Senator ALLEN. When do you think the report of the Select Committee on Intelligence Activity will be available?

Senator GOLDWATER. That is a good question. I can only tell you that I don't know. We have had meetings scheduled almost daily that are canceled. There will probably be three sections of the report: one containing staff reports, one on domestic activities, one on foreign military activities. We were supposed to have completed this report about a month ago. I see no possibility of publishing the entire report in the next 2 or 3 weeks.

Senator ALLEN. Has it been turned over to the printer? Has it been finally edited?

Senator GOLDWATER. Some of it has. The total amounts to about 2,500 typewritten pages. It will be a massive publication. It will probably rot in the basement of the Old Senate Office Building.

Senator ALLEN. You suggest that we ought to wait until this report is made available and also until after the committee studying the jurisdiction of committees has an opportunity to make some sort of recommendation, because this does certainly take away the jurisdiction of at least three standing committees in the Senate now. Senator GOLDWATER. That is true.

Senator ALLEN. The fact that this bill has had to go not only to the Judiciary Committee and the Rules Committee and legitimate criticisms have been made of the bill would certainly indicate that if we just turn this jurisdiction over to one committee and concentrate it in one committee, we might find them recommending action that possibly might need more consideration.

Senator GOLDWATER. I would agree with that.

Senator ALLEN. I notice, too, from your statement the veto power that could be exercised by this committee, not only direct veto power over activities, but the one-man veto of the release of information which, of course, would torpedo any effort that the intelligence agencies would want to perform. That would certainly, it seems to me, be a legitimate criticism.

So you see no reason based on your service on the select committee, you see nothing in the present situation involving our intelligence agencies that demands this accelerated action with regard to this resolution? You don't think the national security will be jeopardized by the failure to act promptly on this resolution?

Senator GOLDWATER. I think we would be much better off without any action. If the subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee charged with oversight on the CIA is at fault, then we can call on the Armed Services Committee to correct that. I don't know who can be the judge of whether we are at fault or not. I am one member of that subcommittee who frankly-I don't want to know what the CIA is up to. The only way the CIA will get into trouble is through the White House, because when ordered they have to salute and go and do the job. That is where all the criticism of the CIA stems from.

Then you ask yourself: What would I have done if I were President at that time? It is a pretty interesting thing as to what you might have to do to overthrow a foreign government which might be a threat to our freedom and security. You don't talk to the editor of the New York Times, Newsweek, the Washington Post, Time, and Harpers. You talk to the National Security Council and your staff and the

Senate, which you are charged to do in the Constitution, and you make up your mind. If at any time during the discussion word gets out, then you abandon the whole thing. It can't be done unless there is

secrecy.

Senator ALLEN. This bill would make it possible for every Member of the Senate to get sensitive information, information which the committees said should not be made public, information which shouldn't be published. I asked Senator Church of the select committee whether he thought any Senator could properly come and ask for information, but he did not seem to feel that any Senator would have that right, that the committee would decide whether or not it should be released, but it looked like you all had a much tighter restriction on the work of your committee than is provided for in this proposed oversight committee.

Senator GOLDWATER. I will say this for the committee: The Senate committee has done a pretty good job of keeping secrets. Of course, the House just blew it wide open. But I will remind you of the action that took place on the floor the morning we had the executive session to discuss the assassination. Through some very clever parliamentary maneuvering the report was issued in spite of the fact that the CIA objected to it because it did contain secret material. And, the President objected to the release, but we, in effect, violated a rule of the Senate and that document was published despite the Senate rules.

A committee cannot publish willy-nilly anything it wants to. It has to get permission of the Senate, and we didn't give it. That is a very interesting thing to read sometime and realize that by just getting the floor, we were prevented from stopping action on that report. Senator GRIFFIN. Would the Senator yield?

Senator ALLEN. Yes.

Senator GRIFFIN. Before the Senator leaves that point, I would like to inquire about the provision to give the committee the power to, by majority vote, make public classified information. Yesterday when Senator Church was here, I asked him why was it necessary since he took the position that the committees already had that power—and that is his position, incidentally

Senator GOLDWATER. Yes.

Senator GRIFFIN. He makes that assertion under the rules of the Senate even though the language is clearly to the contrary, so I can't understand how he-or the Parliamentarian-could arrive at that interpretation. They claim under the rules of the Senate, the committees have authority to make public information.

Senator GOLDWATER. That was a subject of long and hard debate. There were Members of both parties opposed to the release of the information. The chairman maintained we did have that power. I think the rules of the Senate are just as clear as print.

Senator GRIFFIN. Didn't the press have that assassination report before the Senate got through with its debate?

Senator GOLDWATER. Didn't the press?

Senator GRIFFIN. Yes.

Senator GOLDWATER. Yes; it was released immediately. The Senate under the rule, and Doc, back there, probably wrote it, the Senate sitting in a closed session to hear secret material has to vote whether or not that material can be released, and a vote was never taken. In fact,

a proposal was never made because we couldn't get the floor to make it. The leadership took care of that. The report was available almost as soon as the session closed. I think it was in the Press Gallery shortly after it closed.

Senator GRIFFIN. My impression is that they had it before the session was closed, but I don't think I could prove it.

Senator GOLDWATER. It could be.

Senator ALLEN. I think it was handed to the press, but it was embargoed.

Senator Goldwater, I know that you don't favor setting up an oversight committee, but assuming that one should be set up, should it not be a joint committee, joint with the House?

Senator GOLDWATER. I don't feel that I can comment on that. The way the House has abused this whole affair-I have got great confidence in the House. But there are more of them than there are of us, so they have more troublemakers than we have.

Senator ALLEN. What about the ratio situation?

Senator GOLDWATER. I would say it is about the same.

Senator ALLEN. What about those who see some defects legislativewise in not having parallel committees ?

Senator GOLDWATER. I don't think you will ever get away with one committee, and if you are going to wind up with two, I think you are safer with a joint committee.

Senator ALLEN. Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Griffin.

Senator GRIFFIN. Senator Goldwater, you made one statement that bothers me. I think you said something along the line as a member of the Armed Services Oversight committee, you didn't want to know some of the things that the CIA was doing. I really think in all deference, and with respect for your viewpoint, that that is not a posture that the Senate can accept. I would like to think that there is a small group of very responsible colleagues who do know what is going on and I am willing to repose some trust in them, but if nobody in the Senate knows what the CIA is doing, then I really think we are in a position where we have to do something about it.

Senator GOLDWATER. We know generally what is going on. I am talking about the details of a clandestine or covert operation. I can think of one that I can't discuss that I had to be overseas in a battlefield to see and it is still not known. I don't think it should be.

I don't mean we shouldn't know how much money they spend. We know that every year, but getting into the details of agent operationsthis doesn't take place in any country that I know of.

KGB is not held responsible to anybody except maybe the politburo, and I don't think intelligence should be bandied about and it would be. Senator GRIFFIN. It is hard to accept the idea with the constitutional responsibility that the Congress has that we would accept the proposition that only people in the executive branch are able to handle intelligence or be conscious of it.

Senator GOLDWATER. I said before you came in that I am very pleased with what we have now, and if the Senate feels that the Armed Services Committee should be brought up to date on it, if they don't feel we are doing the job, then I think we should be talked to. As far as I am concerned, I think the subcommittee of the Armed Services Com

mittee does the job it is supposed to do. As far as the Constitution, the intelligence problems we have could not have been foreseen by the Founding Fathers.

Senator GRIFFIN. This resolution goes so far that this constitutes the entire membership of the Senate: "The Committee on Intelligence Activity or any such member of such committee may make any information available to any other Member of the Senate."

Senator GOLDWATER. Or the public. It doesn't say that.

Senator GRIFFIN. I suppose a Senator is supposed to be slapped on the wrist if he makes it public, and the Committee on Standards and Conduct can find out about it but to take the position that all 100 Senators know it and it can't get out is naive in the very extreme. Senator GOLDWATER. It is a very dangerous resolution. Senator GRIFFIN. Very dangerous.

The CHAIRMAN. The Senate has just approved Senate Resolution 109, which would establish a select committee to study the jurisdiction of committees, and report back to the Senate recommended revisions therein. Do you believe that that committee ought to take a look at this particular problem as well?

Senator GOLDWATER. I sure do. I talked to a member of the Foreign Relations Committee yesterday on that subject. You know, serving on the Armed Services Committee, they are slowly moving into our field. There are many other committees moving into the Armed Serv ices Committee's jurisdiction. I would hate to think that other committees would undertake oversight over the intelligence community. but I think the purview and purpose of Senate Resolution 109 should certainly include a good hard look at this.

Senator GRIFFIN. Do yo think the Armed Services Committee could carry out its basic responsibility for defense and deciding on weapons systems if they weren't concurrently exercising jurisdiction over the CIA, and foreign intelligence to make a determination as to what was actually required?

Senator GOLDWATER. No; we couldn't. As you know, our rather regular CIA briefings on weapons and other matters are very important to us in our making decisions. There is some of that information that I think could be made public to the advantage of the United States. We have had long arguments on that. On the other hand there is much that we have to keep secret.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Pell, do you have a question?

Senator PELL. No.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Goldwater. We appreciate you being here.

Senator GOLDWATER. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Huddleston.

STATEMENT OF HON. WALTER D. HUDDLESTON, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY

Senator HUDDLESTON. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. while I principally want to address one specific section of the proposed Senate Resolution 400. I would like at the beginning to assert my strong belief that the formation of a separate intelligence oversight committee is essential.

I recognize the difficulties that formation of such a committee proposes. I recognize the conflicting jurisdictions that are involved. I think the manner in which the Chairman has detailed these conflicts has been very helpful. I recognize the questions regarding Senate rules which Senator Byrd delineated yesterday and the various problems that would have to be resolved before this committee could be formed. I know there are other problems, too. What is being proposed in Senate Resolution 400 is not the formation of an ordinary committee for an ordinary job. Oversight of the intelligence community of this Nation is vastly different from oversight of the Agriculture Department or HEW, or any other agency of the Government that operates in the open and operates pursuant to specific legislation and well within accepted constitutional bounds.

If one thing has been learned during the course of our investigation into the intelligence community, it is that this Nation does need a very strong and effective intelligence operation. This operation has to perform to a great extent in secrecy and to carry on activities that are contrary to some of the normal precepts of what democratic systems ought to carry on.

As a matter of fact, the entire operation of a secret agency is almost anathema to our Government, but in the intelligence area, secrecy is necessary and we have to recognize that.

Everybody in the Congress and certainly everybody in the Senate ought to understand that oversight of this type of operation is necessary. Indeed, those who are engaged in these services nearly all of the agencies have indicated to us on the Select Committee that they would welcome better oversight, they would welcome better rules and regulations and laws to operate under. It is my judgment that the way to get better rules and better regulation and better laws is through a separate committee that has primary responsibility for that task, a committee that has the tools to complete its task, that has jurisdiction over the operations and can make proper recommendations to the Senate and to the Congress as to what ought to be done.

Moreover, I am particularly interested in one section of Senate Resolution 400, that which is sometimes referred to as the RothHuddleston amendment and which appears in section 7(c), (d) and (e) of the resolution as reported from the Committee on Government Operations.

As a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities, I have become more keenly aware than ever of the need for a strong and effective U.S. intelligence community, responsive to the needs of both national security and the Constitution. I am also, however, convinced that Congress must take upon its shoulders a larger responsibility for overseeing the activities of the various intelligence agencies through the creation of an effective oversight mechanism such as that proposed in Senate Resolution 400. This, in turn, requires that the Senate be advised of the general nature and extent of intelligence matters. And, that in turn, requires that the Senate keep secrets and control itself internally, which is what our amendment seeks to insure.

Basically, the Roth-Huddleston amendment is designed to provide a practical, workable system of sanctions which could be utilized should we have the unfortunate experience of an unauthorized dis