Department of Justice Authorization

Present: Representatives Rodino, Kastenmeier, Edwards, Conyers, Mann, Danielson, Drinan, Jordan, Holtzman, Hall, Gudger, Volkmer, Harris, Ertel, Evans, McClory, Railsback, Wiggins, Fish, Butler, Cohen, Moorhead, Hyde, and Sawyer.

Staff present: Alan A. Parker, general counsel; Garner J. Cline, staff director; and Franklin G. Polk, associate counsel.

Chairman RODINO. The meeting will come to order.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.

Mr. MOORHEAD. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous consent that this meeting be covered by a photographer to take still pictures. Chairman RODINO. Without objection, it is so ordered.

It is the intention of the Chair to proceed with today's hearing phase immediately following some business that we have got to conduct in order to preserve the confidentiality of some materials which are classified as "top secret." I believe it is important to the committee for consideration of the matters that may come before it that this matter is dealt with now.

As we understand, the Justice Department has provided us with some items that may be considered confidential. Some of the items that have been turned over to the committee have been classified as "top secret," which is the most sensitive security classification authorized by Federal law. And for that reason, because it is top secret and because any unauthorized disclosure violates the law, it has been placed in a locked safe, and even I have chosen not to examine its contents until the committee has taken this action.

The matter relates to foreign counterintelligence expenditures by the FBI. And I am pleased the Department has voluntarily submitted it to the committee.

I believe every member is entitled access to it. But I also believe strongly the committee has a responsibility to treat the material with the strictest confidentiality that the classification requires. Therefore, I am going to entertain a motion to designate the classified material executive session testimony, subject to the strictures of House Rule II, clause 2(k) (7). That rule states, "No evidence or testimony taken in executive session may be released or used in public session without the consent of the committee."

The material, of course, will be made available to all members on a members-only basis and will be available for inspection in committee offices. The times and places for the availability of the documents are being arranged and will be for the convenience of the members. And that announcement will be made shortly.

The FBI testimony is scheduled for Wednesday, March 22, 12 days from today. The Chair will make certain the material is made available well in advance of that date, probably for periods both next week and the following week, prior to the 22d.

Of course, it may be necessary to proceed in executive session for a portion of the testimony on the 22d, unless the committee, by majority vote, decides otherwise.

Following the adoption of this procedure today, it will be incumbent upon all members to refrain from disclosing the contents of the classified material to any person, except during an executive session or by vote of the committee.

Now, I recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Edwards.

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move that the committee designate as executive session testimony, subject to rule II, clause 2(k)(7), the material submitted by the Justice Department as appendix D of its authorization request, and any additional material submitted that is classified under Federal law.

Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, may I make an inquiry?

It is my understanding the documents will be subject to inspection, but they are not subject to copying. Is that correct?

Chairman RODINO. That is correct.

Mr. VOLKMER. I just want to make that clear.
Chairman RODINO. The question is on the motion.
All those in favor, please say aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it. Accordingly, the motion is agreed to.

The Chair would like to make a statement preliminary to the commencement of this hearing, which is an important hearing, this morning.

We are now undertaking the exercise of a new responsibility, the authorization of appropriations for the Department of Justice. There can be no mistaking the significance of this occasion. In recent years, prior to this morning, only the impeachment inquiry and the nominations of Gerald Ford and Nelson Rockefeller to be Vice President have been the subject of hearings before the full committee. That these hearings are before the full committee is a measure of their importance both to the committee and to the Congress.

As the members know, very simply, the faithful execution of the laws by the Department of Justice is that matter at the very heart of our jurisdiction. But having noted that, it is equally important, I believe, to put these hearings into perspective, to understand as much what they are not as what they are.

Unlike the impeachment inquiry and unlike the Ford and Rockefeller inquiries, these hearings are primarily legislative hearings. They are legislative hearings aimed at the drafting and reporting of a single bill. And as such, they should be undertaken as a vehicle to assist the

committee in its subsequent markup of an authorization bill, rather than as a wide-ranging investigative inquiry.

To be sure, of course, the recently enacted authorization requirement and, indeed, this authorization process itself are critically important levels for the exercise of the committee's oversight responsibility. But the oversight must be an ongoing, year-round process engaged in by the subcommittees. It is not the primary function of this hearing this morning.

That fact, however, does not relieve the committee of its duty to probe in the days ahead. We must examine carefully the Department's authorization request. We must weigh closely and thoroughly the policy priorities that that request represents. In order to do that, we must come to understand more closely the operation of the various divisions and agencies within the Department. To that end, we will follow a rigorous hearing schedule that includes 7 days of testimony between now and the date the Congress breaks for its Easter recess on March 22.

During these 7 days, each division or agency requiring authorization will be appearing before the committee to present and explain its own budget request. At the time of its appearance, each division will essentially be giving a background analysis, outlining the work it does, how it operates within the larger department, what its statutory responsibilities are, and how the budget request that is made relates to the policy priorities it has established for fiscal 1979.

Especially during the first experience under the authorization responsibilities, the hearing will serve largely as an educative process that will afford the committee an opportunity to better understand the operation of the Department. Every agency of the Department, every division requiring authorization will be available, from the Solicitor General's Office to the FBI, from the Civil Rights Division to the Immigration Service, from the Antitrust Division to the U.S. attorneys. They will all be appearing, so that by the close of these hearings a total picture, hopefully, will have been drawn.

It is a picture, however, that the Department knows is not being sketched on a blank slate. Although this committee comes new to the authorization process, it does not come new to many of these issues. Years of expertise have developed in many of the problem areas we will be confronting, and it is the intent of the chair to draw upon that expertise.

Thus when the FBI is before us, for example, I will naturally begin the questioning process by recognizing the members of the subcommittee that have been dealing with the Bureau for many years. Likewise, when the Immigration Service appears, I will first recognize members of that appropriate oversight committee, and so on during the hearings.

In that way, I believe the full committee can derive the benefit of the fine work done on an ongoing basis by our seven subcommittees. Finally, if I may, let me offer a word about the constitutional underpinning of these hearings. Perhaps no principle is more central to our governmental structure than the principle of separation of powers. Just as it is fundamentally important that we not abuse these

hearings by intruding in the appropriate executive policy functions performed by the Department, so, too, it is important that the Department understand our own appropriate legislative responsibilities in this area.

It is a delicate balance we must strike in these proceedings, but it is a line that the Constitution commands us to observe. And I am sure this committee will follow that direction.

Now, before I welcome our distinguished witness, Judge Bell, the Attorney General, I want to recognize Mr. McClory, the ranking minority member.

Mr. McCLORY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We are undertaking today for the first time in my experience on this committee a most onerous and highly responsible job. It was only in the last Congress that we delegated to this committee-and the Congress delegated to this committee, the House of Representatives the broad legislative authority which we are beginning to exercise here today with regard to virtually all of the activities of the Department of Justice.

It seems to me extremely important in undertaking this that we recognize a bipartisan responsibility and an objectivity which, of course, this committee has been capable of demonstrating in the past.

I know it is charged that the Department of Justice is politicized, and I know that there are broad criticisms which are being directed because of actions which have occurred in the Department of Justice. There are others, including myself, who feel the Department has not leveled with the committee and with the Congress, particularly in the area of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration and perhaps other areas where efforts appear to have been directed toward changes in the direction intended by the Congress or changes in the law which are not coming through the direct legislative process.

I am particularly concerned about efforts to exercise authority under the Reorganization Act which the Congress has designated, an indirect way of effecting changes in the law without direct action by the Congress.

May I say, for instance, with respect to the FBI, I am confident we have to exercise great caution and great responsibility, so that we don't, in the exercise of zeal, do anything to hamstring or limit the effectiveness of the FBI, which has such a great national and international reputation.

In other words, what we do here is going to determine the reputation of this committee and how well the committee is capable of undertaking this new responsibility. And I am confident we will be judged, just as the Department of Justice will be judged, by what occurs in these hearings. And I am hopeful, indeed, we can work cooperatively, that we can work with a virtual complete objectivity. And, again, I want to emphasize the importance of bipartisan action, because it is only through the input of both parties that the best ends of the people of the Nation can be served.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman RODINO. Thank you very much. We will now hear from the Attorney General of the United States, Judge Bell.

Judge, would you introduce the members of your staff who are with you now, please?

« Previous Continue »

Books

Department of Justice Authorization: Hearings Before the Committee ..., Part 1