STATEMENT OF SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY,
CHAIRMAN, SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE,
ON REPUBLICAN OBSTRUCTIONISM BLOCKING PASSAGE
OF THE FBI REFORM ACT
Thurs., June 20, 2002

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, yesterday's Washington Post provides yet another example of why it is so urgent that we act to pass S. 1974, the Leahy-Grassley FBI Reform Act. Although that bill was unanimously reported out of the Judiciary Committee on April 25, almost two months ago, an anonymous Republican hold has operated to block Senate passage on the bill. It is troubling to me that an anonymous Republican Senator would block passage of this bipartisan effort to improve the FBI, the nation's leading counterterrorism agency, at the same time that the President has sought bipartisan efforts to pass his proposed Homeland Security reorganization.

I urge the Republican Member or Members with a hold on this legislation to remove the hold, or at least discuss whatever issue on the merits that Senator may have.

The press reported yesterday that two new FBI whistle-blowers have come forward and provided information which might be crucial to the FBI's anti-terrorism efforts. At least one of those whistle-blowers has also provided information to the staff of the Judiciary Committee that suggests, in its rush to beef up its translation capabilities after September 11, the FBI may have relaxed both quality control and its security standards. The Post also reported that at least some of the allegations made by this whistle-blower had been verified, but still that the woman was terminated by the FBI for "disruptiveness."

Because the Department of Justice's Inspector General is already looking into this matter, Senator Grassley and I sent a letter to his office based upon what we learned about the incident. This whistle-blower makes allegations that amount to far more than just a "he-said, she-said" internal office dispute. Rather, her allegations raise significant security issues that should be addressed as part of the Inspector General's review. The letter that I sent with Senator Grassley poses specific questions that we hope the Inspector General will examine as part of his investigation, including whether the reaction to this woman's report is likely to chill future reporting of security breaches by FBI employees. It is not a good management practice for the FBI to fire the person who reports a security breach, while nothing happens to the person who allegedly committed the breach. That is precisely the kind of culture that Judge Webster found helped FBI Supervisory Agent Robert Hanssen to get away with spying for the Russians for over 20 years.

Since the attacks of September 11 and the anthrax attacks last fall, we have relied on the FBI to detect and prevent acts of catastrophic terrorism that endanger the lives of the American people and the institutions of our country. FBI reform was already important, but the terrorist attacks suffered by this country last year have imposed even greater urgency on improving the FBI. The Bureau is our front line of domestic defense against terrorists. It needs to be as great as it can.

Even before those attacks, the Judiciary Committee's oversight hearings revealed serious problems at the FBI that needed strong congressional action to fix. We heard about a double standard in evaluations and discipline. We heard about record and information management problems and communications breakdowns between field offices and Headquarters that led to the belated production of documents in the Oklahoma City bombing case. Despite the fact that we have poured money into the FBI over the last five years, we heard that the FBI's computer systems were in dire need of modernization. We heard about how an FBI supervisor, Robert Hanssen, was able to sell critical secrets to the Russians undetected for years without ever getting a polygraph. We heard that there were no fewer than 15 different areas of security at the FBI that needed fixing.

The FBI Reform Act tackles these problems with improved accountability, improved security both inside and outside the FBI, and required planning to ensure the FBI is prepared to deal with the multitude of challenges we are facing. It was unanimously reported by the oversight committee for the FBI, and it reflects our determination to make sure that the FBI is as good and strong as it can be - and, all the more today, given the higher stakes -- as good and as strong as America needs the FBI to be. This reform bill is a long stride toward that goal.

The case reported in yesterday's Washington Post and the matters raised by Minneapolis Field Office Agent Coleen M. Rowley in her May 21, 2002 letter and subsequent testimony critiquing the handling of the Moussaoui case by FBI Headquarters personnel provide case studies for many of the precise issues that S. 1974, the FBI Reform Act, addresses and why its passage is so critical in the FBI's effort to fight terrorism. The Leahy-Grassley bill expands whistle-blower protections to ensure that FBI whistle-blowers get the same protections as other government employees.

The FBI is currently exempted from the Whistleblower Protection Act, and its employees are only protected by internal Department of Justice regulations. For example, while Special Agent Rowley's letter to the FBI Director and the Inspector General is protected under these regulations, three of the five people to whom she sent her letter were Members of Congress and are not covered under the current regulations. Moreover, her testimony at the June 6 Judiciary Committee oversight hearing, and before any other committee or subcommittee of the Congress, is not protected under the current regulations. Even a report or complaint to her immediate FBI supervisors would not be protected under the current regulations. That is why the FBI Director's personal guaranty, and the Attorney General's assurances, that she would be protected against retaliations is so important. The Leahy-Grassley FBI Reform Act would extend whistleblower protection for FBI employees to all these disclosures.

The FBI Reform Act would also put an end to statutory restrictions that contribute to the "double standard,'' where senior management officials are not disciplined as harshly for misconduct as line agents are. Agent Rowley complained about this double standard, as have other FBI agents who have helped the Judiciary Committee craft solutions to the FBI's problems.

The bill would provide expanded statutory authority for the DOJ Inspector General to investigate internal problems at the FBI and help design comprehensive, systematic solutions. It would create the Career Security Officer Program that Judge Webster and FBI officials have endorsed to prevent security breaches.

These are not partisan provisions. The FBI Reform Act is the result of bipartisan oversight hearings which the Judiciary Committee has conducted over the last year. It was reported out of Committee unanimously. Now, when it reaches the Senate floor, it is being blocked anonymously. The future of the FBI is too important for politics. Too many Americans depend on it for their safety.

On June 7, 2002, I delivered a statement that highlighted Republican holds on four important bipartisan pieces of legislation, including important anti-terrorism legislation aimed at curbing terrorist bombings. Less than a week later, the United States Embassy in Karachi, Pakistan was bombed. The next morning, the Senate passed my bill, S. 1770, to deal with that issue.

I now appeal to the Republican Senator or Senators blocking the FBI Reform Act to remove your hold so that we may pass this bill. The American people deserve action, not politics as usual. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my entire statement be printed in the Congressional Record in addition to yesterday's Washington Post article and the letter I sent with Senator Grassley to the Justice Department Inspector General.

# # # # #