Congress long has leaked like a proverbial sieve. That’s not
always a bad thing. A lot of secrets should not be kept by
government. But some are. It’s time to apply the same security
standards to legislators and their staffs as to other federal
employees and government contractors.
The poster child for reform is Rep. William Jefferson (D- La.),
who in 2006 was discovered with $90,000 in his freezer. Perhaps he
simply doesn’t believe in banks. Or perhaps he was bribed. His
constituents, who reelected him, apparently believe the former, but
the FBI is conducting an investigation based on a sting involving
an African technology company. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi removed
Jefferson from the influential Ways and Means Committee, presumably
suspecting corruption.
Jefferson might enjoy a presumption of innocence in the
courtroom, but there’s enough evidence of his guilt to bar him from
sensitive legislative work. Yet Speaker Pelosi has decided to place
him on the Homeland Security Committee, a panel with even more
critical duties than Ways and Means.
Jefferson is well qualified to handle homeland security matters,
she explained, because his New Orleans district was badly hit by
Hurricane Katrina. Perhaps the opportunity for financial corruption
is less on Homeland Security than Ways and Means, though the former
distributes billions in grants to local and state governments and
contracts to private companies. Moreover, the Committee deals with
matters of genuine national security — preventing and responding
to terrorist attacks.
Although her decision was ratified by the Democratic caucus, GOP
members plan on forcing an unusual floor vote. As Rep. Patrick
McHenry (R-N.C.) observed, “You gotta wonder where Jefferson’s
gonna store all those homeland security secrets.” The outcome is
uncertain. Democratic leaders have threatened to retaliate,
pointing out that two GOP members were recently convicted of crimes
while others have been (and some remain under) investigation. But
this circumstance merely offers another reason to limit
congressional access to sensitive information.
The problem is not partisan, but institutional. Neither party
has a monopoly on good legislators or good governance.
For instance, the Democrats also have Alcee Hastings (Fl.),
removed from his federal judgeship in 1989 by the previous
Democratic Congress over bribery allegations (which he beat in
court). Speaker Pelosi had the good grace to deny Hastings the
chairmanship of the House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee.
Other dubious characters with ethical conflicts are Alan Mollohan
(W.Va.) and Sen. Robert Menendez (N.J.). And let’s not forget Rep.
John Murtha (Pa.).
The GOP suffered a sleaze epidemic last session, with
Representatives Randy “Duke” Cunningham and Bob Ney going to jail
for corruption. Curt Weldon (defeated) and Jerry Lewis (reelected)
ended up under investigation for possible misbehavior. Majority
Leader Rep. Tom DeLay was forced from power after being indicted on
political charges in Texas. Personal scandal enveloped Mark Foley
(who had been dabbling with young male pages) and Don Sherwood
(sued for allegedly beating his mistress).
Financial venality and sexual cupidity do not necessarily equate
to treason or misuse of classified material. However, someone
willing to sell his office for money might also be willing to sell
his country. Someone with little personal self-control might not be
the best person to whom to entrust the nation’s secrets. Moreover,
someone engaged in unsavory activity might be willing to sacrifice
his country to prevent disclosures that would destroy his political
career,
Even more important is the question of ideology. The point is
decidedly not that being a liberal, or opposing the Iraq war, or
even being a socialist makes one unpatriotic. (Extremists on the
right no less than on the left can wish America ill.) Sen. Bernie
Sanders (I-Vt.) might be prepared to ruin the American economy, but
no one thinks he is likely to deliver the nation’s secrets to a
foreign power. However, not so trustworthy are legislative
advocates of the authoritarian and naive left. Sadly, such people
are not unknown on Capitol Hill.
Consider Ron Dellums, long-time congressman newly elected at
Oakland’s Mayor. A member of the Democratic Socialist Organizing
Committee and Democratic Socialists of America, Dellums was the
first open socialist to be elected since World War II. Under the
seniority system he took over the chairmanship of the House Armed
Services Committee (which he lost when the GOP took control of
Congress in 1994).
At best, he displayed stunning naivete. In 1982 he traveled to
Grenada, affirming that there was no military use for the airport
under construction, a claim disproved after the U.S. ousted the
communist regime. Dellums reported back to Congress on his
“findings,” a draft of which he first sent to Grenadan Prime
Minister Maurice Bishop for review.
The American invasion brought to light a letter from Dellums’
chief of staff, Carlottia Scott, to Bishop declaring that “Ron has
become truly committed to Grenada, and has some positive political
thinking to share with you. … He’s really hooked on you and
Grenada and doesn’t want anything to happen to building the
Revolution and making it strong. He really admires you as a person
and even more so as a leader with courage and foresight, principles
and integrity. … The only other person that I know of that he
expresses such admiration for is Fidel.”
Dellums is gone, but his successor, Barbara Lee, is a member of
the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and seemingly no less
left-wing than Dellums. Leftist-turned-conservative David Horowitz
claims to have met Lee at the Black Panthers headquarters of Huey
Newton years ago.
Voters are entitled to elect whomever they want as
representatives. Legislators are entitled to choose whomever they
wish as leaders. But congressmen are not entitled to automatic
access to classified information.
STAFFERS ON CRITICAL COMMITTEES who handle sensitive material are
investigated and provided with security clearances. Members of
Congress are not. Nor are their personal staffs.
The result is a huge security hole on Capitol Hill. Members of
Congress, irrespective of party, rarely are elected because they
are trustworthy and responsible. The political process, alas,
rewards other “skills.” Yet today simply being elected yields
access to material denied to most Americans. There is little to
stop a venal, irresponsible, or hostile member from disseminating
classified information for economic or political profit, or
ideological gain.
Even a responsible member served by staffers who have received
official clearances may be ill served by an aide in his personal
office — a chief of staff, legislative director, or someone else.
Having received no special scrutiny to win access to sensitive
material, legislators may treat such information more casually than
justified. Staffers report that representatives of foreign powers
sometimes troll for classified information in congressional
in-boxes.
It doesn’t much matter, in terms of national security, who sits
on the Agriculture or Education and Labor Committees, for instance.
But even largely mundane committees sometimes have at least one
subcommittee dealing with sensitive matters: the House
Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, the Senate Judiciary
Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Homeland Security.
Moreover, the Committees on Homeland Security, Armed Services,
Foreign Affairs/Foreign Relations, and Intelligence regularly deal
with sensitive matters. Consider the four subcommittees under the
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence: Terrorism, Human
Intelligence, Analysis, and Counterintelligence; Technical and
Tactical Intelligence; Intelligence Community Management; and
Oversight and Investigations.
Should the American people be pleased at the thought of Alcee
Hastings serving on this Committee? Would they feel comfortable
with William Jefferson, Duke Cunningham, Don Sherwood, or John
Murtha sitting on this panel? Or James Traficant, Ozzie Myers, or
Bob Ney? Would Americans feel secure knowing that these legislators
had appointed staffers to these committees?
Voters can elect whomever they want. Legislators can choose
whomever they want for committee membership. But security
investigations should be standard for members and staffers.
Although concerns over separation of powers might limit executive
branch prerogatives, Congress could order such investigations.
Clearing everyone on Capitol Hill would be quite a task — 535
legislators and at least 16,000 staffers. However, formal
clearances at least could be required for members of leadership and
their top staffers, members and as well as staffers working on
sensitive panels, and top personal staffers in the offices of such
members. There should be no more automatic access to sensitive
information, whatever the level, whoever the person. Similar checks
should be initiated for chairman and ranking members, and relevant
staff, of other committees and subcommittees; although such people
might not normally come into contact with classified material, they
constitute the leadership of Congress.
Moreover, federal investigations should conduct a superficial
review of all members — who, after all, will be voting on national
security matters and will be positioned to see sensitive documents
— as well as their senior staff. The Justice Department should
look for obvious security problems requiring further investigation.
Finally all offices should be briefed on security procedures and
provided with safes. Ultimately, legislators would continue to
decide what member served on what committees and what staffers
served what members, but access to classified material would
require clearance from independent investigators.
It seems likely that William Jefferson is a crook. Absent a
conviction, his fellow legislators should accept the decision of
his constituents to return him to office. But they should not
reward him with a sensitive committee assignment. If he isn’t fit
to write America’s tax laws, he isn’t fit to oversee America’s
anti-terrorism efforts.
But the problem runs beyond just one corrupt congressman.
Capitol Hill might always leak, but it still could take its
security responsibilities more seriously. We should hold elected
officials to the same clearance standards to which we hold everyone
else.
