first let me clarify that we did what the 9/11 Commission recommended with regard to these agencies. We did not sever their connection to the Secretary of Defense. The Senator from Virginia is well aware of that. He is well aware that I opposed attempts to sever the connection with the Secretary of Defense. The Senator from Virginia is well aware that the Secretary of Defense would continue to have day-to-day line authority supervision over these agencies. The second point I make is there is nothing in this bill that would in any way hinder the ability of the NGA to provide much needed maps for our troops. That is just not going to happen. The satellites that are used to produce these maps for the military are also used for surveillance of international terrorism or compliance with proliferation treaties. They are used to look at camps in Afghanistan. These are national assets that are used by multiple agencies, and the bill reflects that. That is why the majority of the budgets for these agencies are already part of the National Foreign Intelligence Program--what we would rename as the National Intelligence Program. The majority of the budget finances are already part of not JMIP, not TIARA, but what is known as NFIP. That would not in any way hinder the ability of these agencies to meet their obligations to the Department of Defense and to our warfighters.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a bill on intelligence agencies and their connection to the Department of Defense.
Share
More from Susan Collins
I have carefully reviewed Todd Blanche's qualifications to be Attorney General. This includes his record and responses to questions from Senators at the Department of Justice Appropriations hearing, his confirmation hearing, and in the…
This incident shows how imperative it is that we have a mandate for body-worn cameras.
It appears that there is good faith on the Democratic side to try to pass the CR and avoid a government shutdown, which is always a disaster.
“It’s appalling to me that some of the rhetoric is coming from public officials on both sides of the aisle who should know better than to levy personal and political attacks against the judiciary and the court specifically,” Collins said.





