparently, Clinton could not negotiate a peace deal, so Socks will be givento Betty Currie, the president's long-time assistant, and Buddy will be goingwith the former first family to Chappaqua.

MORE STORIES:

Saturday, January 20, 2001

'We got some dancing to do,' Bush says!

Senate confirms Powell, Rumsfeld, O'Neill for Bush Cabinet

Despite January wind, inaugural parade aims to 'celebrate America's

spirit'

Clinton's final day includes pardons, new monument and note for his

successor

Protesters line inaugural parade route

Bush gets keys to White House, flexes first presidential muscles

Clintons departs Washington after emotional farewell ceremony

List of presidential pardons

Chris Black: Bush faces tough task with Washington Democrats

Jamie McIntyre: Administration to reassess national security strategies

Kelly Wallace: Bush now gets down to business

(MORE)

All Scoreboards

WEATHER

All cities

WORLDU.S. spies 3 potential nukesites

U.S.10,000 refugees from Burundicoming to U.S.

LAWStunned relatives pack Iowacourtroom

SCI-TECHApple: Virus wormed into someiPods

ENTERTAINMENTRock 'n' roll genius getting hislicks at 80

HEALTHSeafood benefits outweighrisks, government says

TRAVELMachu Picchu can wait

CAREERA well-balanced 'Day on theJob'

(MORE HEADLINES)

CNN.com - Clinton's final day includes pardons, new monument and not... 01/02/2016 4:15 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/20/clinton.pardon.02/ 2

Bush address calls for unity in 'a nation of character'

Election reform rally held in Tallahassee, without Jesse Jackson

In one of his last acts as president, Clinton grants more than 100

pardons

Lott indicates confirmations likely this afternoon

Tribute to former President Bush yields discussion of Florida Election

Bill Press: Clinton walks off the stage

Stuart Rothenberg: For George W. Bush, the past is prologue

Robert Novak: Inauguration speech is Bush's first test

Bush receives Texas-sized welcome to Washington at Black Tie &

Boots gala

ARCHIVES

Search

Back to the top © 2003 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.Terms under which this service is provided to you.Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us.

CNN.com - Clinton's final day includes pardons, new monument and not... 01/02/2016 4:15 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/20/clinton.pardon.02/ 3

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATES 6368 May 9, 1995and that if the bill has not been re-ported by that time, it be automati-cally discharged and placed on the Sen-ate Calendar; provided further, that ifand when the Senate Commerce Com-mittee reports H.R. 1139, it be sequen-tially referred to the Senate Commit-tee on Environment and Public Worksfor a period not to exceed 20 sessiondays of the Senate; and that if the billis not reported by that time, it beautomatically discharged and placedon the calendar.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutobjection, it is so ordered.f

AUTHORIZING TESTIMONY BY SEN-ATE EMPLOYEE AND REPRESEN-TATION BY SENATE LEGALCOUNSEL

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I askunanimous consent that the Senateproceed to the immediate consider-ation of Senate Resolution 119, submit-ted earlier today by Senators DOLE andDASCHLE, authorizing representationby Senate legal counsel.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutobjection, it is so ordered.

The legislative clerk read as follows:A resolution (S. Res. 119) to authorize tes-

timony by Senate employee and representa-tion by Senate legal counsel.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I askunanimous consent that the resolutionbe considered and agreed to, the pre-amble be agreed to and the motion toreconsider be laid upon the table; andthat any statements relating to theresolution appear at the appropriateplace in the RECORD.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutobjection, it is so ordered.

So the resolution (S. Res. 119) wasconsidered and agreed to.

The preamble was agreed to.The resolution, with its preamble, is

as follows:Whereas, in the case of United States v.

George C. Matthews, Case No. 95–CR–11, pend-ing in the United States District Court forthe Eastern District of Wisconsin, a sub-poena for testimony has been issued to DarinSchroeder, an employee of the Senate on thestaff of Senator Feingold;

Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate ofthe United States and Rule XI of the Stand-ing Rules of the Senate, no evidence underthe control or in the possession of the Senatemay, by the judicial process, be taken fromsuch control or possession but by permissionof the Senate;

Whereas, when it appears that evidenceunder the control or in the possession of theSenate may promote the administration ofjustice, the Senate will take such action aswill promote the ends of justice consistentlywith the privileges of the Senate;

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and704(a)(2) of the Ethics in Government Act of1978, 2 U.S.C. §§ 288b(a) and 288c(a)(2) (1994),the Senate may direct its counsel to rep-resent committees, Members, officers andemployees of the Senate with respect to sub-poenas or orders issued to them in their offi-cial capacity: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That Darin Schroeder and anyother employees in Senator Feingold’s officefrom whom testimony may be necessary areauthorized to testify and to produce recordsin the case of United States v. George C. Mat-thews, except concerning matters for which aprivilege should be asserted.

SEC. 2. That the Senate Legal Counsel isdirected to represent Darin Schroeder andany other employee in connection with thetestimony authorized under section 1.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the UnitedStates has issued a subpoena for DarinSchroeder, an employee on the staff ofSenator FEINGOLD, to testify at thetrial of a defendant who was indictedlast January for threatening to bring abomb to a post office building in Mil-waukee to kill or injure individualsand to damage or destroy the building.The defendant is alleged to have madethe threat in a telephone conversationwith Mr. Schroeder, who handles postalservice constituent casework for Sen-ator FEINGOLD.

This resolution would authorize Mr.Schroeder, as well as any other em-ployees on Senator FEINGOLD’s stafffrom whom testimony may be required,to testify and to produce records attrial, and to be represented by the Sen-ate Legal Counsel.f

ORDERS FOR WEDNESDAY, MAY 10,1995

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I askunanimous consent that when the Sen-ate completes its business today, itstand in recess until the hour of 9:30a.m., Wednesday, May 10, 1995; that fol-lowing the prayer, the Journal of pro-ceedings be deemed approved to date,the time for the two leaders be re-served for their use later in the dayand the Senate then immediately re-sume consideration of H.R. 956, theproduct liability bill.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutobjection, it is so ordered.

PROGRAM

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, for theinformation of all Senators, the Senatewill resume consideration of the prod-uct liability bill at 9:30 a.m. At 9:45a.m., there will be at least two stackedrollcall votes on, or in relation to,amendments to the substitute amend-ment.

ORDER FOR LENGTH OF TIME OF VOTES

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I askunanimous consent that the first voteof the 9:45 a.m. voting sequence be 15minutes in length, with the remainingvotes in the sequence limited to 10minutes each.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutobjection, it is so ordered.

f

ORDER OF PROCEDURE

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, a finalpassage vote is expected on the productliability bill at approximately 11:30a.m. Also, at 12 noon, the Senate willbegin consideration of calendar No. 74,the solid waste disposal bill. Therefore,votes can be expected to occurthroughout the day on Wednesday.

f

RECESS UNTIL 9:30 A.M.TOMORROW

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, if thereis no further business to come beforethe Senate, I now ask unanimous con-sent that the Senate stand in recessunder the previous order.

There being no objection, the Senate,at 8:13 p.m., recessed until Wednesday,May 10, 1995, at 9:30 a.m.

f

NOMINATIONS

Executive nominations received bythe Senate May 9, 1995:

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

JOHN P. WHITE, OF MASSACHUSETTS, TO BE DEPUTYSECRETARY OF DEFENSE, VICE JOHN M. DEUTCH.

f

CONFIRMATION

Executive nomination confirmed bythe Senate May 9, 1995:

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE

JOHN M. DEUTCH, OF MASSACHUSETTS, TO BE DIREC-TOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S 6263May 8, 1995been crying out for solution for all ofthese years. I hope the process will un-tangle itself. I am now confident itwill—there was a moment there whenwe were not sure, but I think it willand I think it has—and we will then beable to give Senators on both sides achance to vote for good product liabil-ity reform.

This is not a product of the ContractWith America. It is not a product ofthe Democratic Party. It is a productof people who want reform on bothsides of the aisle, working within theSenate, within our ways, within our be-liefs to achieve compromise. That isthe way the Senate works.

After all, the President of the UnitedStates will have to sign the bill andput it into law. This is what has alwaysstruck me when people say that theconference process will ruin every-thing. I have never felt that. I knowthe Senator from Washington agreeswith me on that, and I suspect the ma-jority leader does. I know I do. Becausethe President, if he does not want tosign the bill, if it does not meet his cri-teria, which he has laid out to us, willsimply veto it and that will be that. Sothere is a discipline that works therein conference process, which is good.

I remind my colleagues and the lead-ership in the other body of what I havejust said. We have tended to push asideexpansionism here and focus on prod-uct liability reform. We do that in theagreement between the Senator fromWashington and the Senator from WestVirginia. So, let the leadership on theother side understand that we are firmin our resolution, and that the Presi-dent is, too. He will not sign anythingother than what stands within his pa-rameters of acceptability.

So I conclude simply by saying thatthe sidebar of the day was that therewas a certain amount of confusion dur-ing the process at the end. But thestory is that the two sides havereached agreement—Democrats whofavor reform and Republicans whofavor reform. I have been through thisreform with most of my colleagues onmy side and have met with a very goodreaction, and I assume the same is trueon the Republican side.

So, Mr. President, I simply wanted tosay that, because there was a certainamount of confusion, but that pales incomparison to the good news of theagreement.

I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

f

EXECUTIVE SESSION

NOMINATION OF JOHN M. DEUTCH,OF MASSACHUSETTS, TO BE DI-RECTOR OF CENTRAL INTEL-LIGENCE

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Underthe previous order, the Senate will nowgo into executive session to considerCalendar Order No. 114, which the clerkwill report.

The legislative clerk read the nomi-nation of John M. Deutch, of Massa-chusetts, to be Director of Central In-telligence.

The Senate proceeded to consider thenomination.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The de-bate on the nomination is limited to 2hours, equally divided and controlledby the Senator from Pennsylvania andthe Senator from Nebraska.

Mr. SPECTER addressed the Chair.The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-

ator from Pennsylvania.Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, there

have been requests only from SenatorMOYNIHAN, who was on the floor, for 15minutes and from Senator HUTCHISONfor 10 minutes, in addition to state-ments which will be made by the dis-tinguished Senator from Nebraska, thevice chairman, Senator KERREY, and abrief opening statement which I willmake. So, in the event that there areany other Senators who wish to beheard on the subject, they ought tocome to the floor now or at least letthe managers know of their interest inspeaking.

Mr. President, the nomination ofJohn M. Deutch to be Director ofCentral Intelligence was reported tothe Senate last week, pursuant to aunanimous vote in the Senate SelectCommittee on Intelligence with a rec-ommendation that he be confirmed. Itwas a unanimous vote, 17 to 0.

The committee held hearings onApril 26 and then proceeded to thatvote last week on May 3. There is aneed to move expeditiously, as I see it,to have a strong Director of theCentral Intelligence Agency.

In consideration of Mr. John Deutchto be Director, we took up a wide vari-ety of issues. We examined Mr.Deutch’s background and qualifica-tions. He has an extraordinary aca-demic record. He has an extraordinaryprofessional record. He has been a dis-tinguished professor at MIT. He hasbeen the head of the department there.He has been the provost there. He hasworked in the Energy Department. Hehas worked in the Department of De-fense. He currently serves as the Dep-uty Secretary of the Department of De-fense.

It is my thought, and I believe withthe concurrence of the committeemembers, that he has the kind ofstrength to take over the managementas Director of the Central IntelligenceAgency.

He comes to this position at a time ofsubstantial difficulty. He comes to thisposition at a time when the agency iswith substantial problems of morale, inthe wake of the Aldrich Ames case,where the agency had a spy within theCentral Intelligence Agency whichthey could not ferret out and eliminatethemselves; hardly a recommendationfor an agency which is charged withworldwide responsibility to gather in-telligence.

There is, in my opinion, Mr. Presi-dent, the need for intelligence gather-

ing worldwide for the security of theUnited States.

During the course of the hearings, weexplored with Mr. Deutch whetherthere ought to be a reorganization. Hisconfirmation hearings came in thewake of extraordinary success by theFederal Bureau of Investigation on theOklahoma City bombing case. We ex-plored with Mr. Deutch whether per-haps the Federal Bureau of Investiga-tion ought to take over on worldwideintelligence gathering. That has beensuggested by some.

It would be an extraordinary changefor the United States to do that. Itwould vest enormous authority in theFBI, perhaps more than is wise, in acountry where we prize limitations onauthority, where we prize separation ofpower.

The FBI, though, is right now en-gaged in very extensive operationsoverseas in work on terrorism as it re-lates at least to prosecution, work ondrug trafficking, work on organizedcrime, many of those activities beingundertaken by the CIA as well. Butthose were some of the subjects dis-cussed.

I expressed at the hearings consider-able concern about the Director of CIAbeing a member of the President’s Cab-inet. We have had the experience withCabinet officers before of the CIA, spe-cifically William Casey, where we hadproblems on Iran-Contra, and there hasbeen a concern that the policymakersought to be separated from the intel-ligence gatherers to the extent therenot be the motivation to shade intel-ligence gathering to support policy, tosort of cook the evidence.

The Iran-Contra Joint Committeemade a strong recommendation againstthat kind of a concern and that kind ofactivity. But in the final analysis,there is a need to move ahead with theconfirmation of the CIA Director, sothat it is my judgment, and I think thejudgment of others on the committeewho were concerned about having theDirector in the Cabinet, that we shouldnot hold up his confirmation in that re-spect.

Mr. Deutch has addressed that ques-tion very forcefully and directly, say-ing that he will be very mindful ofthose policy considerations and willcomport himself so that intelligencegathering is separate from any mattersof policy.

Mr. Deutch has made a very forcefulstatement on taking strong action. Ifthere are those in the CIA, as therewere in the Aldrich Ames case, whofailed to act when there were lots of in-dications that Aldrich Ames was infact not doing his job—when he was in-toxicated on the job, when there wereunexplained visits to foreign embas-sies, where he lost his files—Mr.Deutch was emphatic that if anybodywas in a position of supervision overanother Aldrich Ames and did not takeforceful action, that person would befired peremptorily.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATES 6264 May 8, 1995Then the question was raised with

Mr. Deutch about somebody who was ina supervisory capacity who did notknow but should have known, and Mr.Deutch answered very forcefully thatthat person would be fired.

Mr. President, there are many peoplein the CIA who have long, distin-guished careers, and there are manyable men and women in the Agencywho can carry on. It is my hope, Ithink the hope of the committee, thatthe morale can be restored by a veryfirm and forceful Director of theCentral Intelligence Agency.

We have recently had hearings onGuatemala which, again, were disturb-ing, with the Deputy Director of theCIA conceding flatly that the CIAfailed in its duty to notify both theHouse Intelligence Committee and theSenate Intelligence Committee of whatwas going on in Guatemala.

In sum and substance, Mr. President,it is my view, and I think the view ofthe committee, that John Deutch iswell qualified to take on a very, verytough job at this time.

Mr. President, the nomination ofJohn M. Deutch to be Director ofCentral Intelligence was reported tothe Senate last week pursuant to aunanimous vote of the Senate SelectCommittee on Intelligence, with a rec-ommendation that he be confirmed. Onbehalf of myself and Senator KERREY,in our respective capacities as chair-man and vice chairman of the commit-tee, we urge the Senate to act favor-ably on this nomination.

The committee made a complete andthorough inquiry of the nominee’squalifications as well as his views onissues of mutual concern, and con-cluded that he is qualified by both ex-perience and temperament to hold thissensitive and critical position.

The Senate has moved expeditiouslyin this important nomination. Never-theless, the intelligence communityhas been with out a confirmed directorsince last December—a delay that isparticularly costly when the commu-nity so urgently needs a strong sense ofdirection, of mission, and of manage-ment. It is a critical time for the intel-ligence community. If Mr. Deutch isconfirmed as DCI, he will come to thejob at a time of exceptional promiseand peril.

The peril is clear. It is now conven-tional wisdom that the euphoria whicherupted after the fall of the Berlin Walland the dissolution of the Soviet Em-pire was premature. While nostalgia forthe balance of terror between the Unit-ed States and the Soviet Union is notin order, it is apparent that the post-cold-war world is not any less dan-gerous or unstale—as the bombing inOklahoma City, the World Trade Cen-ter bombing, and the gas attack in theTokyo subway have made shatteringclear. Global threats from inter-national terrorism and narcotics smug-gling, the proliferation of weapons ofmass destruction, and expanding orga-nized crime networks present the intel-

ligence community with targets farmore dispersed and complicated thanthe traditional focus on Soviet mili-tary power. The role and the prioritiesof the intelligence community in theGovernment’s efforts against these andother threats—efforts which now havesignificant diplomatic, economic, andlaw enforcement implications—is verymuch in need of redefinition and reor-dering.

Moreover, a series of revelations haveilluminated problems in the intel-ligence community that have severelydamaged morale among the rank andfile and have eroded the public con-fidence and trust that is essential foran intelligence apparatus operating ina democracy. From the abuses of powerevident in Iran-Contra to the incom-petence and lack of accountability thatcharacterized the Aldrich Ames deba-cle, to charges of widespread sex dis-crimination, to the latest questionsabout policies and practices that re-sulted in, at the very least, an impres-sion of culpability in murders inCentral America, there is the sense ofan intelligence bureaucracy that is notonly incapable of meeting our nationalsecurity needs but, instead, presents arecurring threat to our Nation’s credi-bility and legitimacy overseas throughits frequent missteps, miscalculation,and mismanagement.

The American people are looking fora Director of Central Intelligence whowill provide strong leadership, account-ability, and a clearly defined mission.And therein lies the promise. There isgrowing support within the intel-ligence community, the Congress, andthe public for significant change in theway we conduct intelligence. The endof the bipolar superpower conflict thatdominated the cold war provides newopportunities to build coalitions andachieve consensus on internationalthreats. And thoughtful application ofcontinuing advances in technology cangreatly enhance our efficiency and ef-fectiveness.

This committee, along with theHouse Permanent Select Committee onIntelligence and a congressionallymandated commission chaired by LesAspin and Warren Rudman, will be tak-ing a hard look at the intelligencecommunity—what it’s mission shouldbe in the post-cold-war world and howit should be organized to accomplishthat mission—with an eye to legisla-tion early next year. This is an oppor-tunity to look forward; to begin a newera and establish a new Americanmodel for foreign intelligence.

A key issue for that future involvesthe nature of the office that Mr.Deutch seeks to assume. The DCI musthave the ear and the trust of the Presi-dent. Yet he cannot allow his role asconfidante in any way to corrupt theintelligence process or his role as intel-ligence advisor. This is the concernthat underlies questions about the wis-dom of giving the DCI Cabinet status.

We have examined the nominee’sviews on a number of critical issues

facing the intelligence community,sought and obtained assurances thathis position as a member of the Cabinetwould not politicize intelligence, andexamined the potential impact of hisearlier involvement with issues likethe Persian Gulf syndrome on his newappointment. Our objective has been todetermine whether he can assert thestrong and independent leadership thatis so desperately needed. I have con-cluded that he can and I urge hisprompt confirmation by the Senate.

In the remainder of my remarks, Iwill summarize for my colleagues thenature of the committee’s inquiry, andhighlight the key features of Mr.Deutch’s testimony to the committee.

SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE INQUIRY

As you know, the former DCI, JamesWoolsey, resigned last December. InFebruary, the administration an-nounced that it planned to nominateretired Air Force General Michael C.P.Carns to replace Woolsey as DCI. Onemonth later, General Carns withdrewhis name, citing immigration issues.The administration then turned toDeputy Secretary of Defense Deutch.In announcing on March 11, 1995, thedecision to nominate Mr. Deutch asDCI, the White House also announcedthat the post would be elevated to Cab-inet-level status. Mr. Deutch’s namewas formally submitted to the commit-tee on March 29, 1995.

The committee required Mr. Deutchto submit sworn answers to its stand-ard questionnaire for Presidential ap-pointees, setting forth his backgroundand financial situations. These weresubmitted to the committee on March30, 1995.

On April 5, 1995, the committee re-ceived a letter from the Director of theOffice of Government Ethics transmit-ting a copy of the financial disclosurestatement submitted by Mr. Deutch.The Director advised the committeethat is disclosed no real or potentialconflict-of-interest.

The chairman and vice chairman alsoreviewed the FBI investigation donefor the White House on Mr. Deutch.

The committee held a confirmationhearing on Mr. Deutch on April 26, 1995,at which time the nominee was ques-tioned on a variety of topics. Subse-quently, written questions were sub-mitted to the nominee for additionalresponses.

Based upon this examination, thecommittee reported the nomination tothe Senate on May 3, 1995, by a unani-mous vote, with a recommendationthat Mr. Deutch be confirmed.

HIGHLIGHTS OF TESTIMONY

VIEWS ON THE ROLE OF THE DCI—CABINETSTATUS

In his opening remarks to the com-mittee, Mr. Deutch described as theprimary duty of the DCI ‘‘to provideobjective, unvarnished assessmentsabout issues involving foreign eventsto the President and other senior pol-icymakers.’’ He emphasized that ‘‘withthe exception of policy that bears on

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S 6265May 8, 1995the Intelligence Community, the Direc-tor of Central Intelligence should haveno foreign policy making role.’’ Speak-ing directly to the issue of making theDCI a member of the Cabinet, thenominee explained his belief that thePresident intended this to signal theimportance he places on intelligenceand the confidence the President has inMr. Deutch. The nominee went on topresent his view that this status is im-portant to ensure that the DCI will bepresent when policy issues are delib-erated so that he can present objectiveassessments of alternative courses ofaction and take away from those meet-ings a better understanding of policy-maker needs.

I questioned Mr. Deutch on this issuein meetings prior to the confirmationhearing and again, for the record, inopen session. I noted my own view thatif you are in the Cabinet, you are muchmore likely to get involved in makingpolicy than if you are not in the Cabi-net. I referred to the congressional re-port on Iran-Contra and SecretaryShultz’s assertion, as reported therein,that the President was getting faultyintelligence about terrorism becausethere was a problem in keeping intel-ligence separated from policy. Thecommittee concluded in that reportthat ‘‘the gathering, analysis, and re-cording of intelligence should be donein a way that there can be no questionthat the conclusions are driven by theactual facts rather than by what a pol-icy advocate hopes these facts will be.’’

This need to separate policymakingfrom intelligence gathering and analy-sis is reflected in the statute definingthe National Security Council. The Na-tional Security Act of 1947 sets forththe members of the NSC and then des-ignates others, including the DCI andthe Chairman of the Joint Chiefs ofStaff, as officials who are not membersbut may attend and participate as thePresident directs. It is my strong sensethat this is the appropriate status forthe DCI with respect to the Cabinet aswell.

Mr. Deutch has assured the commit-tee that he will hold to the properstandard of conduct and that he would‘‘not allow policy to influence intel-ligence judgements and, not allow in-telligence to interfere in the policyprocess.’’

I believe that Mr. Deutch has thebest of intentions in this regard andthat he is certainly capable of rec-ognizing the line between intelligenceand policy. The committee will be sen-sitive to any indication that thisstandard is not being met. Ultimately,however, the makeup of the Cabinet isa Presidential prerogative and is notstatutorily defined.

Given the delay already experiencedin naming Mr. Deutch, and given hisstrong qualifications in every other re-gard, I do not think this issue shouldstand in the way of his confirmation bythe Senate.

With respect to DCI authorities, thenominee noted in response to questions

at the hearing and those submittedlater for the record, that in his view,the DCI could more effectively managethe intelligence community if he or shehad budget execution authority overkey segments of the community.

In further response to questions, Mr.Deutch agreed that this was a pro-pitious time to consider establishing aDirector of National Intelligence—whowould serve at the pleasure of thePresident and manage the entire intel-ligence community—and a separatehead of the CIA who would have a 10-year tenure.

VIEWS ON THE MISSION OF THE INTELLIGENCECOMMUNITY

Mr. Deutch’s prepared statement out-lined some of the significant dangers toour national security today: Regionalconflicts; the spread of weapons ofmass destruction; international terror-ism, international crime, internationaldrug trafficking, and their interconnec-tion; instability in the former SovietUnion; and China—as a threat to itsneighbors and supplier of missiles.

He then described four principal pur-poses to which the intelligence commu-nity [IC] should direct its efforts: First,assuring that the President and otherpolicymakers have the best informa-tion available before making decision;second, support to military operations;third, addressing international terror-ism, crime, and drugs, particularly im-proving interagency coordination andsupport to law enforcement; andfourth, counterintelligence [CI] thatrigorously adheres to high securitystandards, accords priority to defensiveCI and counterespionage, and includesfull and early cooperation within theCI community.

He emphasized that the national pri-orities for intelligence collection es-tablished by the recent PresidentialDecision Directive need to be imple-mented.

VIEWS ON MANAGEMENT

I applaud Mr. Deutch for his unusu-ally candid and forthright openingstatement. In it, he outlined for thecommittee the significant actions hewould take immediately upon con-firmation to begin the process ofchange that is so long overdue in theintelligence community, or ‘‘IC.’’ First,he indicated he would bring in severalnew people to fill upper managementpositions. In doing so, he will empha-size joint operations of the IC agenciesbecause ‘‘we can no longer afford re-dundant capabilities in several dif-ferent agencies.’’ Second, he plans toreview and encourage changes in theculture and operation of the Direc-torate of Operations. Third, he willmove to consolidate the managementof all imagery collection, analysis, anddistribution in a manner similar to theNSA’s for signals intelligence. Fourth,he wants to manage military and intel-ligence satellite acquisition in a moreintegrated way. Fifth, he will put inplace a planning process for meetingthe priorities and goals established bythe Presidential Decision Directive.

Sixth, what he described as his mostimportant challenge is to ‘‘improve themanagement—and thereby the mo-rale—of the dedicated men and womenwho make up the IC.’’

RESPONSE TO AMES

The issue of management is particu-larly critical in the wake of Ames. Iquestioned Mr. Deutch on how hewould ensure that he knew what wasgoing on within the CIA so that hecould exert the proper management. Icited former Director Gates’ admissionthat by 1987, he had only been advisedof about 4 or 5 compromises of U.S.agents, at a time when there were infact 40 or more compromised oper-ations. Director Gates complained that‘‘nobody bothered to share that infor-mation with Judge Webster, my prede-cessor, or with me,’’ when Gates washis Deputy.

I wanted to know what action Mr.Deutch would take if he identified aperson that had a pretty good idea thatAldrich Ames was a mole but failed topass that information on up the chainof command to the Director. Mr.Deutch said he would terminate thatindividual. Moreover, when askedabout reports that the supervisor ofAmes, who knew that Ames had an al-cohol dependency and had observed thenegative consequences of this depend-ency, had not only failed to fire Ames,but had, instead, written a highly com-plimentary review of his performance,Mr. Deutch indicated that supervisorshould be fired. When questioned fur-ther, he conceded that if the super-visor’s supervisor should have knownabout this improper conduct, that su-pervisor should also be fired.

The key in this exchange, as empha-sized by the nominee, is the notion ofaccountability. It is a sense of account-ability that was absent under the lastDCI and that is an essential ingredientof any plan to revitalize our foreign in-telligence apparatus.

Mr. Deutch has told the committeethat if confirmed, he will review theAmes case and will consider the com-mittee’s report on Ames in connectionwith any personnel action affecting theindividuals involved.

VIEWS ON CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT

On the issue of congressional over-sight, Mr. Deutch emphasized in hisopening statement that he could notaccomplish the significant change thatis needed in the intelligence commu-nity without the strong support of Con-gress. ‘‘I consider you my board of di-rectors’’, he said. ‘‘I realize this meansI must keep you fully and currently in-formed about the activities for which Iwould be responsible—both the goodnews and the bad news. I understandthat I am accountable to you, and I ex-pect you to hold me to a high standardof performance.’’

Mr. Deutch conceded, when ques-tioned, that, while he could not imag-ine it happening, if the President evertold him not to inform the committeehe, Mr. Deutch, would ‘‘go happilyback to Massachusetts.’’

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATES 6266 May 8, 1995Moreover, the nominee assured the

committee that he interprets the re-quirement for timely notification of acovert action finding, in the absence ofprior notification, to mean within 48hours. Specifically, Mr. Deutch said, ‘‘Ithink that in all situations thereshould be prior notification. There maybe remote instances where that is notpossible, in a very, very tiny percent-ages of the cases. Then 48-hours is whatI see as the measure of timely notifica-tion.’’

COMMITMENTS FOR PROMPT ACTION

At the conclusion of the hearing, Iasked for, and received, a commitmentfrom Mr. Deutch to report back to thecommittee as promptly as possible ifconfirmed—preferably within 30 days ofconfirmation—regarding several issuesof particular importance;

First, report on any needed changesto DCI authorities;

Second, improving the intelligencecommunity’s fulfillment of its obliga-tion to keep Congress fully and cur-rently informed;

Third, the need for reorganizationwithin the intelligence community;

Fourth, changes in personnel;Fifth, proposal for how to achieve

downsizing in a way which createsheadroom, weeds out poor performers,and leaves the intelligence communitywith the mix of skills required to ac-complish its mission;

Sixth, intelligence reassessment ofthe possibility that U.S. forces were ex-posed to chemical or biological agentsduring Desert Storm;

Seventh, actions taken in response toevents in Guatemala; and

Eighth, improving coordination withlaw enforcement.

CONCLUSION

The foregoing summarizes only thehighlights of the record before thecommittee, which is, of course, avail-able to all Members in its entirety atthe Intelligence Committee.

Based upon the nominee’s statementsto the committee, however, his recordof distinguished service and the ab-sence of any disqualifying informationconcerning him, the Senate SelectCommittee on Intelligence voted to re-port his nomination to the Senate witha recommendation that he be con-firmed by the full Senate as Director ofCentral Intelligence.

Mr. President, before yielding thefloor, I want to commend my distin-guished vice chairman, SenatorKERREY, for his outstanding work gen-erally with the committee and on thisnomination.

The only other speaker who is tocome to the floor on our side is SenatorHUTCHISON, who has an allotment of 10minutes, but I think there will be moretime within the unanimous-consentagreement if Senator HUTCHISON wantsmore time. Or if any other RepublicanSenators wish to partake in the discus-sion, they can take time on our side.

I thank the Chair and yield the floor.Mr. KERREY addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-ator from Nebraska.

Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, I rise inenthusiastic support of the nominationof John M. Deutch to be Director ofCentral Intelligence. While I cannotpredict a length in time that he will bein service to his country in this capac-ity, I can predict with confidence,should he be confirmed, he will turnout to be one of the most effective andinfluential DCI’s in the history of thisAgency.

The President of the United States,with John Deutch, is making a state-ment that he intends to send a man totake charge of Langley during what isobviously one of the most tumultuousperiods ever experienced by Central In-telligence. The Aldrich Ames case andrecent Guatemala revelations portraya troubled corporate culture at CIA.

In addition, many question whetherthe intelligence community has cometo grips with the post-cold-war worldand whether new collection methodsand technologies are required to targetthe new threats that have emerged.

The twin threats of international anddomestic terrorism lead many to ques-tion the intelligence community’sproper role in supporting law enforce-ment. The very structure of the com-munity is in question, as a joint Presi-dential-congressional commission andseveral private study groups askwhether intelligence is necessary atall.

Mr. President, we have been watch-ing, once again, another 50-year cele-bration in the last couple of days. Thistime the celebration is the 50th anni-versary of the day that victory in Eu-rope was declared over Nazi forces.That victory is being celebrated in partbecause we are also celebrating thefact that over the last 47 or so years,we have avoided, with significant ef-forts, a third world war. For a 75-yearperiod, roughly from 1914, when theguns of August started World War I,until the fall of 1989 when the BerlinWall itself collapsed and Eastern Eu-rope began to liberate itself, duringthat 75-year period, it is, I believe, ac-curate to say we experienced the blood-iest 75 years in the history of mankind.

During that 75-year period, Mr. Presi-dent, many things occurred, includingthe institution of a policy that had theUnited States of America leading an ef-fort against a clearly identified enemy,and the celebration that takes placethis year is not just a celebration of avictory over that enemy, but a sensethat we have survived, as a human peo-ple, the forecast that we may annihi-late ourselves through the use of nu-clear weapons. It is a remarkable vic-tory, and I dare not on this floor takea great deal of time describing it, butit is a profound change that the newDirector of Central Intelligence mustfactor in as that individual, hopefullyJohn Deutch, begins to shape the agen-cies under his control to meet the newchallenges that this country faces.

You might expect that only some-body who was a glutton for punishmentwould willingly volunteer and walkinto the set of problems that JohnDeutch will face. But I can assure mycolleagues, as the distinguished chair-man of the Committee has alreadysaid, that John Deutch knows betterthan this. He knows, as many of us onthe Intelligence Committee know, wehave a superb intelligence instrumentin this country staffed by brave and in-telligent people who take risks everysingle day and make sacrifices for theircountry. They provide the President,the military, the Cabinet, our dip-lomats and intelligence analysts a ca-pability no other country can rival: thecapability to know most about threatsto our country’s freedom and independ-ence, and threats to the lives and live-lihoods of Americans.

Unlike the domestic agencies, our in-telligence professionals cannot bragabout their competence. To brag wouldlose the all-important source of infor-mation. So they are generally silent,but they are of immense value. Theyneed guidance, they need leadership,they need a visionary who can helpfocus their talent on the Nation’spressing needs, and John Deutch is theperson to do it. Adm. Bill Studemanhas rendered a vital service as ActingDirector. He has kept a complex enter-prise on track during a difficult period,and the Nation owes him its thanks. Hewould be the first to agree that the in-telligence community needs a Presi-dentially appointed, senatorially con-firmed director.

Even if John Deutch’s service in theDefense Department were his own ac-complishment, he would be a strongcandidate to be DCI. Most intelligencefunding is in defense, the military con-tinues to be the leading customer forintelligence, and his knowledge of de-fense intelligence is matched by few inand out of our Government.

But another part of John Deutch’sresume appeals to me. John Deutch isa scientist of national renown and adistinguished science professor. Tech-nical intelligence collection is mainlya science problem. The scientific deci-sion of which system to buy or developto best collect against a certain threatis typically made by lawyers advisedby scientists. In this administration,however, the scientists have come tothe fore. I, for one, feel very com-fortable knowing that the scientificjudgment of Bill Perry is making theultimate acquisition decisions in de-fense, and I will feel equal comfortwith John Deutch’s scientific judgmenton intelligence acquisitions. The factthat he is a teacher and can explainthese complex systems to those of usnonscientists, who are charged with in-telligence oversight, is that much bet-ter for the American people.

We will get the benefit of Dr.Deutch’s scientific expertise not a mo-ment too soon. New threats, new col-lection priorities, and a rapidly chang-ing collection environment mean that

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S 6267May 8, 1995we cannot stand pat on our collectiontechnologies. Just to maintain theedge we have now, we must fund re-search and development on new tech-nologies and make hard decisionsabout which road we will go down.

We also have to maintain the healthof our intelligence industrial base, theprivate companies that produce theseremarkable systems. There are unique-ly talented people working for thesecompanies, engineers and technicianswho turn the requirements statementinto reality. If we do not keep thesepeople at work in profitable undertak-ings, the Government will never beable to afford new systems. That iswhy Senator WARNER and I, last year,urged the administration to permitU.S. companies to sell 1-meter spaceimagery and imaging equipment. Wedid not want to see remote sensing, atechnology in which we lead the world,go the way of the space launch. We alsowanted America to dominate thisgrowing industry. The administrationsaw it the same way, and John Deutchis a firm supporter of the administra-tion policy. He knows that our indus-trial base is our true national treasure,and he will continue to watch over itshealth.

Intelligence technology routinelysaves American lives, but we should bealert to opportunities to make it usefulto Americans in other ways. For exam-ple, the National Information DisplayLaboratory in Princeton, NJ, noticedthat the technology that helped im-agery analysts understand images bet-ter could also be helpful to radiologistsscanning a mammogram for early signsof breast cancer. NIDL teamed withMassachusetts General Hospital toadapt the technology, and the outcomecould be as many as 15,000 Americanlives saved each year.

Other opportunities abound for thedual-use intelligence technology. Wehave just begun to make public use ofspace images and other intelligencecollected during the cold war. The de-classification process has begun and wemust push the process until we canfairly say that intelligence technologyserves not just a handful ofdecisionmakers in Washington but the250 million decisionmakers across ourcountry.

Mr. President, when I was a youngman operating in the U.S. Navy Sealteam, we had a piece of advice we triedto follow all of the time, which wasthat unless you had a need to knowsomething, you did not press the betand try to acquire it. We did not dis-seminate intelligence to people who didnot have a need to know. Mr. Presi-dent, there are 250 million citizens ofthe United States of America who needto know increasingly a set of complexfacts in order to make decisions aboutour foreign policy, in order to make de-cisions about our domestic policy, inorder to make decisions about all sortsof things that are increasingly confus-ing our citizens.

Democracy cannot function unlesscitizens make the effort to understandthose complexities and come to thetable at election time and come to thetable when it is time to influence theirSenator or Representative or Presidentwith all of the facts and information.

The Director of Central Intelligenceis the President’s national intelligenceofficer. John Deutch’s Governmentbackground is in defense, and his testi-mony before the Committee made clearthat he understands the priority of in-telligence support to the military. Buthe also understands the role of na-tional intelligence, and he understandsthat not every problem facing thecountry is a military problem. He isaware, for example, of the intelligencecommunity’s contributions againstinternational terrorism, against drugtrafficking, against illegal trade prac-tices. He knows how important intel-ligence is to this administration’sinternational economic decisionmak-ing, and he knows that warning thePresident about the economic crisis inMexico last year was at least as impor-tant as warning about a military crisisin some less important region of theworld. It is ironic that, with the end ofthe cold war, the Director of CentralIntelligence has a broader nationalcharter than ever. It is an irony whichJohn Deutch understands.

The intelligence community includesmuch more than the CIA. The NationalSecurity Agency, the Defense Intel-ligence Agency, FBI, and the State De-partment’s Bureau of Intelligence andResearch all play their largely uniqueroles. But no question, CIA, unfortu-nately, lately has been at the center ofcontroversy and likely will continue tobe. At least initially, the heart of JohnDeutch’s task will be to make the CIAmore efficient and accountable to theAmerican people. I am greatly encour-aged, as the chairman indicated ear-lier, by his testimony on the sense ofaccountability and responsibility thathe intends to bring to CIA’s Direc-torate of Operations. I have visited CIAofficers in the field, and I know thehigh quality of the people John Deutchwill lead. These are clear-headed, posi-tive, enthusiastic Americans. The cur-rent senior managers should get creditfor recruiting and training and moti-vating a fine crop of younger officers.Now it is time, as Mr. Deutch put it inhis own testimony, for the seniors tolet the younger officers take the reins.

As they take over, they must recruitand retain more women and minorities,and they must be alert to gender dis-crimination in assignments and pro-motions. The Directorate of Operationshas never been an easy place for womento get a fair opportunity to make theirmark. Not only is gender discrimina-tion illegal, it is also stupid because itdenies the American people the brainpower of more than 50 percent of ourpeople. It also creates resentmentswhich can dangerously weaken theagency. I have heard all the excuses fordiscrimination, and none of them wash.

I am confident that John Deutch willnot permit it.

CIA’s human intelligence activities,which consist mainly in getting for-eigners to secretly provide informa-tion, will always take place in theshadows. Human sources will have tobe protected, so the activities will notbe able to be publicly discussed. ButCIA, no less than any other agency ofGovernment, must operate in accord-ance with American law and Americanvalues. One purpose of congressionaloversight of intelligence is to ensurethat this is so. Oversight cannot workif CIA does not inform Congress, or an-swer Congress’ questions. Failure topromptly inform is one of the mosttroubling aspects of both the Amescase and the Guatemala case. Bad newsdoes not improve with age. The with-holding of bad news—withholding in-formation on an intelligence failure—jeopardizes the oversight system with-out which the United States cannotconduct foreign intelligence oper-ations. John Deutch clearly under-stands his reporting responsibilities,and I believe Directors Gates and Wool-sey and Studeman also understood. Thechallenge for John Deutch is to knowwhat is happening inside his organiza-tion, so the bad news gets to him first.

That is the mark of a tight, con-fident, organization. John Deutch hassome great material to work with, butit is up to him to forge that kind of or-ganization.

If anybody in this great country ofours is up to that job, John Deutch isthe person to get the job done.

I yield the floor.Mr. MOYNIHAN addressed the Chair.The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-

ator from New York [Mr. MOYNIHAN] isrecognized.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I thank my gallantfriend from Nebraska. I rise very muchin support of the position he has takenand that of the distinguished chairmanof the committee, the Senator fromPennsylvania.

I would say by way of introductionthat in the 103d Congress and then onthe first day of the 104th Congress, I of-fered legislation that would basicallybreak up the existing Central Intel-ligence Agency and return its compo-nent parts to the Department of De-fense and the Department of State inthe manner that the OSS, the Office ofStrategic Services, was divided andparceled out with the onset of peace in1945 and 1946, to be followed, of course,by a cold war which has persisted al-most until this moment.

I had hoped to encourage a debate onthe role of intelligence and of secrecyin the American society. That debatehas taken place. Some of the results, Ithink, can be seen in the nomination ofthis distinguished scientist and publicservant to this position.

It could not have been more clearthan in his testimony in which hemade a point, self-evident we would

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATES 6268 May 8, 1995suppose, but not frequently to be en-countered in the pronouncements ofpotential DCI’s. He said:

Espionage does not rest comfortably in ademocracy. Secrecy, which is essential toprotect sources and methods, is not welcomein an open society. If our democracy is tosupport intelligence activities, the peoplemust be confident that our law and rules willbe respected.

It may have come as a surprise—al-though it ought not to have—in recentmonths and weeks, to find how manypersons there are in this country whodo not have confidence that our lawsand rules will be respected; who see thegovernment in conspiratorial modes,directed against the people in waysthat could be of huge consequence toAmericans.

I am not talking about what RichardHofstadter referred to when he spoke of‘‘the paranoid style in American poli-tics.’’ I am talking about the wide-spread belief that the CIA was some-how involved in the assassination ofPresident Kennedy, if we can imagine.But there it is.

It is important to understand howdeep this is in our society. In 1956, evenbefore Hofstadter spoke of it; EdwardA. Shils of the University of Chicago—who just passed away—that great,great, social scientist, published hisbook, ‘‘The Torment of Secrecy,’’ inwhich he wrote ‘‘The exfoliation andintertwinement of the various patternsof belief that the world is dominated byunseen circles of conspirators, operat-ing behind our backs, is one of thecharacteristic features of modern soci-ety.’’

Such a belief was very much a fea-ture of the Bolshevik society that tookshape in 1917 and 1918. The conspira-torial decision to help found and fundin the United States, a Communistparty, half of which would be class des-tiny, the discovery from the archivesin Moscow that John Reed received apayment of $1.5 million in 1920. Even assoft money, that would be a very con-siderable sum today.

In the pattern that societies gothrough, it is said that organizationsbecome like one other. To an extraor-dinary degree we emulate the Sovietmodel in our own intelligence service.

Unintentionally, naturally, it hap-pens that way, but a very powerfulanalyses of this has just been writtenby Jefferson Morley in the WashingtonPost under the headline ‘‘Understand-ing Oklahoma’’ in an article entitled‘‘Department of Secrecy: The InvisibleBureaucracy That Unites AlienatedAmerica in Suspicion.’’

Or by Douglas Turner, in an articlethis weekend in the Buffalo News. Ispoke of these concerns in an earlierstatement on the Senate floor entitled‘‘The Paranoid Style in American Poli-tics,’’ which I ask unanimous consentbe printed in the RECORD along withthe articles by Douglas Turner and Jef-ferson Morley.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutobjection, it is so ordered.

(See exhibit 1.)Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, what

we have is so much at variance withwhat was thought we would get.

Allen Dulles was very much part ofthe foundation of postwar intelligence,having been in the OSS, served withgreat distinction in Switzerland duringWorld War II.

Peter Grose, in his new biography,‘‘Gentleman Spy: The Life of AllenDulles,’’ recounts the testimony Dullesgave before the Senate Armed ServicesCommittee on April 25, 1947, as we areabout to establish, passed the NationalSecurity Act of 1947 and created thissmall coordinating body, the CentralIntelligence Agency.

Personnel for a central intelligenceagency, he argued, ‘‘need not be verynumerous * * *. The operation of theservice must be neither flamboyant norovershrouded with the mystery and ab-racadabra which the amateur detectivelikes to assume.’’ In a lecturing tone,he tried to tell the Senators how intel-ligence is actually assembled.

Because of its glamour and mystery, over-emphasis is generally placed on what iscalled secret intelligence, namely the intel-ligence that is obtained by secret means andby secret agents. . . . In time of peace thebulk of intelligence can be obtained throughovert channels, through our diplomatic andconsular missions, and our military, navaland air attahces in the normal and propercourse of their work. It can also be obtainedthrough the world press, the radio, andthrough the many thousands of Americans,business and professional men and Americanresidents of foreign countries, who are natu-rally and normally brought in touch withwhat is going on in those countries.

A proper analysis of the intelligence ob-tainable by these overt, normal, and above-board means would supply us with over 80percent, I should estimate, of the informa-tion required for the guidance of our na-tional policy.

Mr. President, that could not happen,did not happen. We entered upon a five-decade mode of secret analysis, analy-sis withheld from the scrutiny, whichis the only way we can verify the truthof a hypothesis in natural science orthe social sciences.

The result was massive miscalcula-tion, Nicholas Eberstadt in his wonder-ful new book, ‘‘The Tyranny of Num-bers,’’ writes ‘‘It is probably safe to saythat the U.S. Government’s attempt todescribe the Soviet economy has beenthe largest single project in socialscience research ever undertaken.’’ Hesaid that, sir, in 1990, in testimony be-fore the Committee on Foreign Rela-tions. ‘‘The largest single project in so-cial science research ever undertaken,’’and it was a calamity.

No one has been more forthright thanAdm. Stansfield Turner in an article inForeign Affairs about this time. Hesaid when it came to predicting thecollapse of the Soviet Union, the cor-porate view of the intelligence commu-nity was totally wrong.

I can remember the first years of theKennedy administration. I rememberhaving a meeting with Walt Rostow,Chairman of the Policy Planning Coun-

cil in the Department of State, inwhich he said of the Soviet Union, I amnot one of those 6 percent forever peo-ple, but there it was, locked into theanalyses. That is what the Presidentknew.

Mr. President, in Richard Reeves re-markable biography of John F. Ken-nedy, he records that the agency toldthe President that by the year 2000 theGNP of the Soviet Union would bethree times that of the United States.And that is what the President knew. Aperson might come to him with themost reasonable arguments, as did anynumber of economists. The great theo-rists, Friedman, Hayek, Stigler, said itcould not happen, it would be theoreti-cally impossible. Important work doneby Frank Holzman, at Tufts, and theRussian Research Center at Harvardsaid, ‘‘No, no. That is all very wellwhat you say professor. What I know isdifferent.’’

The consequences have been an ex-traordinary failure to foresee thecentral event of our time. A vast over-dependence on military and similaroutlays, that leave us perilously closeto economic difficulty ourselves.

I would like to close with a letterwritten me in 1991 by Dale W.Jorgenson, professor of economics atthe Kennedy School of Government, inwhich he said:

I believe that the importance of economicintelligence is increasing greatly with themuch-discussed globalization of the U.S.economy. However the cloak-and-daggermodel is even more inappropriate to our neweconomic situation than it was to the suc-cessful prosecution of the Cold War that hasjust concluded. The lessons for the futureseem to me to be rather transparent. TheU.S. government needs to invest a lot morein international economic assessments. * * *(I)t should reject the CIA monopoly modeland try to create the kind of intellectualcompetition that now prevails between CBOand OMB on domestic policy, aided byBrookings, AEI [American Enterprise Insti-tute], the Urban Institute, the KennedySchool, and many others.

I ask unanimous consent the entireletter be printed in the RECORD at theconclusion of my remarks.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutobjection, it is so ordered.

(See exhibit 2.)Mr. MOYNIHAN. Those are the re-

marks I would like to make, sir. I havethe confidence that John Deutch, as ascientist, will follow them. I have theconcern that the administration willnot.

We do know some things in socialscience. Mancur Olson, in his greatbook, ‘‘The Rise and Decline of Na-tions,’’ on this day, V–E Day—I was asailor on V–E Day, so I can rememberthat—I can remember the Boston Com-mon, actually— Mancur Olson asked:

Why has it come about that the two na-tions whose institutions were destroyed inWorld War II, Germany and Japan, have hadthe most economic success since? WhereasBritain—not really much success at all; theUnited States—yes, but.’’ And he came upwith a simple answer. The defeat wiped outall those choke points, all those rents, all

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S 6269May 8, 1995those sharing agreements, all those vetostructures that enable institutions to pre-vent things from happening. And we are see-ing it in this Government today, 5 yearsafter the wall came down.

Remember, 2 years before the wallcame down the CIA stated that per cap-ita GDP was higher in East Germanythan in West Germany. I hope I take noliberty that I mentioned this once toDr. Deutch and added ‘‘Any taxi driverin Berlin could have told you that wasnot so.’’ And Dr. Deutch replied, ‘‘Anytaxi driver in Washington.’’ But if wecannot summon the capacity to changeour institutions in our changed cir-cumstances, there will be consequencesand let nobody say they were not pre-dictable.

Mr. President, I thank the Senatorfrom Texas for her graciousness for al-lowing me to speak when in fact in al-ternation it would have been her turn.

EXHIBIT 1[From the Congressional Record, Apr. 25,

1995]THE PARANOID STYLE IN AMERICAN POLITICS

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, As we thinkand, indeed, pray our way through the after-math of the Oklahoma City bombing, askinghow such a horror might have come about,and how others might be prevented, Senatorscould do well to step outside the chamberand look down the mall at the WashingtonMonument. It honors the Revolutionary gen-eral who once victorious, turned his armyover to the Continental Congress and retiredto his estates. Later, recalled to the highestoffice in the land, he served dutifully oneterm, then a second but then on principlenot a day longer. Thus was founded the firstrepublic, the first democracy since the age ofGreece and Rome.

There is no a more serene, confident,untroubled symbol of the nation in all thecapital. Yet a brief glance will show that thecolor of the marble blocks of which themonument is constructed changes about aquarter of the way up. Thereby hangs a taleof another troubled time; not our first, justas, surely, this will not be our last.

As befitted a republic, the monument wasstarted by a private charitable group, as wewould now say, the Washington NationalMonument Society. Contributions came incash, but also in blocks of marble, manywith interior inscriptions which visitorswilling to climb the steps can see to thisday. A quarter of the way up, that is. For in1852, Pope Plus IX donated a block of marblefrom the temple of Concord in Rome. In-stantly, the American Party, or the Know-Nothings (‘‘I know nothing,’’ was theirstandard reply to queries about their plat-form) divined a Papist Plot. An installationof the Pope’s block of marble would signalthe Catholic Uprising. A fevered agitationbegan. As recorded by Ray Allen Billingtonin The Protest Crusade, 1800–1860:

‘‘One pamphlet, The Pope’s Strategem:‘‘Rome to America!’’ An Address to theProtestants of the United States, againstplacing the Pope’s block of Marble in theWashington Monument (1852), urged Protes-tants to hold indignation meetings and con-tribute another block to be placed next tothe Pope’s ‘bearing an inscription by whichall men may see that we are awake to thehypocrisy and schemes of that designing,crafty, subtle, far seeing and far reachingPower, which is ever grasping after thewhole World, to sway its iron scepter, withbloodstained hands, over the millions of itsinhabitants.’ ’’

One night early in March, 1854, a group ofKnow-Nothings broke into the storage shedson the monument grounds and dragged thePope’s marble off towards the Potomac. Savefor the occasional ‘‘sighting’’, as we havecome to call such phenomena, it has never tobe located since.

Work on the monument stopped. Yearslater, in 1876, Congress appropriated funds tocomplete the job, which the Corps of Engi-neers, under the leadership of LieutenantColonel Thomas I. Casey did with greatflourish in time for the centennial observ-ances of 1888.

Dread of Catholicism ran its course, ifslowly. (Edward M. Stanton, then Secretaryof War was convinced the assassination ofPresident Lincoln was the result of a Catho-lic plot.) Other manias followed, all bril-liantly describe in Richard Hofstadter’s re-velatory lecture ‘‘the Paranoid Style inAmerican Politics’’ which he delivered as theHerbert Spencer Lecture at Oxford Univer-sity within days of the assassination of JohnF. Kennedy. Which to this day remains a fer-tile source of conspiracy mongering. GeorgeWill cited Hofstadter’s essay this past week-end on the television program ‘‘This Weekwith David Brinkley.’’ He deals with thesame subject matter in a superb column inthis morning’s Washington Post which hasthis bracing conclusion.

‘‘It is reassuring to remember thatparanoiacs have always been with us, buthave never defined us.’’

I hope, Mr. President, as we proceed toconsider legislation, if that is necessary, inresponse to the bombing, we would be mind-ful of a history in which we have often over-reached, to our cost, and try to avoid such anoverreaction.

We have seen superb performance of theFBI. What more any nation could ask of aninternal security group I cannot conceive.We have seen the effectiveness of our Statetroopers, of our local police forces, fire de-partments, instant nationwide cooperationwhich should reassure us rather than fright-en us.

I would note in closing, Mr. President, thatPope John Paul II will be visiting the UnitedStates this coming October. I ask unanimousconsent that Mr. Will’s column be printed inthe Record.

[From the Buffalo News, May 8, 1995]

GOVERNMENT SPOOKS, BEWARE—MOYNIHANAIMS TO REVEAL SECRETS

(By Douglas Turner)

WASHINGTON.—For generations, artists likeJules Verne, Graham Greene, StevenSpielberg, and Peter Benchley in his novel‘‘White Shark,’’ have harnessed the public’sflirtation with fear for innocent profit, fameand fun.

There is something lurking out there, ordown there created by a force beyond ourknowing.

Far down the creative scale are conspiracyfreaks Oliver Stone, Ian Fleming and thepublishers of checkout-counter tabloids.

In dank corners of our society is a separatecategory: Those who subsist utterly in para-noia: Oliver North, Gordon Liddy, DavidDuke, Tim McVeigh and those who put onwar paint and military fatigues, play withassault weapons, and preach war against apopularly-elected constitutional govern-ment.

Like Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy, they nurseon paranoia and propagate it.

Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y.,suggests this last category either exploits, oris partly driven by the web of government se-crets that has grown like spores since WorldWar II.

He speaks of official Washinton’s ‘‘enor-mous secrecy system . . . which just ex-pands, if anything, which we’re in on and ev-eryone out there is not, is out of, and easilyit’s a culture that breeds paranoia.’’

For years, Sen. Moynihan has been sound-ing a warning about what he calls our cul-ture of paranoia. In an article he penned fouryears ago, Moynihan said Stone’s film,‘‘JFK,’’ could ‘‘spoil a generation of Amer-ican politics just when sanity is returning.’’

Realizing he couldn’t do much about popu-lar culture, Moynihan set about strippingdown government’s role in creating fear bygoing after the mountain of official secretsgenerated annually.

To that end, on Jan. 22, 1993, Moynihan in-troduced a bill creating a bipartisan commis-sion on reducing and protecting governmentsecrecy. A Democratic Congress passed itand President Clinton made it law.

The commission had its first meeting inJanuary and elected Moynihan chairman.Other members include Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., who was appointed by Sen. MajorityLeader Bob Dole, R-Kansas; Ellen Hume ofAnnenberg Washington Program, who wasnamed by the president; a Harvard professor,and Clinton’s nominee to head the CIA, JohnDeutch.

It has an office in an old Navy Buildingwith view of the Potomac, and a staff direc-tor, Eric Biel, formerly a senior Senate staff-er. It has had a couple of organizationalmeetings, all public. And its first real work-ing session will be on May 17.

Moynihan in a television interview joked‘‘we’ve managed to conceal our activities sofar by holding public hearings. Nobody goesto public hearings.’’

On the 17th, the commission will hearabout official secrets from officials of theNational Security Council, who are cooperat-ing as a result of an executive order issuedby President Clinton three weeks ago.

Government files harbor nearly a billionofficial secrets.

It generates about 7 million of them ayear. But the secret, Moynihan wrote, is thatthe government ‘‘only counts (secrets) up tothe level of Top Secret.

‘‘All the real secrets are higher than thatwith code names I am not at liberty to re-veal, having taken a kind of vow of secrecywhen I became vice chairman of the SenateSelect Committee on Intelligence,’’ he said.

Three million government employees havesecurity clearances up to top secret. This isfairly common stuff as most field grade mili-tary officers, beginning with lieutenants, areentitled to top secret access.

The plethora of secrets, security levels and‘‘cleared’’ employees has made a joke of thesecurity system itself—with ‘‘secret’’ mate-rial spilled into defense and intelligencetrade publications every day.

‘‘They’’ can see it, but you can’t.Then there are the active classified files of

the FBI, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco andFirearms, the Secret Service, the Customs,Immigration and Naturalization Service, theBorder Patrol, the Department of Energy,and even the Department of Agriculture.

Official secrecy, endemic to big govern-ment, dies hard. As in corporate life, and inthe highest aeries of journalism, secrets arenot just the key to power. They are power.

Official infatuation with secrecy is re-flected in the forbearance in President Clin-ton’s executive order. Existing secrets mustbe declassified after 25 years, he said. Futureones after 10 years.

This would matter in an age when breech-load rifles were on the cutting edge of mili-tary science. The standard is ridiculous inthe light of today’s expanding technology.

Thanks to the reports the CIA issued—based on ‘‘evidence’’ you and I could never

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATES 6270 May 8, 1995see or evaluate—on Soviet weaponry and theeconomy, this country went on a militaryspending binge beginning with the Vietnamwar and ending only three years ago.

But these CIA fabrications served to jus-tify quantum leaps in spending on the Amer-ican defense establishment, and of coursecovert CIA. We will be paying for that build-up for the rest of our lives.

[From the Washington Post, Apr. 30, 1995]

DEPARTMENT OF SECRECY

THE INVISIBLE BUREAUCRACY THAT UNITESALIENATED AMERICA IN SUSPICION

(By Jefferson Morley)

Scapegoating is a time-honored springsport in Washington. Professionals of thepastime are already in fine mid-summerform on Topic A: Who is responsible for theOklahoma City bombing? Skillful soundbitesindict various culprits: Right-wing talkradio, the NRA, lone nuts and (the ever-reli-able) ’60s counterculture.

But while the theories fly, the All-Stars ofthe Washington blame game somehow over-look one of the leading suspects in the mindsof the American people: the Department ofSecrecy.

There is no official department of secrecy,complete with Cabinet officer and officialseal. But there is the functional equivalent:the federal bureaucracy that keeps the gov-ernment’s secrets. It consists of the officesand archives in the Pentagon, the intel-ligence agencies, the FBI, the Bureau of Al-cohol Tobacco and Firearms and other fed-eral agencies that classify and guard allsorts of information considered too sensitiveto be shared with the American public. Theconnection between this empire of informa-tion and the Oklahoma City bombing is notobvious but it is real.

First, the Department of Secrecy is a sig-nificant presence in American society andpolitics. Viewed on an organizational chart,the federal secrecy system is bigger thanmany Cabinet agencies. According to aWashington Post report last year, the se-crecy system keeps an estimated 32,400 peo-ple employed full-time—more than the Envi-ronmental Protection Agency and the De-partment of Education combined. Accordingto the Office of Management and Budget, thebureaucracy of secrets may cost as much as$16 billion a year to run.

Second, mistrust of the government and itsmany secrets is now raging out of control.The assumption that the government is notaccountable for its actions is now the norm.

It is an article of faith among many on thereligious and paramilitary right (including,apparently, one of the bombing suspects incustody) that the federal government hasnot been held accountable for the 1993 raid inWaco which left 85 people dead.

Liberals and the left were angered but notsurprised by the recent revelations about theCIA in Guatemala. In the name of protectingits ‘‘sources and methods,’’ the agencyshielded from justice the Guatemalan colo-nel who is the leading suspect in the murderof an American innkeeper and the husband ofan American lawyer.

Robert McNamara’s memoirs are an infuri-ating reminder to moderates that the veil ofsecrecy allowed utterly respectable main-stream Washington officials to send thou-sands of American boys to slaughter in a dis-astrous and still-divisive war.

In the movie theaters of America, the mosttreacherous, evil Hollywood villains oftenwork inside the Department of Secrecy. Pop-ular movies like ‘‘Outbreak’’ and ‘‘Clear andPresent Danger’’ routinely depict senior offi-cials in Washington as smooth-talkingcriminals who think nothing of betraying

the public trust and sending innocent Ameri-cans to their death.

‘‘The pathology of public attitudes towardgovernment are due in large part to exces-sive and unnecessary secrecy,’’ says StevenAftergood of the American Federation ofScientists, a leading advocate of governmentopenness in Washington.

The State Department, for example, re-tains the right to withhold information thatwould ‘‘seriously and demonstrably under-mine ongoing diplomatic activities of theUnited States.’’ Under this standard the CIA-in-Guatemala story would almost certainlystill be secret and two American womenwould still be wondering who murdered theirhusbands.

For now, the effect of Clinton’s order is ex-pected to be modest.

‘‘I don’t think it’s going to make much dif-ference,’’ said retired Lt. Gen. WilliamOdom, the former director of the NationalSecurity Agency and a skeptic of opennessefforts. Odom recalled that a similar direc-tive from President Carter in 1978 had littleeffect on how he, Odom, actually classifiedinformation for the government at the time.

Aftergood praised Clinton’s directive as adistinct improvement over the old secrecyrules but added ‘‘I just hope we are at the be-ginning of a reform process, not the end.’’

That will depend, in part, on what the pub-lic, the president and Congress learn fromOklahoma City.

Is the bombing the work of isolated mad-men with no connection to the larger politi-cal culture? Or is it a warning of the patho-logical possibilities opened up when the fed-eral government loses the faith of its people?

These questions are especially pertinentfor people working within the secrecy sys-tem. Most of them do not hide wrongdoingfrom the American people. The informationthey guard is often legitimately secret: mili-tary codes, the names of law enforcement in-formants, the U.S. position in internationaltrade talks and the like.

But they shrug off the widespread mistrustof their work at their own peril. With thegovernment generating so many secrets eachyear—an estimated 6.3 million in 1993—andcontinuing revelations about governmentalabuses of power, the line between the para-noia of a few and legitimate fears of themany gets harder to draw.

A few years ago, the notion that the U.S.government had, over the course of severaldecades, routinely conducted dangerous radi-ation experiments on thousands of unwittingAmericans would have been regarded bymost reasonable people as unfounded, if notridiculous. Today, thanks to the aggressiverelease of long-secret documents by Sec-retary of Energy Hazel O’Leary, the radi-ation experiments are cold, disturbing his-torical fact.

O’Leary’s leadership shows that full disclo-sure of embarrassing material is not politi-cal or institutional suicide. In fact, the De-partment of Energy, by all accounts, enjoysmore credibility on Capitol Hill and with thepublic for coming clean.

We don’t know what other abuses of gov-ernmental power, if any, the secrecy systemis hiding. But we do know that a citizenrywithout access to its own history has noguarantee of democratic accountability. Andas long as democratic accountability is indoubt, the citizenry, not just government of-fice buildings, will remain vulnerable.

EXHIBIT 2

HARVARD UNIVERSITY, JOHN F. KEN-NEDY SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT,

Cambridge, MA, March 18, 1991.Senator DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN,U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR PAT: This is just a personal note ofthanks for your eloquent and stimulatingcontribution to the lunch discussion withthe new National Research Council Board onScience, Technology, and Economic Policylast Friday. Needless to say, I think you areabsolutely right about the significance of thelong-standing intelligence failure in assess-ing the Soviet economy and the Soviet mili-tary effort. While I do not concur with yourGalbraithian view of economics as a failedprofession, this has to be one of the greatfailures of economics—right up there withthe inability of economists (along with ev-eryone else) to find a remedy for the GreatDepression of the 1930’s.

On your specific arguments: In 1985 PaulSamuelson was relying on the CIA estimates,so that this is not an independent piece ofevidence. For every quotation you can givefrom people like Lawrence Klein, you canfind a counter-argument in the writings ofFriedman, Hayek, Stigler and many others.All three have been amply rewarded for theirefforts with the Nobel Prize, the NationalMedal of Science, and the esteem of theircolleagues (with the conspicuous exceptionof your former neighbor on Francis Avenue).They deserve a lot of credit for the positionsthey took in the 1930’s all the way up to the1980’s and they are getting it.

It seems to me that it is better to addressthe issue of international economic assess-ments within your framework of post-ColdWar recoversion that Galbaith’s entertainingbut wrong-headed view of economics as afailed profession. Given the importance ofeconomic assessments of the Soviet Union, itis almost incredible that the U.S. govern-ment established an in-house monopoly onthese assessments. The principal academiccenters for research in this area at Columbiaand Harvard were allowed to wither away.Over the past decade, Frank Holzman ofTufts and the Russian Research Center atHarvard has been a lonely voice in opposi-tion to the CIA view.

I believe that the importance of economicintelligence is increasing greatly with themuch-discussed globalization of the U.S.economy. However, the cloak-and-daggermodel is even more inappropriate to our neweconomic situation than it was to the suc-cessful prosecution of the Cold War that hasjust concluded. The lessons for the futureseem to me to be rather transparent. TheU.S. government needs to invest a lot morein international economic assessments. Sec-ond, it should reject the CIA monopolymodel and try to create the kind of intellec-tual competition that now prevails betweenCBO and OMB on domestic policy, aided byBrookings, AEI, the Urban Institute, theKennedy School, and many others.

An important subsidiary lesson we canlearn from the failure of the CIA Soviet as-sessments is the importance of ‘‘sunshine’’.Although economic intelligence is alwaysgoing to be sensitive to somebody, it shouldbe carried out in full sight of the public, in-cluding the professional peers of the intel-ligence analysts. I hope that the new Na-tional Research Council Board can contrib-ute to the post-Cold War re-conversion of oureconomic intelligence establishment in apositive way. As I see it, this is a dauntingtask. To use a medical analogy, this will re-quire something more like a ‘‘life style’’change than a simple remedy for a chronicdisease.

I hope that you can find the time topresent your perspective on this issue to the

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S 6271May 8, 1995policy community, say in the form of an ar-ticle for Public Interest. This would be an in-teresting opportunity to bring your ideasabout post-Cold War conversion to a specificproblem of great importance to the nationalinterest.

With best regards,Yours sincerely,

DALE W. JORGENSON.

Mrs. HUTCHISON addressed theChair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-ator from Texas is recognized.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, Iam always happy to yield to the seniorSenator from New York, because I al-ways enjoy hearing what he has to say.

Mr. President, the importance of in-telligence gathering for our Nation isat a critical juncture. Never has it beenas important as it is today that wehave foreign intelligence gathering ca-pabilities, particularly because we arenow facing a time when weapons ofmass destruction, nuclear, chemicaland biological, are being made in dif-ferent parts of the world. Even worse,the weapons that transport those weap-ons are also being developed in dif-ferent parts of the world. There is anurgent need for us to know where thoseweapons are and where the capabilitiesare to transport those weapons, eitherwithin their own theater or over to ourcountry.

So, there is no question in my mindthat we must have a strong foreign in-telligence gathering capability. Wealso have a problem. That is we need aleader and we need a focus and we needa mission for the people who are in ourintelligence gathering operations rightnow. We have had several mishaps. TheAldrich Ames case is one that has beentalked about on this floor and it is onethat is very troubling to us, eventoday. Many people feel this traitorwas not dealt with in a way that willshow there is an accountability when adrastic mistake happens.

The lack of management account-ability did demonstrate, by recentevents in Guatemala, the lack of infor-mation that the oversight committeeshad about the situation in Guatemala.The escalation of terrorism all over theworld is causing an ongoing need for usto have intelligence-gathering capabili-ties.

So, we do need a person who can takecontrol of our central intelligence-gathering operation, lift the morale ofthe wonderful people who work there,and put an accountability into the sys-tem. We also need someone who canmake it more efficient. As we aredownsizing our budget we need to makesure that we have a mission, that weare using our assets in the most effi-cient way.

So we need someone to come in andshow that leadership. I believe JohnDeutch is that person. I think thePresident has made a good decision.

There are some issues that must bedealt with. First, I must say I disagreewith the President giving Cabinet rankto the Director of Central Intelligence.The National Security Act of 1947 sets

forth the members of the National Se-curity Council and then designates oth-ers, including the Director of CentralIntelligence and the Chairman of theJoint Chiefs of Staff, as officials whoare not members but may attend andparticipate as the President directs. Ibelieve that is also the appropriate rolefor the DCI with respect to the Cabi-net.

Mr. Deutch was asked these ques-tions in our Intelligence Committeehearing on his nomination regardingthe Cabinet status of the Director ofCentral Intelligence. He assured thecommittee that he would hold to theproper standard of conduct and that hewould not allow policy to influence in-telligence judgments and not allow in-telligence to interfere in the policyprocess.

That is a very important distinctionthat the new Director has adopted andwhich I think is very important for usto keep—the separation between intel-ligence gathering and policymaking.The committee is going to be sensitiveto any indication that this standard isnot being met, but I believe the make-up of the Cabinet is the responsibilityof the President. That is not within ourmission in confirmation. And, there-fore, I hope the standards that we havediscussed will be adhered to, both bythe President and by the new Directorof Central Intelligence.

I brought up two major issues incommittee that I thought were impor-tant. First, a closer working relation-ship with the oversight committees inCongress, the Intelligence Committeein the Senate, and the one in theHouse. I think it is most importantwhen you have a covert operationwhich, of course, intelligence gatheringis, to have an even more strong rela-tionship and communications networkwith the oversight committees thatcan assess the judgments that arebeing made in these covert operations.

It is good for Congress and it is goodfor the intelligence gathering, as well.It is very important that we have anoversight and we have the ability tomake judgments by the duly elected of-ficials in the U.S. Congress when weare dealing with such sensitive intel-ligence matters.

So I talked to the new Director-des-ignate about that. And he agreed to-tally that we needed to have that lineof communication, and I think it hasbeen reiterated by every person whohas spoken on the floor today, andmost certainly every member of thecommittee.

The second issue that was very im-portant to me was complete financialdisclosure of every person who worksat the CIA and every contractor who isworking on CIA projects. I felt this wasimportant because one of the obviousthings that was missed in the AldrichAmes case was a high-living lifestyleby Aldrich Ames and his family, clear-ly one that could not be shown to havebeen supported by a person on the sal-ary of Aldrich Ames.

If we had the vehicle in place to havetotal financial disclosure, the CIAcould immediately have begun tocheck on this lifestyle to see if therewas something that was not right.Clearly, it was not right the way Al-drich Ames was living. And we foundout later it was because he was receiv-ing millions of dollars from the Rus-sian Government for secrets that hewas giving to them from our CIA. Sowe need the basic information.

Mr. Deutch said, and promised, thathe would make sure that every personwho works for the CIA, who willinglycomes to work for the CIA, will givebasic financial disclosures. I think thatis going to be a very important tool forus to show that there is an account-ability in the CIA and that an AldridgeAmes case will not as easily be re-peated and, if it is repeated, that wewill have the ability to go in imme-diately and see what the assets arethat have been disclosed and if some-thing seems to be amiss.

So these are two areas that I am sat-isfied that Mr. Deutch is going to ad-dress, and he has already given me hisword that there is going to be financialdisclosure among the CIA employeesand people who are working for the CIAunder contract.

So in conclusion, Mr. President, Isupport Secretary Deutch for the roleof Director of Central Intelligence.This is one of the most importantnominations that we will have beforeus this year, because this agency needssuch direction. I believe Mr. Deutchcan provide that direction. I haveworked with him as a member of theArmed Services Committee in his ca-pacity as Deputy Secretary of Defense.I find him to be a person of integrity.I respect his judgment, and I think hedid a fine job as Deputy Secretary ofDefense. I think he is the person to ful-fill this mission at this very importanttime in our intelligence gathering reor-ganization.

I think we must take our responsibil-ity in confirming him, to do this in aswift and timely manner. We have hadfive DCI’s in the last 10 years. Thisagency needs leadership. We need somereorganization. We need a mission, andwe need to make sure that we are usingour assets efficiently and well so thateveryone in our country is secure sothat we have the information that weneed to keep that freedom, independ-ence, and liberty that we have.

So I am supporting Mr. Deutch forthis very purpose. I wish him well. It isgoing to be a very tough job. I hopethat he will work with Members ofCongress who want him to succeed, andwe do. For all of our country, we mustsucceed with this new Director.

Thank you, Mr. President. I yield thefloor.

Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I ampleased to join my colleagues today tourge confirmation of John Deutch asDirector of Central Intelligence. As apermanent resident of Belmont, MA,and having a lifelong involvement in

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATES 6272 May 8, 1995the Massachusetts community, JohnDeutch is a neighbor and a man whohas built a national and internationalreputation as a leader and as a forcefuland effective professional. I describedhim publicly, not long ago, as ‘‘superband first rate’’, and I reiterate that de-scription today, without hesitation andwith renewed respect and continuedconfidence in his extraordinary ability.

Let me add a few words about thetask he will face and the talent he willbring to the position of Director ofCentral Intelligence. The world is un-doubtedly changing. It will continue tochange more quickly, perhaps, than atany other time in our history. We areseeing old threats and new threatsemerge in a shifting political and eco-nomic atmosphere that will test our re-solve and challenge our leadership.

Mr. President, John Deutch is un-doubtedly up to the challenge, and heis a leader for his time. There is noquestion about that. He understandsthe critical task that he will face, andthe importance of facing it with re-solve, strength, and a firm hand. Hehas proven that he knows the need andhas the expertise to address what weall acknowledge are operational andadministrative problems at the CIA. AsDirector of Central Intelligence he willface two daunting managerial tasks:First, he must try to restructure theU.S. intelligence community at a timewhen many believe there is no longer aneed—nor the funds—for the level of in-telligence activity to which we becameaccustomed during the cold war. Hewill have to balance proper and appro-priate intelligence activity with in-creasing congressional and public scru-tiny of scarcer and scarcer tax dollars.

Second, in the wake of recent eventsat the CIA, he will have to look criti-cally at internal operations and movequickly to rebuild morale, public trust,and confidence while maintaining theintegrity of America’s intelligence ca-pability. As far as restructuring the in-telligence community, I believe JohnDeutch has one very important advan-tage over many who could have beenchosen to serve. He is not an architectof either the current intelligence sys-tem or the processes that have beenput into place. He is a fresh face, a newvoice, a real leader with the talent andthe foresight to succeed.

Now, as far as what Secretary Deutchwill face at the CIA, operationally andadministratively, there is a need to actexpeditiously to turn things aroundeven if it means significant personnelchanges, and I am confident that JohnDeutch has the necessary judgmentand will to quickly act in the best in-terest of the Agency and the Nation.

Mr. President, the American intel-ligence community will be well servedby the experience and leadership ofJohn Deutch who rightfully observedin his statement to the IntelligenceCommittee that ‘‘changing intelligencepriorities, as well as intelligence fail-ures, dictate that we carefully re-ex-amine the need for, and specific mis-

sions of, intelligence.’’ He added thathe sees ‘‘four significant dangers to ournational security and the social andeconomic well-being of our citizens.’’He cites major regional conflicts; thespread of weapons of mass destruction;international terrorism, crime, anddrug trafficking; and the present nu-clear danger that still exists in Russiaand the Russian republics as they movetoward democracy.

I also see the new Director of CentralIntelligence moving, as he said hewould, to improve the support that theintelligence community gives to lawenforcement agencies in areas of nar-cotics trafficking, international crime,and terrorism. I agree with his assess-ments and I am confident he will moveexpeditiously to address the continuingthreat of the proliferation of weaponsof mass destruction, and particularlythe emerging threat of terrorist at-tacks with these weapons. I see thenew Director re-defining and establish-ing new standards for the proper rolefor the intelligence community in theareas of economic intelligence, and ad-dressing the issue of making informa-tion, when appropriate, more readilyavailable by lowering classifications orthrough declassification. And I see thenew Director, like every other directorof a Federal agency, looking for waysto economize and streamline the oper-ations at CIA to give us more for ourtax dollars.

From all we’ve heard about JohnDeutch, I believe he has the experience,the expertise, the professionalism, thereputation, the perseverance, the quali-fications and the integrity to do thejob, and I urge my colleagues to con-firm his nomination.

Thank you, Mr. President, and I yieldthe floor.

THE NOMINATION OF JOHN DEUTCH TO BEDIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE

Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I wouldlike to add my voice in support of thenomination of Dr. John Deutch to beDirector of Central Intelligence. Thisnomination is extremely important,Mr. President, because the Central In-telligence Agency is at a crossroadsand I believe John Deutch has what itsgoing to take to redirect the Agency’scourse during its next few crucialyears.

There is no question that strongleadership is critical for the CIA to beable to transform the Agency’s missioninto one that provides policymakerswith timely, useful, and target-specificintelligence. CNN can cover the world;the CIA needs to bring greater atten-tion and resources to bear on countriesand issues that represent a threat toour national security interests.

Dr. Deutch was brutally frank in hisassessment of CIA successes and fail-ures, and refreshingly candid aboutwhat he would like to accomplish asDCI. His candor was unusual, sincenominees normally go out of their wayto avoid categorical statements aboutagendas and work plans. Dr. Deutch, incontrast, went out of his way to ex-

plain exactly where he is headed andwhat he would like to do.

During his confirmation hearing, Iheard Dr. Deutch speak of bringing in anew generation of leaders at the CIA,streamlining imagery operations, andgetting to the root of problems insidethe Operations Directorate.

Mr. President, John Deutch bringswith him a demonstrated track recordof achievement in both governmentand academia. He is widely respectedwithin the defense community for hisperformance as Secretary Perry’s dep-uty at the Pentagon and within the sci-entific community for his tenure at theMassachusetts Institute of Technology.I believe he is more than equal to thetask of restoring luster to the CIA.

As a member of the Armed ServicesCommittee, I have worked with JohnDeutch, and I have seen firsthand thequality of his work and his conscien-tious commitment to our national de-fense and to the men and women whoserve our country.

Finally, Mr. President, as a Senatorfrom Virginia, I’m pleased that Dr.Deutch understands the distress of tal-ented Agency personnel and alumniwho have watched the CIA and otherintelligence branches endure a roughpatch. He is, in my judgment, the rightman at the right time to restore dig-nity and respect to deserving and hard-working public servants working in theIntelligence Community.

Mr. President, I have high hopes forDr. Deutch’s tenure at the CIA, and Iurge my colleagues to support his nom-ination.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

NOMINATION OF JOHN M. DEUTCH TO BE THEDIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE

Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I ampleased to support the nomination ofJohn M. Deutch to be the Director ofCentral Intelligence. The nominationof Dr. Deutch, who presently serves asthe Deputy Secretary of Defense, hasreceived the unanimous, bipartisansupport of the Senate Select Commit-tee on Intelligence. This strong supportreflects Dr. Deutch’s outstandingqualifications, including his first-rateperformance as Deputy Secretary ofDefense and Under Secretary of De-fense for Acquisition.

I have had the opportunity to workclosely with Secretary Deutch, both inmy prior capacity as chairman of theArmed Services Committee and in mycurrent role as ranking minority mem-ber. He has made an outstanding con-tribution at the Department of De-fense, and is well-qualified to serve asthe Director of Central Intelligence.

Secretary Deutch came to the De-partment of Defense following a longand distinguished academic and gov-ernment career. His positions in aca-demia included service as provost andinstitute professor at the Massachu-setts Institute of Technology. His priorGovernment experience included serv-ice on the staff of the Office of the Sec-retary of Defense during the early

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S 6273May 8, 19951960’s, and as Under Secretary of En-ergy during the late 1970’s. In addition,he served on the Defense Science Boardand on many other advisory boardsover the years.

In 1993, he was nominated by Presi-dent Clinton and confirmed by the Sen-ate to serve as the Under Secretary ofDefense for Acquisition. When BillPerry became the Secretary of Defensein 1994, Dr. Deutch was nominated andconfirmed to his current position asDeputy Secretary of Defense.

I have known Secretary Deutch per-sonally for many years, including theperiods of his service in the Depart-ment of Energy and during his tenureat MIT. His entire career—both in aca-demia and in Government service—hasbeen devoted to developing creativeand thoughtful approaches to nationaldefense and intelligence policy issues.

Secretary Deutch has compiled assolid record in the Department of De-fense as a strong manager. He hasserved the Nation well, not only in themanagement of internal Department ofDefense functions, but also as the DODofficial with primary responsibility forinterface with the intelligence commu-nity. He knows how to solve problems,make clear decisions, and addresspressing issues. On the Armed ServicesCommittee, we have appreciated hisbreadth of knowledge, his candor, andhis willingness to engage in dialog. Healso has a good sense of humor, whichhe uses to put difficult issues in per-spective—a quality that will be mostuseful in his new position.

The intelligence community facesmany difficult challenges in the post-cold war era, particularly in the after-math of the Ames espionage matter.The Oklahoma City tragedy under-scores the dangers of terrorism in themodern world. The tensions in the Per-sian Gulf and North Asia, as well as theproblems faced by the States of theformer Soviet Union, are but a few ofthe difficult challenges facing the in-telligence community. John Deutchhas the experience and background totake on these challenges. I stronglyurge the Senate to confirm his nomina-tion to be Director of Central Intel-ligence.

Mr. KERREY addressed the Chair.The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.

DEWINE). The Senator from Nebraska.Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, there

are, to my knowledge, no other Sen-ators who wish to speak on this nomi-nation. I will offer a couple of closingcomments and then yield time, alert-ing colleagues who are watching of thepossibility that we may be yieldingback, and they have not told us theywanted to speak. They could rush overhere and say a few words.

In my statement, I indicated, and itis correct, that one of the problems wehave with our intelligence effort isthat as a consequence of needing toprotect security, we are unable—the in-telligence people are unable—to bragabout successes, and thus not only is itdifficult for us to give credit, but in-

creasingly citizens are needing andasking for information that will enablethem to judge whether or not their taxdollars are being well spent. I wouldargue that this condition of being un-able to disclose sometimes puts us in aposition of not being able to give citi-zens information or having them say,‘‘Now I understand why we are doingthis, and I believe we are in fact get-ting our money’s worth.’’

I would like as a consequence to iden-tify for citizens two recent events thatwere publicly disclosed. And for the in-formation of citizens, it is the Presi-dent of the United States who has thecontrolling authority both to make aclassification decision and to make adeclassification decision. That decisionis spelled out in statute. It is not a de-cision that can be made by either theCongress, in the absence of changingthe law, or an individual Member ofCongress. But two recent disclosures,probably, I suspect, disclosed by a deci-sion made by the President to makethe disclosure, underscore the impor-tance of this intelligence effort.

The first was that the United Statesof America presented to the U.N. Secu-rity Council clear and present evidencethat North Koreans were engaged in apolicy, a strategy, an active effort toacquire nuclear capacity. We could saythat they were, and people did or didnot believe it. They mostly said, ‘‘Well,maybe that is just the United Statesjust sort of hung up again.’’ Because wehad the intelligence capacity, we pre-sented information—in this case, im-ages—to the Security Council, and theSecurity Council sees clearly NorthKorea is building nuclear capabilityand the Security Council takes actionssupportive of the United States’ effortto make certain that North Korea doesnot become a nuclear nation.

Again, with the use of images dis-closed to the public, our Ambassador tothe United Nations, MadeleineAlbright, at the direction of the Presi-dent of the United States, at the timewhen the French and the Russians wereweakening in their resolve in regard tosanctions on Iraq, buying into theIraqis’ assertions that, ‘‘We are impov-erished now; we don’t have very muchmoney; and, no, we are not buildingany chemical or biological chemicalcapability, and we are not really amilitaristic nation. You need notworry about us any longer.’’

Our Ambassador presents, in a week-long trip to I think 10 or 12 nations,again, images that are our intelligenceimages to these world leaders on theSecurity Council, information clearlyindicating that the Iraqi leader hadbuilt a $1.2 billion palace, hardly thesort of action taken by a nation thatwas impoverished; second, that chemi-cal and biological capability continuedto be a problem; and that the acquisi-tion of Kuwaiti military equipmentduring their occupation of Kuwait wasbeing integrated into the Iraqi forces,giving lie to all three of the statementsmade by the Iraqi leader and giving the

United States the capacity, the Presi-dent the capacity, through his UnitedNations, our U.N. Ambassador, theability to make the argument to keepthe sanctions still tightening aroundthe nation of Iraq.

In both cases, the United States ofAmerica received benefit. Who knowswhat the cost to the world would havebeen had North Korea been permittedto continue building its nuclear capa-bility or had the sanctions beendropped from Iraq, a nation that con-tinues to exhibit dangerous tendencies,indeed dangerous actions.

I cite those two amongst the latestthat have been disclosed publicly be-cause citizens deserve to get enough in-formation upon which they can make adecision about whether or not we areeither sort of captive to the intel-ligence community, as is very oftensuspected by many who are not on thisIntelligence Committee, and perhapsother citizens as well, that we in factare looking at these successes, insist-ing upon accountability, trying to as-sess the threats in the world and orga-nize our intelligence efforts to meetthose threats, to maintain the capabil-ity to keep the United States of Amer-ica as safe as is humanly possible.

Let me, in addition, Mr. President,point out that there are two things Mr.Deutch is going to be addressing whichin some ways are a consequence of bothour successes and at times our failuresof the past.

The first is, many of the threats thatwe are now dealing with are threatsthat are a consequence, sort of a resid-ual, of the cold war. The proliferationthreat on the nuclear, biological, andchemical is a threat that came as aconsequence of our building capacityand the Soviets’ building capacity.This proliferation threat is a very realthreat, and we are having to now takethe sort of residual problem of the coldwar and move it to the top of the listknowing that the bombing in Okla-homa City would be magnified severalthousand times over were either chemi-cal, biological, or nuclear weapons tobe used in a terrorist effort.

This is a very real and present prob-lem. It requires the United States ofAmerica to lead. No other nation isgoing to do it. We saw recently, whenthe President put sanctions on Iran,our friends in Europe said, ‘‘Well, wethink that’s a bad idea. We want tocontinue to engage with a countrythat’s involved with terrorism.’’

I do not know what they are going todo; I suspect wait until something ter-rible were to happen. Only the UnitedStates of America can lead on thatissue, lead trying to get Russia not tosell nuclear technology to Iran. Onlythe United States of America, I believe,is willing to make the kind of diplo-matic and financial effort necessary tomake this world safe in the area of nu-clear, chemical, and biological weaponsand the terrorism that comes fromthat.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATES 6274 May 8, 1995There is a second problem, Mr. Presi-

dent, that our new, hopefully new Di-rector of Central Intelligence is goingto have to be dealing with. The distin-guished Senator from New York in hiscomments referenced that, and that isnot just a cynicism toward Govern-ment but a precise suspicion that theCIA is involved in all sorts of thingsthat are bad. That the CIA is possiblyresponsible for the assassination ofJohn Kennedy is something that is ac-tually honestly believed by someAmericans who see a conspiracy inwhich the Central Intelligence Agencyperhaps played some central role.

We are going to have to face an awfullot of that, Mr. President, and we aregoing to have to face it very squarelyand very honestly. As I said earlier, Iam very excited watching the accountsof the celebration of the victory in Eu-rope 50 years ago, watching old men re-call the stories of bravery and heroismand sacrifice. I say, with no interest indisparaging that success—I thrilled inthat success and am unable to measuretruly the sacrifice and heroic behaviorthat was necessary, but it stands instark contrast to an event that oc-curred, oh, I guess about a month or soago when former Secretary of DefenseMcNamara published a mea culpa booksaying that in 1966 the Secretary of De-fense of the United States of America,with all the intelligence effort at itsdisposal, had actually concluded thatthe war in Vietnam was unwinable.

Well, I was there in 1969. I do not re-member McNamara saying anythingabout it then. And that kind of a state-ment is the example of the sort ofthing, unfortunately, that feeds thiscynicism and this conspiracy theoryand causes people to say that the Gov-ernment really is against rather thantrying to be on their side in makingtheir lives not only safe but their livessecure as well. It means that we aregoing to have to press the envelope abit on secrecy. By that I mean we aregoing to have to take great care that asecret is, indeed, necessary to protectthe American people rather than pro-tecting those who are operating, eitherthe Director of Operations or othersorts of entities. It cannot be that wekeep a secret from the American peo-ple because we are afraid of what theywill do to us if we tell them the truth.It must be that a secret is being main-tained because we are concerned aboutour inability to carry out an importantsecurity mission if full disclosure wereto occur.

As I indicated, there is a tremendouscapacity in the intelligence commu-nity to help citizens in a very difficulttime acquire the information needed tobecome informed. When you are born inthe United States of America, you aregiven enormous freedoms at birth andshould have been told at some pointduring your public education or up-bringing by your parents or upbringingby others, you should have been toldthat freedom is not free; that a con-tribution has to be made back of some

kind. And our citizens are increasinglyaware of the contribution of time andeffort that they have to make to be-come informed about what is going onin Chechnya, what is going on in theformer Yugoslavia, what is going on inMexico, what is going on in placeswhere they have a difficult time pro-nouncing the name let alone makingdecisions about what our foreign policyought to be. I believe the technologiesthat we have at our disposal, if wepress the envelope judiciously and notin a reckless fashion, can, indeed, helpour citizens make decisions and makeit more likely that government of, by,and for the people works both in for-eign as well as domestic policy.

Mr. President, no one has traipsedover to the floor to provide additionaltestimony, and I am prepared to yieldback what time is remaining and yieldthe floor.

Mrs. HUTCHISON addressed theChair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-ator from Texas.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. We will also yieldback our time, and I will go forwardand close.

f

REMOVAL OF INJUNCTION OFSECRECY

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I ask unanimousconsent that the Injunction of Secrecybe removed from the extradition treatywith Hungary (Treaty Document No.104–5), transmitted to the Senate bythe President today; and the treatyconsidered as having been read the firsttime; referred, with accompanying pa-pers, to the Committee on Foreign Re-lations and ordered to be printed; andordered that the President’s messagebe printed in the RECORD.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutobjection, it is so ordered.

The message of the President is asfollows:

To the Senate of the United States:With a view to receiving the advice

and consent of the Senate to ratifica-tion, I transmit herewith the TreatyBetween the Government of the UnitedStates of America and the Governmentof the Republic of Hungary on Extra-dition, signed at Budapest on December1, 1994. Also transmitted for the infor-mation of the Senate is the report ofthe Department of State with respectto this Treaty.

The Treaty is designed to update andstandardize the conditions and proce-dures for extradition between the Unit-ed States and Hungary. Most signifi-cantly, it substitutes a dual-criminal-ity clause for the current list of extra-ditable offenses, thereby expanding thenumber of crimes for which extraditioncan be granted. The Treaty also pro-vides a legal basis for temporarily sur-rendering prisoners to stand trial forcrimes against the laws of the Request-ing State.

The Treaty further represents an im-portant step in combating terrorism by

excluding from the scope of the politi-cal offense exception serious offensestypically committed by terrorists, e.g.,crimes against a Head of State or firstfamily member of either Party, air-craft hijacking, aircraft sabotage,crimes against internationally pro-tected persons, including diplomats,hostage-taking, narcotics-trafficking,and other offenses for which the UnitedStates and Hungary have an obligationto extradite or submit to prosecutionby reason of a multilateral treaty, con-vention, or other international agree-ment. The United States and Hungaryalso agree to exclude from the politicaloffense exception major commoncrimes, such as murder, kidnapping,and placing or using explosive devices.

The provisions in this Treaty followgenerally the form and content or ex-tradition treaties recently concludedby the United States. Upon entry intoforce, it will supersede the Conventionfor the Mutual Delivery of Criminals,Fugitives from Justice, in CertainCases Between the Government of theUnited States of America and theAustro-Hungarian Empire, signed atWashington, July 3, 1856, with certainexceptions.

This Treaty will make a significantcontribution to international coopera-tion in law enforcement. I recommendthat the Senate give early and favor-able consideration to the Treaty andgive its advice and consent to ratifica-tion.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON.THE WHITE HOUSE, May 8, 1995.

f

EXECUTIVE SESSION

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

Mrs. HUTCHISON. As in executivesession, I ask unanimous consent thatthe Senate immediately proceed to theconsideration of the following nomina-tions on the Executive Calendar enbloc: calendar Nos. 107, 108, 109, 110, 111,and 112; further, that the nominationsbe confirmed en bloc, the motions toreconsider be laid upon the table enbloc; that any statements relating tothe nominations appear at the appro-priate place in the RECORD, the Presi-dent be immediately notified of theSenate’s action, and that the Senatethen return to legislative session.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutobjection, it is so ordered.

The nominations considered and con-firmed en bloc are as follows:

THE JUDICIARY

Maxine M. Chesney, of California, to beUnited States District Judge for the North-ern District of California.

Eldon E. Fallon, of Louisiana, to be UnitedStates District Judge for the Eastern Dis-trict of Louisiana.

Curtis L. Collier, of Tennessee, to be Unit-ed States District Judge for the Eastern Dis-trict of Tennessee.

Joseph Robert Goodwin, of West Virginia,to be United States District Judge for theSouthern District of West Virginia.