{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "rows": [["CREC-2012-12-31-pt1-PgH7479", "2012-12-31", 112, 2, null, null, "INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ALLOTHER", "H7479", "H7485", "[{\"name\": \"Mike Rogers\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"C. A. Dutch Ruppersberger\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Dennis J. Kucinich\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Earl Blumenauer\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"112\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3454\"}, {\"congress\": \"112\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3454\"}, {\"congress\": \"112\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3454\"}, {\"congress\": \"112\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3454\"}]", "158 Cong. Rec. H7479", "Congressional Record, Volume 158 Issue 171 (Monday, December 31, 2012)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 171 (Monday, December 31, 2012)]\n[House]\n[Pages H7479-H7485]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n          INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013\n\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules\nand pass the bill (S. 3454) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year\n2013 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United\nStates Government and the Office of the Director of National\nIntelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability\nSystem, and for other purposes.\n  The Clerk read the title of the bill.\n  The text of the bill is as follows:\n\n                                S. 3454\n\n       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of\n     the United States of America in Congress assembled,\n\n     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.\n\n       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the\n     ``Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013''.\n       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act\n     is as follows:\n\nSec. 1. Short title; table of contents.\nSec. 2. Definitions.\n\n              TITLE I--BUDGET AND PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS\n\nSec. 101. Authorization of appropriations.\nSec. 102. Classified Schedule of Authorizations.\nSec. 103. Personnel ceiling adjustments.\nSec. 104. Intelligence Community Management Account.\n\n TITLE II--CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM\n\nSec. 201. Authorization of appropriations.\n\n           TITLE III--GENERAL INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MATTERS\n\nSec. 301. Restriction on conduct of intelligence activities.\nSec. 302. Increase in employee compensation and benefits authorized by\n              law.\nSec. 303. Non-reimbursable details.\nSec. 304. Automated insider threat detection program.\nSec. 305. Software licensing.\nSec. 306. Strategy for security clearance reciprocity.\nSec. 307. Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010\n              compliance.\nSec. 308. Subcontractor notification process.\nSec. 309. Modification of reporting schedule.\nSec. 310. Repeal of certain reporting requirements.\n\n     TITLE IV--MATTERS RELATING TO THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\n\nSec. 401. Working capital fund amendments.\n\n                         TITLE V--OTHER MATTERS\n\nSec. 501. Homeland Security Intelligence Program.\nSec. 502. Extension of National Commission for the Review of the\n              Research and Development Programs of the United States\n              Intelligence Community.\nSec. 503. Protecting the information technology supply chain of the\n              United States.\nSec. 504. Notification regarding the authorized public disclosure of\n              national intelligence.\nSec. 505. Technical amendments related to the Office of the Director of\n              National Intelligence.\nSec. 506. Technical amendment for definition of intelligence agency.\nSec. 507. Budgetary effects.\n\n     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.\n\n       In this Act:\n       (1) Congressional intelligence committees.--The term\n     ``congressional intelligence committees'' means--\n       (A) the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and\n       (B) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the\n     House of Representatives.\n       (2) Intelligence community.--The term ``intelligence\n     community'' has the meaning given that term in section 3(4)\n     of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4)).\n\n              TITLE I--BUDGET AND PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS\n\n     SEC. 101. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.\n\n       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal\n     year 2013 for the conduct of the intelligence and\n     intelligence-related activities of the following elements of\n     the United States Government:\n       (1) The Office of the Director of National Intelligence.\n       (2) The Central Intelligence Agency.\n       (3) The Department of Defense.\n       (4) The Defense Intelligence Agency.\n       (5) The National Security Agency.\n       (6) The Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy,\n     and the Department of the Air Force.\n       (7) The Coast Guard.\n       (8) The Department of State.\n       (9) The Department of the Treasury.\n       (10) The Department of Energy.\n       (11) The Department of Justice.\n       (12) The Federal Bureau of Investigation.\n       (13) The Drug Enforcement Administration.\n       (14) The National Reconnaissance Office.\n       (15) The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.\n       (16) The Department of Homeland Security.\n\n     SEC. 102. CLASSIFIED SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZATIONS.\n\n       (a) Specifications of Amounts and Personnel Levels.--The\n     amounts authorized to be appropriated under section 101 and,\n     subject to section 103, the authorized personnel ceilings as\n     of September 30, 2013, for the conduct of the intelligence\n     activities of the elements listed in paragraphs (1) through\n     (16) of section 101, are those specified in the classified\n     Schedule of Authorizations prepared to accompany the bill S.\n     3454 of the One Hundred Twelfth Congress.\n       (b) Availability of Classified Schedule of\n     Authorizations.--\n       (1) Availability to committees of congress.--The classified\n     Schedule of Authorizations referred to in subsection (a)\n     shall be made available to the Committee on Appropriations of\n     the Senate, the Committee on Appropriations of the House of\n     Representatives, and to the President.\n       (2) Distribution by the president.--Subject to paragraph\n     (3), the President shall provide for suitable distribution of\n     the classified Schedule of Authorizations, or of appropriate\n     portions of the Schedule, within the executive branch.\n       (3) Limits on disclosure.--The President shall not publicly\n     disclose the classified Schedule of Authorizations or any\n     portion of such Schedule except--\n       (A) as provided in section 601(a) of the Implementing\n     Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (50 U.S.C.\n     415c);\n       (B) to the extent necessary to implement the budget; or\n       (C) as otherwise required by law.\n\n     SEC. 103. PERSONNEL CEILING ADJUSTMENTS.\n\n       (a) Authority for Increases.--The Director of National\n     Intelligence may authorize the employment of civilian\n     personnel in excess of the number of positions for fiscal\n     year 2013 authorized by the classified Schedule of\n     Authorizations referred to in section 102(a) if the Director\n     of National Intelligence determines that such action is\n     necessary to the performance of important intelligence\n     functions, except that the number of personnel employed in\n     excess of the number authorized under such section may not,\n     for any element of the intelligence community, exceed 3\n     percent of the number of civilian personnel authorized under\n     such section for such element.\n       (b) Treatment of Certain Personnel.--The Director of\n     National Intelligence shall establish guidelines that govern,\n     for each element of the intelligence community, the treatment\n     under the personnel levels authorized under section 102(a),\n     including any exemption from such personnel levels, of\n     employment or assignment in--\n       (1) a student program, trainee program, or similar program;\n       (2) a reserve corps or as a reemployed annuitant; or\n       (3) details, joint duty, or long term, full-time training.\n       (c) Notice to Congressional Intelligence Committees.--The\n     Director of National Intelligence shall notify the\n     congressional intelligence committees in writing at least 15\n     days prior to the initial exercise of an authority described\n     in subsection (a).\n\n     SEC. 104. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT.\n\n       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized\n     to be appropriated for the Intelligence Community Management\n     Account of the Director of National Intelligence for fiscal\n     year 2013 the sum of $540,721,000. Within such amount, funds\n     identified in the classified Schedule of Authorizations\n     referred to in section 102(a) for advanced research and\n     development shall remain available until September 30, 2014.\n       (b) Authorized Personnel Levels.--The elements within the\n     Intelligence Community Management Account of the Director of\n     National Intelligence are authorized 835 positions as of\n     September 30, 2013. Personnel serving in such elements may be\n     permanent employees of the Office of the Director of National\n     Intelligence or personnel detailed from other elements of the\n     United States Government.\n       (c) Classified Authorizations.--\n       (1) Authorization of appropriations.--In addition to\n     amounts authorized to be appropriated for the Intelligence\n     Community Management Account by subsection (a), there are\n     authorized to be appropriated for the Community Management\n     Account for fiscal year 2013 such additional amounts as are\n     specified in the classified Schedule of Authorizations\n     referred to in section 102(a). Such additional amounts for\n     advanced research and development shall remain available\n     until September 30, 2014.\n       (2) Authorization of personnel.--In addition to the\n     personnel authorized by subsection (b) for elements of the\n     Intelligence Community Management Account as of September 30,\n     2013, there are authorized such additional personnel for the\n     Community Management Account as of that date as are specified\n     in the classified Schedule of Authorizations referred to in\n     section 102(a).\n\n TITLE II--CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM\n\n     SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.\n\n       There is authorized to be appropriated for the Central\n     Intelligence Agency Retirement\n\n[[Page H7480]]\n\n     and Disability Fund for fiscal year 2013 the sum of\n     $514,000,000.\n\n           TITLE III--GENERAL INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MATTERS\n\n     SEC. 301. RESTRICTION ON CONDUCT OF INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES.\n\n       The authorization of appropriations by this Act shall not\n     be deemed to constitute authority for the conduct of any\n     intelligence activity which is not otherwise authorized by\n     the Constitution or the laws of the United States.\n\n     SEC. 302. INCREASE IN EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS\n                   AUTHORIZED BY LAW.\n\n       Appropriations authorized by this Act for salary, pay,\n     retirement, and other benefits for Federal employees may be\n     increased by such additional or supplemental amounts as may\n     be necessary for increases in such compensation or benefits\n     authorized by law.\n\n     SEC. 303. NON-REIMBURSABLE DETAILS.\n\n       Section 113A of the National Security Act of 1947 (50\n     U.S.C. 404h-1) is amended--\n       (1) by striking ``two years.'' and inserting ``three\n     years.''; and\n       (2) by adding at the end ``A non-reimbursable detail made\n     under this section shall not be considered an augmentation of\n     the appropriations of the receiving element of the\n     intelligence community.''.\n\n     SEC. 304. AUTOMATED INSIDER THREAT DETECTION PROGRAM.\n\n       Section 402 of the Intelligence Authorization Act for\n     Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 112-18; 50 U.S.C. 403-1 note) is\n     amended--\n       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``October 1, 2012,'' and\n     inserting ``October 1, 2013,''; and\n       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``October 1, 2013,'' and\n     inserting ``October 1, 2014,''.\n\n     SEC. 305. SOFTWARE LICENSING.\n\n       (a) In General.--Not later than 120 days after the date of\n     the enactment of this Act, each chief information officer for\n     an element of the intelligence community, in consultation\n     with the Chief Information Officer of the Intelligence\n     Community, shall--\n       (1) conduct an inventory of software licenses held by such\n     element, including utilized and unutilized licenses; and\n       (2) report the results of such inventory to the Chief\n     Information Officer of the Intelligence Community.\n       (b) Reporting to Congress.--The Chief Information Officer\n     of the Intelligence Community shall--\n       (1) not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment\n     of this Act, provide to the congressional intelligence\n     committees a copy of each report received by the Chief\n     Information Officer under subsection (a)(2), along with any\n     comments the Chief Information Officer wishes to provide; and\n       (2) transmit any portion of a report submitted under\n     paragraph (1) involving a component of a department of the\n     United States Government to the committees of the Senate and\n     of the House of Representatives with jurisdiction over such\n     department simultaneously with submission of such report to\n     the congressional intelligence committees.\n\n     SEC. 306. STRATEGY FOR SECURITY CLEARANCE RECIPROCITY.\n\n       (a) Strategy.--The President shall develop a strategy and a\n     schedule for carrying out the requirements of section 3001(d)\n     of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of\n     2004 (50 U.S.C. 435b(d)). Such strategy and schedule shall\n     include--\n       (1) a process for accomplishing the reciprocity required\n     under such section for a security clearance issued by a\n     department or agency of the Federal Government, including\n     reciprocity for security clearances that are issued to both\n     persons who are and who are not employees of the Federal\n     Government; and\n       (2) a description of the specific circumstances under which\n     a department or agency of the Federal Government may not\n     recognize a security clearance issued by another department\n     or agency of the Federal Government.\n       (b) Congressional Notification.--Not later than 180 days\n     after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President\n     shall inform Congress of the strategy and schedule developed\n     under subsection (a).\n\n     SEC. 307. IMPROPER PAYMENTS ELIMINATION AND RECOVERY ACT OF\n                   2010 COMPLIANCE.\n\n       (a) Plan for Compliance.--\n       (1) In general.--The Director of National Intelligence, the\n     Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, the Director of\n     the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Director of the National\n     Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, and the Director of the\n     National Security Agency shall each develop a corrective\n     action plan, with major milestones, that delineates how the\n     Office of the Director of National Intelligence and each such\n     Agency will achieve compliance, not later than September 30,\n     2013, with the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act\n     of 2010 (Public Law 111-204; 124 Stat. 2224), and the\n     amendments made by that Act.\n       (2) Submission to congress.--Not later than 45 days after\n     the date of the enactment of this Act--\n       (A) each Director referred to in paragraph (1) shall submit\n     to the congressional intelligence committees the corrective\n     action plan required by such paragraph; and\n       (B) the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the\n     Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, and\n     the Director of the National Security Agency shall each\n     submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and\n     the Committee on Armed Services of the House of\n     Representatives the corrective action plan required by\n     paragraph (1) with respect to the applicable Agency.\n       (b) Review by Inspectors General.--\n       (1) In general.--Not later than 45 days after the\n     completion of a corrective action plan required by subsection\n     (a)(1), the Inspector General of each Agency required to\n     develop such a plan, and in the case of the Director of\n     National Intelligence, the Inspector General of the\n     Intelligence Community, shall provide to the congressional\n     intelligence committees an assessment of such plan that\n     includes--\n       (A) the assessment of the Inspector General of whether such\n     Agency or Office is or is not likely to reach compliance with\n     the requirements of the Improper Payments Elimination and\n     Recovery Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-204; 124 Stat. 2224),\n     and the amendments made by that Act, by September 30, 2013;\n     and\n       (B) the basis of the Inspector General for such assessment.\n       (2) Additional submission of reviews of certain inspectors\n     general.--Not later than 45 days after the completion of a\n     corrective action plan required by subsection (a)(1), the\n     Inspector General of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the\n     Inspector General of the National Geospatial-Intelligence\n     Agency, and the Inspector General of the National Security\n     Agency shall each submit to the Committee on Armed Services\n     of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the\n     House of Representatives the assessment of the applicable\n     plan provided to the congressional intelligence committees\n     under paragraph (1).\n\n     SEC. 308. SUBCONTRACTOR NOTIFICATION PROCESS.\n\n       Not later than October 1, 2013, the Director of National\n     Intelligence shall submit to the congressional intelligence\n     committees a report assessing the method by which contractors\n     at any tier under a contract entered into with an element of\n     the intelligence community are granted security clearances\n     and notified of classified contracting opportunities within\n     the Federal Government and recommendations for the\n     improvement of such method. Such report shall include--\n       (1) an assessment of the current method by which\n     contractors at any tier under a contract entered into with an\n     element of the intelligence community are notified of\n     classified contracting opportunities;\n       (2) an assessment of any problems that may reduce the\n     overall effectiveness of the ability of the intelligence\n     community to identify appropriate contractors at any tier\n     under such a contract;\n       (3) an assessment of the role the existing security\n     clearance process has in enhancing or hindering the ability\n     of the intelligence community to notify such contractors of\n     contracting opportunities;\n       (4) an assessment of the role the current security\n     clearance process has in enhancing or hindering the ability\n     of contractors at any tier under a contract entered into with\n     an element of the intelligence community to execute\n     classified contracts;\n       (5) a description of the method used by the Director of\n     National Intelligence for assessing the effectiveness of the\n     notification process of the intelligence community to produce\n     a talented pool of subcontractors;\n       (6) a description of appropriate goals, schedules,\n     milestones, or metrics used to measure the effectiveness of\n     such notification process; and\n       (7) recommendations for improving such notification\n     process.\n\n     SEC. 309. MODIFICATION OF REPORTING SCHEDULE.\n\n       (a) Inspector General of the Intelligence Community.--\n     Section 103H(k)(1)(A) of the National Security Act of 1947\n     (50 U.S.C. 403-3h(k)(1)(A)) is amended--\n       (1) by striking ``January 31 and July 31'' and inserting\n     ``October 31 and April 30''; and\n       (2) by striking ``December 31 (of the preceding year) and\n     June 30,'' and inserting ``September 30 and March 31,''.\n       (b) Inspector General for the Central Intelligence\n     Agency.--\n       (1) In general.--Section 17(d)(1) of the Central\n     Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 (50 U.S.C. 403q(d)(1)) is\n     amended--\n       (A) by striking ``January 31 and July 31'' and inserting\n     ``October 31 and April 30'';\n       (B) by striking ``December 31 (of the preceding year) and\n     June 30,'' and inserting ``September 30 and March 31,''; and\n       (C) by striking ``Not later than the dates each year\n     provided for the transmittal of such reports in section 507\n     of the National Security Act of 1947,'' and inserting ``Not\n     later than 30 days after the date of the receipt of such\n     reports,''.\n       (2) Conforming amendments.--Section 507(b) of the National\n     Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 415b(b)) is amended--\n       (A) by striking paragraph (1); and\n       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), and (4), as\n     paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), respectively.\n\n     SEC. 310. REPEAL OF CERTAIN REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.\n\n       (a) Repeal of Reporting Requirements.--\n       (1) Acquisition of technology relating to weapons of mass\n     destruction and advanced conventional munitions.--Section 721\n     of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997\n     (50 U.S.C. 2366) is repealed.\n       (2) Safety and security of russian nuclear facilities and\n     nuclear military forces.--Section 114 of the National\n     Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404i) is amended--\n       (A) by striking subsections (a) and (d); and\n       (B) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections\n     (a) and (b), respectively.\n\n[[Page H7481]]\n\n       (3) Intelligence community business systems budget\n     information.--Section 506D of the National Security Act of\n     1947 (50 U.S.C. 415a-6) is amended by striking subsection\n     (e).\n       (4) Measures to protect the identities of covert agents.--\n     Title VI of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 421\n     et seq.) is amended--\n       (A) by striking section 603; and\n       (B) by redesignating sections 604, 605, and 606 as sections\n     603, 604, and 605, respectively.\n       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--\n       (1) Report submission dates.--Section 507 of the National\n     Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 415b) is amended--\n       (A) in subsection (a)--\n       (i) in paragraph (1)--\n\n       (I) by striking subparagraphs (A), (C), and (D);\n       (II) by redesignating subparagraphs (B), (E), (F), (G),\n     (H), and (I) as subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), (D), (E), and\n     (F), respectively; and\n       (III) in subparagraph (D), as so redesignated, by striking\n     ``section 114(c).'' and inserting ``section 114(a).''; and\n\n       (ii) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:\n       ``(2) The date for the submittal to the congressional\n     intelligence committees of the annual report on the threat of\n     attack on the United States from weapons of mass destruction\n     required by section 114(b) shall be the date each year\n     provided in subsection (c)(1)(B).'';\n       (B) in subsection (c)(1)(B), by striking ``each'' and\n     inserting ``the''; and\n       (C) in subsection (d)(1)(B), by striking ``an'' and\n     inserting ``the''.\n       (2) Table of contents of the national security act of\n     1947.--The table of contents in the first section of the\n     National Security Act of 1947 is amended by striking the\n     items relating to sections 603, 604, 605, and 606 and\n     inserting the following new items:\n\n``Sec. 603. Extraterritorial jurisdiction.\n``Sec. 604. Providing information to Congress.\n``Sec. 605. Definitions.''.\n\n     TITLE IV--MATTERS RELATING TO THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\n\n     SEC. 401. WORKING CAPITAL FUND AMENDMENTS.\n\n       Section 21 of the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949\n     (50 U.S.C. 403u) is amended as follows:\n       (1) In subsection (b)--\n       (A) in paragraph (1)--\n       (i) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;\n       (ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``program.'' and\n     inserting ``program; and''; and\n       (iii) by adding at the end the following:\n       ``(D) authorize such providers to make known their services\n     to the entities specified in section (a) through Government\n     communication channels.''; and\n       (B) by adding at the end the following:\n       ``(3) The authority in paragraph (1)(D) does not include\n     the authority to distribute gifts or promotional items.'';\n     and\n       (2) in subsection (c)--\n       (A) in paragraph (2)(E), by striking ``from the sale or\n     exchange of equipment or property of a central service\n     provider'' and inserting ``from the sale or exchange of\n     equipment, recyclable materials, or property of a central\n     service provider.''; and\n       (B) in paragraph (3)(B), by striking ``subsection (f)(2)''\n     and inserting ``subsections (b)(1)(D) and (f)(2)''.\n\n                         TITLE V--OTHER MATTERS\n\n     SEC. 501. HOMELAND SECURITY INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM.\n\n       There is established within the Department of Homeland\n     Security a Homeland Security Intelligence Program. The\n     Homeland Security Intelligence Program constitutes the\n     intelligence activities of the Office of Intelligence and\n     Analysis of the Department that serve predominantly\n     departmental missions.\n\n     SEC. 502. EXTENSION OF NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR THE REVIEW OF\n                   THE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS OF THE\n                   UNITED STATES INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY.\n\n       Section 1007(a) of the Intelligence Authorization Act for\n     Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-306; 50 U.S.C. 401 note) is\n     amended by striking ``Not later than one year after the date\n     on which all members of the Commission are appointed pursuant\n     to section 701(a)(3) of the Intelligence Authorization Act\n     for Fiscal Year 2010,'' and inserting ``Not later than March\n     31, 2013,''.\n\n     SEC. 503. PROTECTING THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPLY CHAIN\n                   OF THE UNITED STATES.\n\n       (a) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the\n     enactment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence\n     shall submit to the congressional intelligence committees a\n     report that--\n       (1) identifies foreign suppliers of information technology\n     (including equipment, software, and services) that are linked\n     directly or indirectly to a foreign government, including--\n       (A) by ties to the military forces of a foreign government;\n       (B) by ties to the intelligence services of a foreign\n     government; or\n       (C) by being the beneficiaries of significant low interest\n     or no interest loans, loan forgiveness, or other support by a\n     foreign government; and\n       (2) assesses the vulnerability to malicious activity,\n     including cyber crime or espionage, of the telecommunications\n     networks of the United States due to the presence of\n     technology produced by suppliers identified under paragraph\n     (1).\n       (b) Form.--The report required under subsection (a) shall\n     be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a\n     classified annex.\n       (c) Telecommunications Networks of the United States\n     Defined.--In this section, the term ``telecommunications\n     networks of the United States'' includes--\n       (1) telephone systems;\n       (2) Internet systems;\n       (3) fiber optic lines, including cable landings;\n       (4) computer networks; and\n       (5) smart grid technology under development by the\n     Department of Energy.\n\n     SEC. 504. NOTIFICATION REGARDING THE AUTHORIZED PUBLIC\n                   DISCLOSURE OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE.\n\n       (a) Notification.--In the event of an authorized disclosure\n     of national intelligence or intelligence related to national\n     security to the persons or entities described in subsection\n     (b), the government official responsible for authorizing the\n     disclosure shall submit to the congressional intelligence\n     committees on a timely basis a notification of the disclosure\n     if--\n       (1) at the time of the disclosure--\n       (A) such intelligence is classified; or\n       (B) is declassified for the purpose of the disclosure; and\n       (2) the disclosure will be made by an officer, employee, or\n     contractor of the Executive branch.\n       (b) Persons or Entities Described.--The persons or entities\n     described in this subsection are as follows:\n       (1) Media personnel.\n       (2) Any person or entity, if the disclosure described in\n     subsection (a) is made with the intent or knowledge that such\n     information will be made publicly available.\n       (c) Content.--Each notification required under subsection\n     (a) shall--\n       (1) provide the specific title and authority of the\n     individual authorizing the disclosure;\n       (2) if applicable, provide the specific title and authority\n     of the individual who authorized the declassification of the\n     intelligence disclosed; and\n       (3) describe the intelligence disclosed, including the\n     classification of the intelligence prior to its disclosure or\n     declassification and the rationale for making the disclosure.\n       (d) Exception.--The notification requirement in this\n     section does not apply to a disclosure made--\n       (1) pursuant to any statutory requirement, including to\n     section 552 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred\n     to as the ``Freedom of Information Act'');\n       (2) in connection with a civil, criminal, or administrative\n     proceeding;\n       (3) as a result of a declassification review process under\n     Executive Order 13526 (50 U.S.C. 435 note) or any successor\n     order; or\n       (4) to any officer, employee, or contractor of the Federal\n     government or member of an advisory committee to an element\n     of the intelligence community who possesses an active\n     security clearance and a need to know the specific national\n     intelligence or intelligence related to national security, as\n     defined in section 3(5) of the National Security Act of 1947\n     (50 U.S.C. 401a(5)).\n       (e) Sunset.--The notification requirements of this section\n     shall cease to be effective for any disclosure described in\n     subsection (a) that occurs on or after the date that is one\n     year after the date of the enactment of this Act.\n\n     SEC. 505. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS RELATED TO THE OFFICE OF THE\n                   DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE.\n\n       (a) Personnel Practices.--Section 2302(a)(2)(C) of title 5,\n     United States Code, is amended by striking clause (ii) and\n     inserting the following:\n       ``(ii)(I) the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central\n     Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the\n     National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the National\n     Security Agency, the Office of the Director of National\n     Intelligence, and the National Reconnaissance Office; and\n       ``(II) as determined by the President, any executive agency\n     or unit thereof the principal function of which is the\n     conduct of foreign intelligence or counterintelligence\n     activities, provided that the determination be made prior to\n     a personnel action; or''.\n       (b) Senior Executive Service.--Section 3132(a)(1)(B) of\n     title 5, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``the\n     Office of the Director of National Intelligence,'' after\n     ``the Central Intelligence Agency,''.\n\n     SEC. 506. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT FOR DEFINITION OF INTELLIGENCE\n                   AGENCY.\n\n       Section 606(5) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50\n     U.S.C. 426) is amended to read as follows:\n       ``(5) The term `intelligence agency' means the elements of\n     the intelligence community, as that term is defined in\n     section 3(4).''.\n\n     SEC. 507. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.\n\n       The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of\n     complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go-Act of 2010, shall\n     be determined by reference to the latest statement titled\n     ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation'' for this Act,\n     submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the\n     Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, provided that such\n     statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from\nMichigan (Mr. Rogers) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.\nRuppersberger) each will control 20 minutes.\n\n[[Page H7482]]\n\n  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.\n\n                             General Leave\n\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that\nall Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend\ntheir remarks and include extraneous material on the bill before us\ntoday.\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the\ngentleman from Michigan?\n  There was no objection.\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I\nmay consume, and I appreciate the opportunity to be here on New Year's\nEve.\n  I first wish to make an announcement with respect to the availability\nof the classified annex to the bill under consideration for the Members\nof the House. This is to reinforce a previous announcement I made to\nMembers last evening.\n  Madam Speaker, the classified Schedule of Authorizations and the\nclassified annex accompanying the bill remain available for review by\nMembers at the offices of the Permanent Select Committee on\nIntelligence in room HVC-304 of the Capitol Visitor Center. The\ncommittee office will be open during regular business hours for the\nconvenience of any Member who wishes to review this material prior to\nits consideration by the House.\n  I recommend that Members wishing to review the classified annex\ncontact the committee's director of security to arrange a time and date\nfor that viewing. This will assure the availability of committee staff\nto assist Members who desire assistance during their review of these\nclassified documents.\n  Madam Speaker, I am pleased that the House is considering this\nintelligence authorization bill today, the last day of the year. If\npassed and enacted, this will be our third intelligence authorization\nbill since I assumed the chairmanship and my friend the gentleman from\nMaryland became the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee.\n  In May, the House overwhelmingly passed, by a vote of 386-28, an\nintelligence authorization bill which is the same product as the bill\nthat is before us today. I appreciate the ranking member's hard work on\nthis year's bill and that of our colleagues in the Senate to achieve a\nbipartisan result between the two Chambers.\n\n                              {time}  1030\n\n  This is indeed a rare occurrence in this town these days, but this is\ntruly a bipartisan, bicameral product that moves forward when it comes\nto protecting the United States and putting us in the best national\nsecurity posture we could imagine.\n  The intelligence authorization bill is vital to ensuring that our\nintelligence agencies have the resources and authorities they need to\ndo their important work. The intelligence community plays a critical\nrole in the war on terrorism and securing the country from the many\nthreats that we face.\n  The annual authorization bill, which funds U.S. intelligence\nactivities spanning 17 agencies, is also a vital tool for congressional\noversight of the intelligence community's classified activities.\nEffective and aggressive congressional oversight is essential to\nensuring the continued success of our intelligence community, and\ntherefore the safety of all citizens of the United States. The current\nchallenging fiscal environment demands the accountability and financial\noversight of our classified intelligence programs that can only come\nwith an intelligence authorization bill.\n  The FY 2013 bill sustains our current intelligence capabilities and\nprovides for the development of future capabilities, all while\nachieving significant savings and ensuring intelligence agencies are\nbeing good stewards of our taxpayers' money.\n  This year, the bill is significantly below last year's enacted budget\nbut up modestly from the President's roughly $72 billion budget request\nfor fiscal year 2013. It is also in line with the House budget\nresolution, which provides for a modest increase of defense activities\nabove the President's budget.\n  The bill's comprehensive classified annex provides detailed guidance\non intelligence spending, including adjustments to costly but important\nprograms. The bill funds requirements of the men and women of the\nintelligence community, both military and civilian, many of whom\ndirectly support the war zones and are engaged in other dangerous\noperations designed to keep Americans safe.\n  It provides oversight and authorization for vital intelligence\nactivities, including the global counterwar on terrorism and efforts by\nthe National Security Agency to defend us from advanced foreign state-\nsponsored cyberthreats. And I can't tell you enough, Madam Speaker, how\nin this Chamber we have acted to stand up in the face of a growing\ncyberthreat not only to government networks but to private networks as\nwell. We have, in a bipartisan way, given the first step on how we\nstand up our defenses here in the United States to protect us from\nnation-states like China and Russia--and now Iran--who seek to do us\nharm using the Internet. We will again aggressively pursue next year,\nwith the help of my ranking member, actions needed, I believe, to\nprotect the United States against what is the largest threat we face\nthat we are not prepared to handle, and that is the growing threat of\ncyberattack and cyberespionage.\n  Countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is also a\ncritical, important mission of our intelligence community, and we made\nsure the resources were available to that end, as well as for global\nmonitoring of foreign militaries and advanced weapons systems and\ntests, and for research and development of new technology to maintain\nour intelligence agencies' technological edge.\n  And like the House-passed bill, this bill promotes operating\nefficiencies in a number of areas, particularly in information\ntechnology, the ground processing of satellite data, and the\nprocurement and operation of intelligence, surveillance, and\nreconnaissance platforms. The bill holds personnel levels, one of the\nfirst and biggest cost drivers, generally at last year's levels. Even\nso, the bill adds a limited number of new personnel positions for\nselect, high-priority positions, such as FBI surveillance officers to\nkeep watch on terrorists, and personnel for certain other programs that\nwill increase cooperation and training with our foreign partners in the\ncritically important role for our intelligence agencies as we move to\nprotect ourselves from threats all around the world.\n  The bill authorizes increased funding for intelligence collection\nprograms, including increased counterintelligence to thwart foreign\nspies. It also increases funding for our intelligence community's\ncomparative advantage--cutting-edge research and development. This is\nan incredibly important investment for the United States. If we are\ngoing to continue to lead in the ability to detect before they can do\nharm to the United States, we have to make the investment in research\nand development of high-end technological advancement.\n  While I cannot get into the specifics of a lot of these programs,\nit's important to mention them as we are going through the process each\nyear in conducting oversight of intelligence activities and making\nfunding recommendations that will help the community meet its mission\nin the most effective, fiscally responsible way.\n  The bipartisan fiscal year 2013 intelligence authorization bill we\nare considering today preserves and advances national security and is\nalso fiscally responsible. The secrecy that is a necessary part of this\ncountry's intelligence work requires that the congressional\nIntelligence Committees conduct strong and effective oversight on\nbehalf of the American people and even our colleagues here in the\nHouse. That strong and effective oversight is impossible, however,\nwithout the advancement of these bills.\n  I want to thank all of the members of the committee for their\nbipartisan effort to find agreement on a bill that saves money and\nmoves forward smartly on protecting the interests of national security\nfor the United States. I want to thank both of the staffs for working\ntogether to produce this bill. This truly is a collaborative effort\nboth from staff and Members in this Chamber and in the Senate, proving\nthat you can work in a bipartisan way to accomplish the best interests\nof the United States and, in this case, particularly when it comes to\nnational security.\n\n[[Page H7483]]\n\n  One final note: I want to congratulate Mrs. Myrick on her years of\ngreat service to the Intelligence Committee. She will be leaving us\nthis year. This will be her last authorization bill that she will\nparticipate in. I am pleased to see that a provision she championed in\nMay concerning the protection of the United States information\ntechnology supply chain is included in this bill. She has done great\nwork in her time with the committee, and she certainly will be missed.\nShe has been a true champion of the national security interests of this\ncountry. She is a great friend of mine, and I wish her well in her new\nendeavors.\n  I thank all who participated. I also want to take this opportunity to\nthank my chief counsel for celebrating his birthday today on the House\nfloor with us on New Year's Eve day. I appreciate that very much.\n  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.\n  Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I\nmay consume.\n  Before us today is the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal year\n2013. It's a good, bipartisan bill that gives our intelligence\nprofessionals the resources, capabilities, and authorities they need to\nkeep us safe. And I also want to acknowledge the leadership of Chairman\nRogers. His bipartisan leadership has helped us make the Intelligence\nCommittee a committee that provides oversight to our intelligence\nagencies and gives them the resources that they need to protect our\ncountry. I also want to acknowledge the staff on both sides of the\naisle who worked very closely to put this bill together.\n  When Chairman Rogers and I took over leadership of the Intelligence\nCommittee, we made a commitment to bipartisanship. We believe politics\nhas no place in national security. The stakes are just too high. We\nalso made a commitment to passing intelligence budgets that provide\noversight to the intelligence community and give it important financial\ndirection. Chairman Rogers and I also work closely with Chairwoman\nDianne Feinstein and vice chair Saxby Chambliss of the Senate\nIntelligence Committee, our counterparts in the Senate, so we can get\nthings done.\n  If this bill becomes law, it will be the third budget bill in a row\npassed since we took over leadership in January, 2011--a big change\nfrom the previous 6 years when we only passed one budget bill. This was\nan open, bipartisan process where we reached agreement on issues that\nwill make this country safer and intelligence processes more efficient.\n  We know we are facing tough economic times. This budget is slightly\nbelow the enacted levels of FY 2012. We made cuts where appropriate,\neliminated redundancies, and pushed programs to come in on time and on\nbudget.\n  People ask me what keeps me up at night. Besides spicy food, I say\nweapons of mass destruction and a catastrophic cyberattack that shuts\ndown our banking system, water supply, power grids or worse.\n  This bill continues a substantial investment in cybersecurity that\nmust be made to keep up with the cyberthreats of today and tomorrow. We\nalso believe we must protect privacy and civil liberties when it comes\nto cybersecurity.\n  Another priority is space. The bill promotes the commercial space\nindustry by enhancing the government use of commercial imagery and\ncommercial communications services. It requires the government to use\ncommercial imagery to the maximum extent practicable.\n  I believe competition is important to ensure we get high quality\nproducts while keeping costs down. It drives innovation and provides a\nmuch-needed insurance policy in case there are problems with other\nprograms. And it does create jobs.\n  The bill expanded our counterterrorism efforts to continue the fight\nagainst al Qaeda and its affiliates around the world. The bill also\nmakes counterintelligence the priority it is. It makes strategic\nadditions across the intelligence community. This will pay for\nsurveillance, better supply chain security, and the counterintelligence\nanalysts we need.\n  The bill added resources to the intelligence community's global\ncoverage initiatives to ensure the United States is capable and ready\nto address threats from any location around the world, especially in\nareas of strategic interest.\n\n                              {time}  1040\n\n  It authorizes the Department of Defense's new defense clandestine\nservice to reorganize its human intelligence collection. It will be a\npart of the CIA's national clandestine service. The bill directed the\nDirector of national intelligence to develop a centralized cloud for\nthe entire intelligence community; advancing collaboration and further\npromoting efficiency; and it required the President to develop a\nstrategy for security clearance, reciprocity, and a report on how to\nbetter protect our information technology across the global supply\nchain.\n  I urge my colleagues to support the Intelligence Authorization Act\nfor FY 2012. When this bill was before the House in May, it passed by a\nbipartisan margin of 386-28. It's a good bipartisan bill that gives our\nintelligence professionals what they need to do their jobs and protect\nour Nation.\n  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I inquire if the minority side\nhas a list of speakers.\n  Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. At this time, we have one speaker. We're waiting\nfor more; but if they don't come, we'll move on.\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Then I will continue to reserve the balance\nof my time.\n  Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the\nCongressman from Ohio, Dennis Kucinich.\n  Mr. KUCINICH. I thank my friend. And I want to thank both my friends,\nthe chair and the ranking member, for the work that they do on\nintelligence. You make a commitment to this country, and I think the\ncountry is in good hands because of your work.\n  I want to raise a question--and we've had some of these conversations\nbetween ourselves. I'm very concerned about the shift that's occurred\nin our national security policy where the Central Intelligence Agency\nhas increasingly played a very powerful paramilitary role with the\nexecution of drone strikes. Numerous studies have indicated that there\nare many innocent civilians being killed by drone strikes. There's a\nlack of accountability here. There have been studies that suggest, for\nexample in Yemen, that drone strikes are stirring up anti-American\nsentiment to the point where al Qaeda is actually being empowered.\n  We really have to ask of the CIA, but even more than that, of our\nentire national security infrastructure, What's the game plan here? We\nsee there have been changes in military policy where certain functions\nhave been ceded to the CIA. We see changes in foreign policy where the\nState Department has let go of some of its functions. We know that the\nmilitary has made an attempt with the Defense Intelligence Agency to\ntry to become more actively involved as a separate organization. They\nwere seeking 1,600 new spies.\n  We have this architecture of national security which is so powerful,\nbut I'm not sure that it's actually that effective. I don't question\nthe effectiveness of our chair or our ranking member, but I do question\nthe effectiveness of what we're doing.\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.\n  Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman\nfrom Ohio.\n  Mr. KUCINICH. I do question the effectiveness of this drone program,\nits adherence to international law or lack thereof, the intel gathering\non targeted killings where we've seen reports of efforts of one group\nto target individuals and other groups as a way of trying to settle\nsome scores between people so they put them up as a potential terrorist\nand they get marked on a list and executed. And as I mentioned earlier,\nthe concern about civilian deaths.\n  I think that the Central Intelligence Agency functions best in\ngathering intelligence, and we ought to support them in that regard. I\nwas very concerned and expressed this on the floor about what happened\nin Benghazi. If we'd paid more attention to the CIA, we probably would\nstill have some of our officials there alive. But that's gone and it's\nover. We have to recognize that putting the CIA more and more into a\nparamilitary position is not in the best interest of this country, I\ndon't believe.\n\n[[Page H7484]]\n\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. I yield myself such time as I may consume.\n  The gentleman and I have had these conversations, and I respect his\nposition greatly and the work he does in Congress.\n  I have some disagreements, and I'll tell you why--and I hope that the\ngentleman will consider voting for this bill today. The amount of\noversight that the ranking member and I have increased on programs that\nmay have concerns on behalf of Americans, because we have the same\nconcerns. There are tools that America engages in, including air\nstrikes. Air strikes have been something that we have used since we\ncould figure out how to get something off the ground and throw\nsomething at the ground. They have been used as a tool. It's not a\npolicy of the United States; it's a tool of the United States to make\nAmerica safe.\n  The amount of oversight that happens--and I will tell you this: if\nthere is any air strike conducted that involves an enemy combatant of\nthe United States outside the theater of direct combat, it gets\nreviewed by this committee. I am talking about every single one. That's\nan important thing. There are very strict reviews put on all of this\nmaterial. There are very strict guidelines about how these air strikes\nmay or may not occur, because we have that same feeling. If people lose\nfaith in the ability of our intelligence services to do their work,\nthen they will be ineffective, and, therefore, we will be less safe.\n  Our argument has been we want that oversight, we want aggressive\noversight, and we want thorough review. I can tell you--and I think\nyou'd be proud--of the very work that we do on the committee to that\nend. We never really did covert-action reviews, except for\nsporadically. Now we do regularly, quarterly, and monthly covert-action\nreviews on this committee to make sure that we get it right, that they\nget it right.\n  Mr. KUCINICH. Will the gentleman yield?\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. I would be honored to yield to the gentleman\nfrom Ohio.\n  Mr. KUCINICH. I have no question about the commitment of the chair\nand the ranking member to proper oversight, but what I do question is\nthat the proliferation of the drone strikes puts such an extraordinary\nburden on our own oversight capacities. I'm wondering, looking\nretrospectively at the number of civilian casualties that have\noccurred, the oversight--there's a decoupling of the oversight capacity\nfrom the consequences of the strikes, and that's the point that I'm\nmaking here.\n  I would ask my friend going forward for the committee to be ever more\nvigilant on--if you're for these strikes and you are conducting the\noversight, look at the consequences of civilian casualties to raise\nquestions about the information that's being given you. That's the\npoint that I'm making.\n  With that, I thank my friend for yielding.\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. I appreciate that, and I reclaim my time.\n  I think this is very important. Again, I personally review and the\ncommittee reviews the material that comes to these committees.\n  There are many in the world who have political agendas about civilian\ncasualties. I can tell you to rest assured that that is a point of\nreview for any activity--I'm talking about any activity--that our\nintelligence community may or may not engage in. I think that you would\nbe shocked and stunned how wrong those public reports are about\ncivilian casualties, and I say that with all seriousness and with the\nvery thought that every one of these events is reviewed.\n  If there is an air strike used as a technique anywhere in the world\nto keep America safe, it is reviewed if it comes within the purview of\nthe intelligence community, both military and civilian, on this\ncommittee. Those reports are wrong. They are not just wrong; they are\nwildly wrong. And I do believe people use those reports for their own\npolitical purposes outside of the country to try to put pressure on the\nUnited States.\n\n                              {time}  1050\n\n  Mr. KUCINICH. If I may, will the gentleman yield?\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.\n  Mr. KUCINICH. What I would like to do, Mr. Chairman, is to present to\nyou and the ranking member reports that have been forwarded to me\nregarding these casualties. Maybe these are reports that you've seen,\nand maybe they aren't; but I certainly think that in the interest of\nacquitting our country's efforts that we make sure that every effort is\nmade to avoid civilian casualties. So I will present those to you and\nthe ranking member in the next few days, and I want to thank you for\ngiving me this opportunity.\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. In reclaiming my time, I just want to assure\nthe gentleman that every one of these is reviewed, and rest assured\nthat the public reports about civilian casualties are not just a little\nbit wrong; they are wildly wrong.\n  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.\n  Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. I yield myself such time as I may consume.\n  First, I do want to acknowledge the work that has been done by Dennis\nKucinich as a Member of Congress. Dennis and I don't always\nphilosophically agree, but I respect that he has a good point of view.\nThat's the whole process here in Congress--that we have different\npoints of view, that we come together, that we debate, and that we can\nmake decisions.\n  So, Dennis, we are going to miss you. Good luck to you and your\nfamily in the future, and I'm glad that one of the last things you're\ngoing to do is come here and talk about our bill today.\n  In just acknowledging what the chairman said, there is an aggressive\nlegal process that is undertaken as far as drones are concerned that\ngoes to the highest levels of our government before strikes are taken.\nIn everything that I have reviewed, if there are children or innocent\nvictims there, the strike does not take place. So there is a process.\nUnfortunately, there are some casualties--very minor. I would also\nagree with the chairman as far as this is concerned: in that what you\nread in the media is usually not what the facts are.\n  It is part of what we do. Why do we have the Intelligence Committee?\nWe have it because there is classified information that if it got out\nwould hurt the national security of our country. It's part of our role\nand our committee's role to take this classified information and work\nwith the agencies to which we provide oversight so we will continue to\nwork through that process.\n  Mr. Kucinich, I'm glad that you did raise that as an issue, as we all\nshould.\n  Madam Speaker, for the third time in 3 years, Chairman Rogers and I\nhave stood on the floor of the House encouraging our colleagues to\nsupport our intelligence budget bill. Today, we both rise in support of\nthe Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013. The bill gives\nour intelligence professionals the resources, capabilities, and\nauthorities they need to protect America and American interests.\n  We crafted a bill that addresses our core needs, including space,\ncybersecurity, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism. We are also\nkeeping an eye on the bottom line. The bill is slightly below last\nyear's budget and holds personnel at last year's levels. In a very\nstrong bipartisan way, the Intelligence Committee came together as\nDemocrats and Republicans to do what is right for our country and for\nthe intelligence community.\n  I thank the staff again for what it has done, and I thank the\nchairman for his leadership in helping to provide this bill in a very\nfair, bipartisan way.\n  I would also like to acknowledge two Democratic Members who will be\nleaving us at the end of this session--Congressman Dan Boren of\nOklahoma and Congressman Ben Chandler of Kentucky. Both Members will be\ngreatly missed, and I appreciate their service on the Intelligence\nCommittee.\n  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the Intelligence\nAuthorization Act for FY 2013, and I yield back the balance of my time.\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much\ntime is remaining.\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan has 5\\1/2\\\nminutes remaining.\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. I yield myself such time as I may consume.\n  Again, I want to thank my ranking member and both staffs on the\nIntelligence Committee for the long hours, hard work and thorough,\ndetailed work\n\n[[Page H7485]]\n\non the budgets and on the classified annex of this report.\n  I think it should alleviate many of the good concerns of Mr. Kucinich\nand others who are concerned about these activities. I think it's\nimportant to reiterate that we have the same concerns, which is why we\nare so thorough and why we have joined together in a bipartisan way to\nincrease the level of congressional oversight and to increase our\nimpact and influence on the policies of the intelligence community in\norder to make sure it conforms with what this body and what I think the\nUnited States of America wants and needs in its intelligence services.\n  We have now done, as I said before, regularly scheduled covert\naction, which, I think, should rest assured Americans that it is\nserious, thoughtful and thorough oversight. For counterintelligence\nactivities, we now have regularly scheduled oversight. Every department\nis required to proffer its budget request, and we go over it line by\nline, dollar by dollar, policy by policy to make sure it conforms with\nthe concerns of everyone in this body.\n  As I said before, these are very brave Americans who are serving in\nreally tough neighborhoods all over the world--trying to collect\ninformation, trying to take actionable intelligence to a point that it\nprotects us from harm here at home. They deserve our respect, our\nencouragement, our high-five and pat on the back when they come home.\nThey want thorough oversight. You wouldn't believe it, but they do.\nThey want to know that the work that they're doing would make America\nproud for them risking their lives and being away from their families\nand putting it all on the line to keep America safe.\n  That's why we agreed to do this in a bipartisan way and to be so\nthorough in its congressional oversight, because without that--without\nthat confidence, without that faith of the American people that they're\ndoing something on behalf of this great Nation--they will lose their\nability to do what they do, and they will lose the courage and\nconfidence that they need to do it in the right way. So that's what\nthis bill reflects.\n  I understand your concerns. I look forward to our further\nconversations on this; and in further conversations, I'd like to have\nthe opportunity, if we can arrange this, to give you some examples--a\npeek behind the curtain as to exactly what goes on in the processes of\nmaking sure that we keep the good people safe and that the bad guys are\nbrought to justice. I think you'd be proud of that work. This bill\nreflects that.\n  Again, thanks to the ranking member and to the staffs and to the\nmembers on both sides of this committee. Thanks to Senator Feinstein\nand to Senator Saxby Chambliss for their help in putting this bill\ntogether.\n  I hope we'll get a large show of support with a strong vote of\nbipartisanship for the men and women who are serving at our\nintelligence posts all around the world today. Let's send this to the\nPresident so we can go about the business of keeping America safe and\nmaybe even look at some other details that the Speaker may have\ninterest in dealing with today.\n  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.\n  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today, I voted against the Fiscal Year\n2013 Intelligence Authorization Act. Despite keeping funding levels\nflat and capping personnel levels to that of Fiscal Year 2012, this\nauthorization is not significantly different than the earlier version I\nvoted against in May.\n  It is another missed opportunity to make significant, smart\nreductions in our intelligence infrastructure, at a time when we're\nasking so many others to make significant budgetary sacrifices in the\nmidst of austerity. This legislation continues to spend way too much\nmoney--$72 to $78 billion a year--with little transparency or efforts\nto reduce the sprawling intelligence community and protect privacy\nrights.\n  It's of paramount importance to keep our country safe, and that's\nexactly what our intelligence community has done, but we cannot afford\nto spend as much on intelligence as Russia does on its entire military\nbudget or employ hundreds of thousands of people with secret clearance.\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the\ngentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers) that the House suspend the rules\nand pass the bill, S. 3454.\n  The question was taken.\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds\nbeing in the affirmative, the ayes have it.\n  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the\nground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a\nquorum is not present.\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further\nproceedings on this question will be postponed.\n  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.\n\n                          ____________________"]], "columns": ["granule_id", "date", "congress", "session", "volume", "issue", "title", "chamber", "granule_class", "sub_granule_class", "page_start", "page_end", "speakers", "bills", "citation", "full_text"], "primary_keys": ["granule_id"], "primary_key_values": ["CREC-2012-12-31-pt1-PgH7479"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 92.33270899858326, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}