JFK Assassination System Date: 7/7/2015 Identification Form : Agency Information AGENCY: SSCIA RECORD NUMBER : 157-10014-10124 RECORD SERIES: MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF THE CHURCH COMMITTTEE AGENCY FILENUMBER:  07-M-30 Document Information ORIGINATOR: SSCIA FROM: TO: TITLE: Released under the John Kennedy WSsassination Records Ollection Act of 1992 DATE: 03/17/1976 (44 USC 2107 Note). PAGES: 58 ase#: NU 53244 Date: 6-14-2017 SUBJECTS : SSCSGO, METHODOLOGY COMMITTEE BUSINESS DOCUMENT TYPE: TRANSCRIPT CLASSIFICATION: — Declassified RESTRICTIONS : 1B;1C CURRENT STATUS: — Redact DATE OF LASTREVIEW: — 03/22/2000 OPENING CRITERIA : COMMENTS : CCBOX 324 v9.) HW 532744 DBocld: 324273512 Page 1
Date Page 08/07/95 1 JFK ASSASSINATION SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION FORM AGENCY INFORMATION AGENCY : SSCIA . RECORD NUMBER : 157-10014-10124 | RECORDS SERIES : MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF THE CHURCH COMMITTTEE AGENCY FILE NUMBER : 07-M-30 ORIGINATOR : SSCIA FROM : ; TO : TITLE : DATE : 03/17/76 PAGES : 58. ‘SUBJECTS : SSCSGO, METHODOLOGY ‘ - COMMITTEE BUSINESS DOCUMENT TYPE.: TRANSCRIPT CLASSIFICATION : TOP SECRET RESTRICTIONS. : REFERRED CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 01/05/99 OPENING CRITERIA : ; , COMMENTS 3: CCBOX 324 (R] - ITEM IS RESTRICTED HW 53244 DBocld:3242735512 Page 2
cal NATIONAL SECURITY /{NFORMATION® Unauthorized Disélosure Subject Vol. 2 OF 3 to Criminal safct tags / | —: Che United States Senate K ae OP Report of. Proceedings, = ce Hearing held before: Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental. a “Operations With Respect to Intelligence Activities , —S Wednesday, March’ 17,/ 1976 - Washington, D.C. | (Stenotype Tape and Waste turned over’ - .. to the Committee for destruction) _ | | WARD & PAUL | : 410 FIRST STREET, S. E. - ‘ WASHINGTON, D. C. 20003:. (202) 544-6000
WARD/smnl . LO 11 le 13° 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2 25 24 25 a.m., in Room Ss-407, the Capitol, the Honorable Frank Church COMMITTEE MEETING Wednesday, March 17, 1976 ' United States Senate, Select Committee to. Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, Washington, D. C. -The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:30 o'clock (Chairman of the Committee) presiding. present: Senators Church (presiding) , Mondale, Huddleston, Hart of Colorado, Tower, Baker, Mathias and Schweiker. Also present: William G. Miller, Staff Director; Frederic A. O. Schwarz, Jr., Chief Counsel; Curtis R. Smothers, Minorit Counsel; and Joseph -diGenova, Pat Shea, Al Quanbeck, William Bader, Rick Inderfurth, Elizabeth Culbreath, Michael Madican,- Joseph Dennin, Charles Lombard, Margaret Carpenter, Elliot Maxwell, Walter Ricks, David Aaron, Jan Orloff, Rhett Dawson, Bob Kelley, Anne Karalekas, Molly Dillon and Burt Wides. HW 53244 DocId:32423512 Page 4 oe . —_ oY
1 Fritz, may I ask before we proceed when you think you 2 will be ready with your’ final recommendations for consideration ‘5 / 3 || by the Full Committee? . - Senator Mondale. rhe 25th or 26th Mr. Schwarz tells me. 5 _ Mr. Schwarz. That | is the day we are scheduled for, and 6 we are well on schedule! ; be 9 _ ‘The Chairman. Well, if they could be distributed to. g || members. by the 24th. 9 Mr. Schwarz. Can do. - 10 The Chairman. If you could do that, we could take that 11 || up and we can work on them on the 25th. 12 Senator Mondale. I think we can just vote them out. 13 The Chairman. All right. 14 Now that Senator Tower has arrived, we will commence these 15 || proceedings. 16 | Calling the Committee's attention to the first section, 17 || general findings and conclusions, running through pages 1 through . a | . 18 page 5, does any memberiof the Committee have any amendment to ‘19 offer or suggested change to make? 20 . Senator Baker. Mr. Chairman, I have one on page 4. 51 a The Chairman. On page 4? 22 . Senator Baker. In the second paragraph, the third sen- 93. tence: "The recent proposals and executive actions by the 24 President: are an important step in this process and a useful 25 point of departure. They are not, however, adequate in “HW §32944 Docld:32493512 Page 8
10 li 12 14 15 16 1? 18 19 20, 22 25 24 25 ‘think it is likely that we will suggest and urge the: enactment not, however, adequate in themselves." And it seems to me therefore is not a dependable standard, and I think this the President's suggestions. I would suggest that. this style themselves." . It is my view that: the President. did a rather extraordinar thing in making sweeping and comprehensive recommendations, and it deserves probably better treatment from us than that. I of additional legislative steps, but I think this particular on diminishes the importance of the President's recommendations - unduly. The Chairman. Well, it says "The recent proposals and executive actions by the President are an important step in this process and a useful point of departure. They are that no executive action can be adequate in itself because it is subject to immediate change, to change without notice, and. | ; Committee, ,in making recommendations that statutes be enacted, ! . is attempting to establilsh definite and dependable Standards. That is not to criticize the executive orders the Presiden himself has issued, but it is to suggest that they are not adequate in. themselves. a Senator Baker. I think that: is the way it would be read, though. this is what I had in mind when I said part of my objections may in fact go to questions of style. I surely , doubt that the Committee tends to diminish the importance of HW 53244 Docld:32423512 Page 9
od be ‘changed simply by saying "These tasks are urgent. They shoul 2 be undertaken by Congress in consultation with the executive S | branch in. the coming year, and: the President's significant 4 ‘recommendations: in this! respect are most welcome.” 5 The Chairman. All’ right. 6 That's all right. og | Senator Baker. Thank you, sir. 8 The Chairman. put. think we should add the final 9 sense, "They are not, however, adequate in themselves." 10 Senator Baker. No} I don't want to do that. I think if i ‘fb am you want to put that sentence in, then I want to diddle with 12 || that one a little bit. i 13° .. I would recommend just leave that out. . There is no need. , i . . 14 to say that. | | 15 | Senator Tower. Say, "However, other steps should be 16 taken." | 1? _ The Chairman. Or we could,say, "However, legislative fi ve ly 18 || steps are also needed. 19 - Senator Baker. weil, why not add "We especially note ‘f 20 || the suggestion by the President that legislative action will 21 | be required as well, ‘ana we agree with that." i" 22 | > Senator Huddleston Well, I would just suggest, Mr. 23 Chairman, that if we aré going to accept the President's 24 action as adequate, we Gan end, the report right there on 25 || page 4 and send it on down. HW 53244 DocId:32423512 Page 10
HW 535244 (10 ll le 13 14 15 16 1? 18 19 20 21 ae 23 24 29 Senator Baker. Wel, nobody is suggesting that. -I don't suggest that. | | | | Senator ‘Huddleston. Well, why not say it? Senator Baker. Because. Don't say either one. Senator Huddleston. Because as a matter of fact the steps. are woefully inadequate,-Senator, if you look at it. | Senator Baker. I don't think they are inadequate. I thin they are very good, indeed. I think there are a lot of things I would add to it, but I don't like to be doing a thing to aid the legislative process by saying that the President did a good job or a bad job, and that is a question of style that we are addressing. | | Senator Mondale. Why don't we just agree that the President did a job on this issue. Senator Baker. Why don't we have a vote on it. Why don't we just do that? Senator Huddleston. Okay, but I don't really see -any criticism at all, here, of the President. The Chairman. "It shall be undertaken by Congress in consultation with the executive branch in the coming years." And then what would you add to that, Howard? | ‘Senator Baker. “The recent proposals and executive actions by the" -- "The recent Suggestions and proposais by the President in that respect are most welcome," and I am proposing we stop there. Docld: 32423512 Page 11
AW 53244 na GG nw, # o 10 LL 12 13° 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 el 22 23 24 7-29) The Chairman. Then I: would Say we add "They are not, however, sufficient in. themselves." RS Senator Schweiker. How about, "But further action by. Congress is necessary." Wouldn't that get us over the hump here? | ‘The Chairman. All right. . Senator Mondale. clearly necessary. Senator Baker. How about putting, "And as the President “indicated, further action by Congress is also needed. Senator Mondale. Wait a niinute. The Chairman. After all, Howard -- Senator Mondale. Let! Ss not be political here. The Chairman. You've gotten. enough, out of that, Howard. Senator Mondale. We'll call the President and say you're working like hell. | Senator Baker. The only right I've got is to vote or to note vote, and to make a separate statement. ‘Now, seriously, boys, we need to just decide what we are going to do, and 1 propose that we just stop it after that statement, that the recent proposals by the President -in that | respect are most welcome, and. then what Schweiker said, whether ‘Congressional initiative is required. The Chairman. What did you say? Senator Schweiker. After his I said, "but further action -by Congress is necessary," which I think Says that we've got a TOR SEEREF DocId:32423512 Page 12
10 job to do. The Chairman. All right, we will adopt Howard's first — sentence and Schweiker's second sentence on: that. © Senator Huddleston. The Baker-Schweiker amendment. The Chairman. All right. Are there any other proposals to be made in connection wit this section? Senator Tower. Yes, page 5, Mr. Chairman, the last sentence in the first paragraph, "The Committee believes that 10 covert action must be employed only in the most extraordinary 11 || circumstances." 12 What are extraordinary circumstances? 13 The Chairman. well, they are extraordinary. That's a 214 ‘good word. 15 Senator Huddleston. I'm sorry. What page are we? - 16 “Senator Tower. Page 5. | 17 The Chairman. ‘Last sentence on page 5, "The Committee 218 believes that covert action must be employed only in the most 19° extraordinary circumstances." 20 Senator Tower. I think probably on the Committee there 21 are varying degrees of support or opposition to this whole 29 idea of covert action anyway. I happen to believe in it 23 || pretty strongly. I respect the views of. those who don't think 24 we should use ‘it at all. That is a policy matter. 95 Mr. Miller. I think the idea that was. intended there, HW 53244 Docld:32423512 ‘Page 13
LO 11 12 13 14 15 16° 17 18° 19 20 21 22 23 “24 28 overt means have been exhausted and it is the only way to we don't attempt to define it more precisely, I don't see any problem with it. You and I might have.a different notion reports and recommendations where we can get into that matter ~ bl Senator, was that it is a technique that should be used when achieve your goals. The Chairman. In other words, extraordinary is the Opposit of ordinary. “We could say the Committee believes -= you could turn that around and say the Committee does not believe that covert action should be. employed in ordinary circumstances, but this is a poSitive way of saying it. Senator Tower. Well, my view is’ that extraordinary. circumstances is when there is imminent threat of the Soviet invasion of a small country, for example, or a european country}, Senator Huddleston... That is a good enough example for. me. The Chairman... Well, I think we don't define it, and since of what constituted an extraordinary circumstance. Mr. Miller. That is the Agency's view. | ‘Senator Huddleston. Mr. Chairman, we also have further in substance, whether or not the Committee wants to -- we didn't resolve it at the Subcommittee: level -- but whether and to what extent the Committee wants to impose some kind of restriction on covert action, 1 think there is a better place’ than dealing with it that specifically here. I.think we HW 53244 Docld:32423512 Page 14
HW 53244 10 11 le 13° 14 15 16 17 18 ‘19 20 21 22 23 24 “29 Docld: 32423512 Page 15 anything else, and that is in anyone neglecting to watch what kind of covert action. I know that I would like to have the Agency's comments on this point in particular, and I would withhold my vote until Bill Miller has his meeting. 12 just want to indicate here that something that is somewhat of a usual and everyday; operation -- Senator Baker. Excuse me, John. I am not sure I would | like to leave it that ee I think we are touching now one of | the vitals of this whole thing, and frankly I don' t know what I think. about it. I do know that my general feeling is that there is a need, certainly a conceivable need for some sort of covert capability action. I know that in my view it has been abused in the _ past, but I think that abuse is just one of neglect as was going on. My own personal view is that rather than restrict the scope of action, the Scope of covert action, ‘that’ there ought to be an escalating requirement for accountability reaching. to the President himself, in the case of any significant to 1 . Senator Mondale. To me this is a pretty central point. Senator Baker... It‘is. Senator Mondale. ‘And. it is hard to define a standard that is mechanical, and ‘we all accept that, that what this word means is that in éffect we think covert action has been used in too many circumstances and unwisely frequently in the
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 rt, 18 ~19 20 el 22 235 24 29 13 past, and we would Like) to say that much more caution and. restraint should be applied in its exercise. in the future,. and. 1} I know there are some who think there should be no covert action. I am not willing to walk that line. | Senator Baker. I think I would take what you just said. The Chairman. Well,. why don't we go to the statute by which Congress has already enacted into law the test, which is a hell of a lot stronger than "extraordinary," for | Christ's sake. Senator Mondale. Is that the Hughes Act? What does it say? The Chairman. It says when the president determines that the national security, is imperiled -- what is the Hughes language?” : Mr. Aaron. The iighes’ language is that unless. there -- well, no funds be appropriated, et cetera, unless and until the President finds that such operation is important to the: national sécurity and the scope of such operation, and so forth and so forth. | Senator Mondale. No, I think this "extraordinary" is better. | | “The Chairman. Well, Tr agree that that's kind of weak. UI remembered it differently. | | Senator Baker. well, I disagree. I think this is pretty clearly in accord with what I just said.: Phat is, it HW 535244 ‘DocId: 32423512 Page 16
414. 1 L isn't a question of.whether you ought to restrict covert — 2 activity or not. We should rather escalate the level of a responsibility to the point where if you are going to use 4 significant covert action, it requires direct and express 5 written approval of the 'President of the United States, and 6 that is, in effect, what Hughes said. 7 ' The Chairman. Well, we do have that in the recommendations, 8 but even the Agency, even the Agency that.we are supposedly , 9 | investigating has not argued, to my knowledge, that: covert — »~ 7 10 || actions ought not to be ‘restricted to extraordinary situations. 11 Mr. Miller. That is correct. 12 ' The Chairman. And why we cannot say what the basic -- 13 the Agency itself basically agrees with -- I personally think 14 that these covert operations have been a national catastrophe. 15 || for the United States, and I think the last 25 years is damned 16 || good evidence of just. what has happened to us. by your notion 17 that we have to imitate the Russians in the treatment of 18 || foreign. people and adopt their methods and techniques. I-am 19 ‘against it, and f will say so in a separate, personal statementh 20 | But I should think! that, at least the Committee would be 21 willing to say chat covert operations ought not to be taken_ 22) in ordinary circumstances, and that is what this sentence ii 23 says. . i: 24 Senator Tower. may I suggest this, Mr. Chairman, if we 29 HW 53244  DoclId:324293512 Page 17 . '
10 ‘li (1 i213 14 15 16 17 18 | 19 21 22 295 -on., | : ‘but I am about to. ‘ repair to Dee's original recommendations in that we.take up this matter later on, that we reserve the right. to return - to this after we. have taken up the other aspect of it later ' 3 Senator Baker. That is all right with me. The Chairman. All right,’ we can do that. Tentatively we will pass over it. Senator Baker. So tentatively we are going to pass over’ The Chairman. Yes. And I think we have got to make some -- let's take our. decisions, as I. indicated to start with, and I would like to hold the roll, let's take our decisions tentatively, but let's make them. tt is lalways open -— . Senator Tower. with the understanding that we can reconsider it. | The Chairman. ves, that's right. Senator Tower. that's okay. | The Chairman. ALL those in favor of leaving this sentence|. as it presently stands, ‘raise their right hands. | Senator Tower. Why don't we just leave it and not raise the issue of striking it, but with the right to come back to. i bk it. Senator Baker. Well, I don't want to quarrel with my leader : 3 . HW 53244 DoclId: 32423512 Page 13
10 11 13 14 “15 16 17 13 |. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 : D ion Was CO he i _ | 16 . . Senator Tower. Who is your leader? Senator Baker. Well, you are running for it. I was just trying to get your attention. Senator Hart of Colorado. Please, boys, not here. Senator Baker. But I would be prepared to pass this, in my view, until the Agency has a chance to respond through the Miller-Rogovin route. My preference is not to tentatively or otherwise approve itior disapprove it, but if we. are going to put the question I am going to vote against it or not vote. | : | Senator Hart of Colorado. . there's no motion to strike. Let's adopt the Tower position. : Senator Tower. I just want to be able to come back to.it- and then revise it if we feel like we want to.- The Chairman. It is always open to the Committee to do that. : | | Senator Tower. “Tsee. No vote is required. “whe Chairman. All right. | | Then the language stands as it is, subject to the right of the Committee to return to it at 2 later date. - Senator Tower. I have got another one. The Chairman. On page 5? senator Tower. ves. "The Committee finds that the Constitution requires public disclosure and public authorization for an annual aggregate one, il ~ me - an @ HW 53244 Docld:32423512 Page 19 |
HW 535244 10 11 “Le 13) 14 15 16 ch, 18 19- 20 21 2 25 24 25 _the Congress when the Congress approves the authorization is really the policy matter that is béfore us rather.than the standard? the record of the Committee does not perhaps go quite far -enough. to iron out the national security implications of going } . beyond the aggregate figure. _There may be a way of resolving 20 a long discussion of what the figure is. What we are recommend}) | is that the aggregate. figure be published, and that in the future, the oversight committee establish the aggregat figure in the appropriate way, and that it be made known to: bills. Senator Mondale. Public disclosure, too. The Chairman. Right, with the public disclosure, and that discussion of whether the figure is $4.1 billion or $10 billion|, and depending on how it is broken down and how future committee { : act upon it, but it is ithe policy question that prevails. Senator Mondale. Does this approach meet the constitutions: Mr. Schwarz. In my judgment it does not. It is not. sufficient to put only the aggregate figure out, but the proble _4 is, understanding the conversation with Bill yesterday, that 7 . that tension between what. the Constitution apparently requires and the record of the Committee, would be ‘to say something like as a matter of principle the Committee believes the Constitution requires disclosures beyond the aggreqate figure, but the oversight committee should hold hearings on the argumen Docld:32423512 Page 23.
21 against doing that ta ste if there is a convincing case’ on national security grounds to go the other way. | But really, the Constitution is not going to be satisfied by an aggregate figure which lumps together a lot of agencies. The Chairman. But you see, what we do here in this | report, gentlemen, is we take the first step of publishing an aggregate figure.’ It has ‘not been done before. Then we - recommend that the oversight committee in the future not only repeat that process, but examine the extent to which a nore. ‘detailed figure could be presented, breaking down the various. components in conformity with the necessary national security considerations. | So we leave that properly, I think, to the oversight committee that will exercise jurisdiction, now, on the issue. We break the ground, we! make the recommendation, and I think it moves toward the satisfaction of the ‘constitutional require- ment. So for that reason I would hope that we could just. leave the sentence the way it is. ' Senator Huddleston. phe’ sentence to be accepted would be more accurate to say that the Constitution requires at least the public disclosure of an aggregate figure. ; Senator Tower. In fact, we tend to disclose aggregate figures rather’ than line items anyway. You don't bother with every nut and bolt you ‘huy off the shelf. | The Chairman. Yes. | | HW 53244 | Docld:32423512 Page 24
end 1 tin 2 HW 53244 10 “ii 12 13 14 15 16 17. 18 19 20 21 22 £35. 24 - 29 . and requires further thought in general, which we hope the gsi nor SECRET - why can't we adopt this suggestion and say the Committee finds that the Constitution. at least requires public disclosure and public authorization for an annual aggregate Figure of -- for. the United States National Intelligence activity, and: then. later on, the permanent committeé can look at that matter further and see the extent to which -- Mr. Schwarz. . And you do discuss that later on. The Chaiiman. We discuss it later on... Senator Baker. Could I make one minor suggestion? Although the issue presents: substantial constitutional questions oversight committee, if. created, will give it; we recommend on the basis of the present record that -- and then go ahead. — All I want to do is signal to the permanent committee that we are still troubled by this, we would like ‘to take a look at it. | The Chairman. Howard, we do that later in the report, do we not? Senator Huddleston. — We might flag that. The Chairman. This is just a summary | of our: Findings. Senator Baker. But if they are going to be published in’ this form, I would like that flagged, you know, so the veople ‘can understand. | ‘The Chairman. Well, I don't see any objection to that. Senator Baker. I don't think it'd change it. DocId: 32423512 Page 25
“oO fF G&G QO 10° 11 le 13 _ 14 _ 15 16 17 18 19° 20 21 22 295 25 ii between the Constitution and national security, just an. that an aggregate figure is required by the Constitution. too awkward, I would say, "and to which we invite the attention 23 The Chairman. well, why don't we say this -- Senator Huddleston. .Constitutional and security problems. Senator Baker. that's better. | | | The Chairman. why don't you make that just a short openin phrase on that sentence, and then say “?he Committee finds that the Constitution at least requires public disclosure and public authorization of the annual aggregate figure." | Senator Baker. All right, or "is of the opinion." Mr. Aaron. I am not too sure what the fragment is that will precede the sentence. Mr. Schwarz. You're saying that there is a tension announcement of the -- The Chairman. Howard, how did you put it? Senator Baker. "AL though there are substantial Constitutional and security issues unresolved, the Committee is of the opinion that" ae The Chairman. Unresolved as to the extent to which | the figures should be revealed, the Committee at least believes| & Senator Baker. And if -it canbe done without being. of any future permanent’ committee." The Chairman. Allright. . Well, no, I think that should come here, too, because that HW 535244 ‘Docld: 32423512 Page 26
10 11 |; 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 .. 22 250 24 24 puts it all together in one place. Why can't -- well, let's have an understanding with the staff that that provisions be rewritten in accordance with senator Baker's suggestion so that it says three things: one, that there are or there is a question as to the extent to which the Constitution requires it, an unresolved question as to the extent to which the Constitution requires the publication of, how much publication of figures; and that this is a matter that we-would call to the attention of the permanent committee to settle. Nevertheless, the Committee believes that the Constitution clearly requires or at least requires the publi- cation of an aggregate figure, and then’ the rest of the. paragraph. | | | Is that all right? Senator Baker. ALL right. The Chairman. Does that satisfy you, Senator Baker? Okay. | Senator Tower. Could I ask one question of counsel? The Chairman. Mr. Maxwell? | Senator Tower. Has there been an adequate court test -of this issue? Mr. Maxwell. No.. The courts have found in the only. tests that have come to it that the plaintiff did not have standing. There is another test case coming now in which the issue is the publication of the CIA budget, the aggregate CIA — HW 532449 DBDocld:32423512 Page 27
HW 535244 25 budget. It was filed about six months.ago, and there has been a substantial amount of material produced in conjunction with the case. There isa longer ‘piece that would be part of the Foreign and Military Subcommittee report which deals with that case and with the deposition of Mr. Colby in connection with | it, and his views on disclosure of the aggregate budget, but there has been no court case because of standing .problems. ‘Mr. Schwarz. It is basically political problems. The language of the Constitution seems to lodge with the Congress the issue. | | The Chairman. All right. Can we then turn to page 6, the 1947 National Security Act and related. legislation. | | I have some stylistic changes that I will give to the ‘staff. They are purely stylistic, on page 6." Is.there any suggestion for changes on page 6, I mean substantive changes. senator Mondale. We have two suggestions that voua, 1 | think, bring the Domestic’ and the Foreign and Military Subcommittees: recommendations together. ‘One on the bottom of ‘the first paragraph c on page 7, at the end of the first paragraph you would say "Recommendations of the Committee which are intended to protect the rights and _ liberties of Americans have been set forth in the Committee's domestic recommendations," so it just refers to that. . Dbocld:324293512 Page 28
HW 53244 10 il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ‘19 20 21 22 23 24 2 25 26 the Chairman. Bo you add that?’ Where? | Senator Mondale. Just ‘add that as an additional sentence after "order." And then. on page 8, following the senténce on Item 4, you. would say "These have been spelled out in the recommendations of the Domestic Section. of the Report." That way they track. Mr. Aaron. May I just make a point in regard to 4? You will have to sharpen: that to say those that affect. . the domestic aspects, because there are other limitations that are proposed, and it goes to 4, | Senator Mondale. That! s all. right. This is just stylistic,. to make it track. the Chairman, All ‘right. on believe my changes here are all, Stylistic. I just ‘called them to the attention of the staff. Any other suggestions here? If not, can we go to Section 3, beginning -on page 9? Mr. Miller. There is one small point ‘on the word "mechanism," and we need.a. bit of expansion, but it is the eet ne at aetna are ee tee —— Mr. Smothers. Well, there is something here that appears to be out of order. What appears here at page 120 at D probably should come up to page 8 because we are talking about the Act, on the secrecy and authorized disclosure. To -make this track, since we are making the recommendations. on Docld: 32423512 Page 29°
| ed 10: 11 12 13 14 15 16 1? 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 29 27 the act here on page 8, it appears to me that D should come up to join that as a No. 5, the substance of what it Says, and . that we may have to work: with it. Mr. Miller. Well, understand that the recasting, it is only that portion of the 1947 act which affects intelligence. | Most of the National Security Act affects the organization . of the Defense Department. Mr. Smothers. But on the secrecy disclosure, it appears that what we have at 120 would track that, and since we are talking about the act here early on on page 8, we have -- we would add this 5 early on and pick up what is at Don 120. Senator Mondale. Mr. Chairman? Senator Huddleston. I think Bill Miller's point was that the recommendation, beginning on page 13, refer only. to the National Security Council portion of the Act. This section would refer to'any secrets in the intelligence communit as I understand it. Senator Mondale. And I was wondering if for that reason we could hold it until the last, because the Domestic ‘Committee will be interested in this, too. The Chairman. But this is a matter that relates directly to the liberties of individual Americans. Any kind . of a secrecy act that imposes criminal penalties goes to the heart of the question of individual: liberties, and I think in accordance with the decision reached yesterday, matters of HW 53244 Docld: 32423512 Page 30
16 17 18 19 20 el 22 23 24 29 that later, but that we are going to flag it because it appears. ‘decision at the proper time, we will insert whatever that decis 28 this kind should be taken up when we consider the domestic reports, that we consider them together. - Mr. Smothers. I am not necessarily endorsing them, Mr. chairman. what. we are saying, apparently, however, is here are defects. in the '47 Act in terms of flagging these big ones. I don't see that it is inconsistent with, if we arrive . at the use of a secrecy provision, that further discussion of to be a point. | Mr. Schwarz. As an organizational aS opposed’ to a sub- stantive point. The Chairman. Organizationally, yes, I agree with that, but let us simply flag it here, and then when we reach our Mr. Smothers. . thank you, Mr. Chairman. whe Chairman. All right, let's go on into 9. Any proposed changes. on page 9? | (Pause) | ‘The Chairman. I have one question on page 9. When you get down to, in the second paragraph on the bottom where it says "The National Security Council's principal vehicle for dealing with clandestine activities, the 40 Committee and its. predecessors, were not only a mechanism for reviewing and making recommendations with regard to the approval of covert | WW 53244) Docld: 32423512 Page 31
. 5 . - . rm ki SECKE 29 1 action projects, but served until 1974 to insulate the Presiden 2. from apparent involvement in the approval process." And then Pe) you've got an asteris, on 1974, and then down at: the bottom 4 you have "Cite and explain Hughes-Ryan Amendment." 5. I didn't quite understand the relationship of the Hughes- Ryan Amendment to the insulation of the President from the “approval. “Mr. Aaron. The Hughes~Ryan Amendment requires a President to certify. 10 “the Chairman. I understand that. 11 Senator Mondale. And we don't change..that... le. Mr. Aaron. And we don't change that. It just means that 13 from then on his deniability was gone. . | Mr. Miller. You might add one word and say "apparent involvement and accountability." ia 15 16 “Senator Schweiker. “And requires reporting. 17 the Chairman. Well, all of that can be. explained in the 18 cootnote. I just needed that explained to me. It's all right, 19 I understand it now. 20 Any proposed changes on page 10? 21. Senator Baker. (Mr. Chairman. 22 “the Chairman. Yes, Senator Baker. 23 Senator Baker. ‘Tr don't think so. 7 was about to suggest 24 that we cast this page mostly in the past tense, in view | 25 || of the apparent effort by the White House now to upgrade the HW 53244 Docld:32423512 Page 32
10 il l2 130 14 (15 16 17 18 19 — 20 el Le 235 RA 25° 30 staffing and skills for the group at the White House, but - that is important enough to go into thig section. The Chairman. r have a couple of stylistic changes just for clarification. I have nothing substantive. Do the members have any recommendations or amendments to offer on page 10? | (pause) The Chairman. If not, let's move on to page ll. (Pause) | The Chairman. Do the members have any proposals or changes to make on page ll? | Mr. Schwarz. Just one minor thing, the "or directed to United States citizens," relates. to some of the things that we are going to table there, domestic counterintelligence, but it is just a parenthetical. There are later some recommen- dations that we would propose to table. The Chairman. -But you have no objection to this. Mr. Schward. ‘No, this is just a’ statement of fact. The Chairman. very well. Let's turn to page 12, ‘Senator Baker. I have one here, Mr. Chairman: The Chairman. All right. | Senator Baker. The same ‘thing before. ‘I think you are taking a shot at the President in the language there and I | ‘don't think it's necessary. | | | The Chairman. Where? HW 532744 Docld:324273512 Page 33
no, Gi LO 11 12 13° 14 15 - 16 17 18 19 20 21 22° 29 24 29 +P SECRET 31 Senator Baker. "The language of the Presidential order is ambigious," and, “'Manage' and ‘coordinate! are: inherently slip- pery ." Now, surely you can say it better chan that. ‘Even Lif you disagree with it, you don't have to.use ‘that language. | “I don't want to even put in "ambiguous." Senator Mondale. You can say: "managé and coordinate are Senator Baker. Requireing further inquiry and definition. The Chairman. -Are _- i Senator Hart of Colorado. Are vague. “The Chairman. Are vauge words, ' Senator Baker. .I like "general" better. Senator Tower. I always thought that’ "manage" is.a slippery word. - | | | | | The Chairman. We're taking out slippery words. We are taking out instead of inherently slippery, we are putting in vague. | | Senator Baker. Well, what do we have? | The Chairman. "Manage and coordinate are vague words and have proven to be so in matters of intelligence. Questions| remain about the operation of the CFI and its relation to..the current responsibilities of the DCI,” and so forth. They are. vague words « Senator Baker. Well, I-think that. carries an implication of sorts Why.don't we say "general in nature?" Humor me a little. HW 53244 Docld: 32423512 Page 34
1 The Chairman, ALL right. 2 All right, "manage and. coordinate are"-- 3 - Mr. Smothers. -- “terms which are inherently ‘general 4 in nature." | . oo |e _—— | 5 . “The Chairman. All right, "terms inherently general in — . a 6 nature." — . , senator Baker. All right. a) a The Chairman. All right. Senator Baker. What are we doing about the "ambiguous?" The Chairman. The way we have it now, "However, the language of the Presidential order is ambiguous and much will depend on how it is in fact implemented. ‘Manage! ana” ‘coordinate ' are terms inherently general in nature.” The two sentences go properly together. | | Senator Baker. 1 don't think "ambiguous": could be uncertain. ‘I think "ambiguous" implies conflicts. Mr. Schwarz. How about saying} “whose meaning’ depends - on their application." ” | | The Chairman. Well, make that a whole sentence. Mr. Schwarz. “Are general words whose meaning" -- senator Baker. We are up to ambiguous. | “the Chairman. "However, the language of the Presidential order --"" . | Mr. Aaron. "Is such that much will depend on how it is. interpreted. " er ee CO, HW 53244 DocId:32423512 Page 35
oH Gi on (o>) © ~1O ll 12 13 14, 15 16 17 19 “20 -R1 22 23 24 . 25 HW 535244 ‘Docld: 32423512 Page 36. al word "commended" there? Senator Huddleston. Does anybody want to object to the ‘Senator Baker. I hadn't planned on it. The Chairman.. “Is such that much will depend on how it is| pameeenentnemnre ope engncnann rersen ne get at rn ne ay em eran ane —ereetanntteeay in fact implemented," and then we will go on as agreed. Anything else on this page? Then let's turn to page 13. Do the members. have any recommendations or suqgestions on . page 13? I have a number of stylistic changes. Senator Baker. Charlie brings. out the question on. page 12 of what "kitchen cabinet" means. I guess we all agree it “means an unofficial group of advisors who confer with the President from time to time, sometimes in the kitchen. Is that what we are talking about? The Chairman. You know what kitchen cabinet means. Senator Baker. I know what kitchen cabinet means. I jus a wanted to make sure you have the same understanding. ‘the Chairman. All right. If there are no suggestions for changes on page 13, let's turn to page 14. | oe Senator Mondale. I would like to add at the end of recommendation 6 the following language: "the Attorney General, as the Committee set forth in its domestic recommen- dations, should have ultimate responsibility for ensuring that
LO me 12 13 | 414 15° 16 17 18 - 19> 20 aL 22 29 24 RO 34 such actions taken within the United States or affecting U.S. citizens comply with the Constitution and. laws of the United “States. As to all other matters, he shall function as an’”” advisor to the NSC on questions of law." The Chairman. That appeals to me. Senator Baker. Where are you. putting that? Senator Mondale. That would be the last, following 6. Mr. diGenova. Do you want to strike the last part of the | -sentence that's already there that says he's there to protect the Constitution? Mr. Schwarz. No, this is to add to that. The theory -is under our recommendations he is given new and greater responsibilities to make sure that happens. Mr. diGenova. Well, it already exists. That is what it says. . Mr. Inderfurth. “He is to be made an advisor under that? Mr. Schwarz. It is to make sure that he doesn't function’ solely as an advisor. _ The Chairman. The importance of Senator Mondal's suggestion is that he would serve as an advisor in matters othe than the treatment given to American citizens within the | United States, in which case he. would. be the final authority as to its constitutionality. Senator ‘Mondale. That-is correct except that it would also involve the treatment accorded to U.S. citizens abroad.. | “HW 53244 Docld:32423512 Page 37-
Se ECKE 35 1 The Chairman. Well, the Constitution extends to -them 2 abroad. I think it is a very good addition. 3 Is there any objection to it? | 4 Without objection, it is adopted. 5. Is there any other suggestion on this page? If not, 6 let's go to page 15. va : Senator Schweiker. The only question I: have on 15, and 8 I don't feel strongly about it, is does the Director of OMB. 9° really belong on that Committee, and what is the: reason for 10 | putting him on there? 1 Mr. Aaron. Well, let me say first of all the President “12 has now placed the Director of OMB on that Committee ‘as an 13 || observer and our discussions with OMB I think indicated that 14 that was a helpful thing. I might ask Rick to speak to it. 15. Mr. Inderfurth. The financial considerations are apparent 16 That is one reason he is placed on it. 17 of}, Senator Schweiker. He is on there now? Le . Mr. Inderfurth. Yes, he is being placed on there by “19 Executive Order. | | | 20. : Senator Schweiker. Well, then, I have no problem. 21 a Mr. Inderfurth. Also, there is one other thing. You 22 | get an outside observer, somebody not involved day to day in 23 |l clandestine activities, and that should be a healthy | 24 addition. That's why he was placed on. | 25 Oo Senator Baker. Mr. Chairman, 1 have a general question. HW 53244 Docld:32493512 Page 38
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 el 22 23 24. 29 36 We know what the situation is. Now we have a pretty good idea what it has been’in the last two decades, but we ought to “think about how much we are restricting the actions of the future Presidents. Presidents. traditionally have changed these groups. Kennedy, for instance, brought his brother in, obviously because he trusted him and knew his brother and didn't have to get acquainted with somebody else, and I wonder if by statute we aren't severely limiting the flexi- bility of future chief executives by designating so many to constitute. And later on, for instance, we say down here the Chairman of the group shall be the Administration spokesman. | | Senator Hart of Colorado. Are you worried that too many people are on there, or that he can't add others? | Senator Baker. what he cannot add others -- well, both | things. ; - Senator Hart of Colorado. But the recommendation doesn't prohibit him. “Senator Baker. I suppose not, but you are going to get a pretty good sized crowd. One thing I might say in context while we are discussing this, the question of Senate confirmation. We are also digging down pretty deep into the bark, into the number of people we are proposing to be confirmed,. Senator Hart of Colorado. He has already proposed that HW 53244 Docld:32423512 Page 39 .