Ensign has misgivings about intelligence reform bill

Benjamin Grove

Friday, Dec. 3, 2004 | 11:15 a.m.

WASHINGTON -- Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., has misgivings about the intelligence reform legislation set to be the subject of a final-hour showdown in Congress next week.

The high-stakes bill, which aims to overhaul U.S. intelligence gathering, has been frozen in Congress. The Senate approved the legislation Oct. 6, and Senate and House negotiators have crafted a compromise version of the bill, which President Bush supports.

But the full House has not voted because two key GOP House members object. Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., believes the bill must include tighter immigration controls.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., is worried about the Pentagon relinquishing spy agency control. He said the new intelligence community structure would impede the flow of intelligence data to battlefield officers.

President Bush told lawmakers today he is working as hard as possible to strike a deal on legislation to implement the Sept. 11 commission's recommendations on how to make the country safer from terrorist attack.

Bush told House and Senate members at the White House that "he's working on it as hard as he can," said Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., who briefed reporters after the session. "We've talked to other people who are working on it, progress is being made, and we hope that it can be finished up (next) week."

Meanwhile, Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said his one objection to the compromise bill was resolved. He asked last month that the bill keep money for combat support agencies flowing through the Pentagon instead of going through the proposed national intelligence director.

"The issue that I specifically addressed in a letter to Chairman Hunter has been accommodated, I'm told, in the bill," Myers said, although he refused to endorse the compromise.

Ensign, who voted for the bill, said it's "not all bad" if the legislation fails to pass this year.

Ensign said lawmakers need to spend more time thinking through a more carefully constructed bill next year.

"This is so complex," he said. "I think there are some big unknowns in the bill we passed. If I knew them, I would tell you. We pushed this thing through pretty quickly."

Ensign offered tepid support for the bill's key tenet that creates a new post of director of national intelligence. He said the provision is "about the best answer we have right now."

"I wish I felt more solidly," Ensign said. "I don't know if what we were creating there was better or worse."

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., supports the bill, although he also said it wasn't ideal. He said he spoke to congressional leaders, including Senate Republican leader Bill Frist of Tennessee this week, and that the bill's chances of passing are good.

The bill is "not as good as when it left the Senate," because it doesn't do enough to reform the way Congress oversees intelligence, Reid said. But it includes other key changes, he said. It is important to pass the bill next week because it would get bogged down next session, Reid said.

Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., a former Air Force pilot who flew reconnaissance photography missions and whose eight-year term on the House Intelligence Committee ends this year, supports the concept of a new central director with budget and policy-making powers. But Gibbons was "dismayed" the immigration provisions advocated by Sensenbrenner were not part of the compromise bill, he said in a written statement.

Gibbons declined to be interviewed this week about the bill. Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., supports the bill. He has not supported the immigration provisions as part of this bill, spokesman Adam Mayberry said. Porter believes the bill will not hinder the flow of intelligence to battlefield troops, Mayberry said.

Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., supports the bill and said there was no need to delay action until next year.

Bush's "winking and nodding" aren't enough to force Republican leaders to call for a vote, Berkley said. Bush should invite Hunter and Sensenbrenner to the White House for a chat, she said.

"That's all it would take," Berkley said.

Berkley said she agrees with Sensenbrenner that there needs to be tighter controls on illegal immigration, but not at the cost of the bill. She said Hunter was merely trying to protect the Defense Department in a turf battle.

"He's a front man for the Pentagon who doesn't want to lose one bit of his power when it comes to the intelligence community," Berkley said.