Susan Collins

As Senator Collins says, it is important that we assure ourselves, we address these issues, because it is at the core of our obligation to protect our military service members and their families.

To Senator Collins' question, these can be complicated, perhaps unnecessarily so.

I can think of no more important task for this Committee to undertake.

I want to make clear this morning that we intend to carry out this investigation with respect for the thousands of Muslim-Americans who are serving in the American military with honor and the millions of other patriotic, law-abiding…

The recent arrest of Najibullah Zazi demonstrates the tremendous benefits of information sharing.

This case also raises questions about whether or not restrictive rules have a chilling effect.

I think this kind of oversight is so important.

I believe that on the capability side--I am coming back to Senator Coburn's question--we have a lot to do.

I can assure you we are going to hold you to it because it is important.

I agree with you that there are some agencies, DOD is an example, where there has been such a diminution of the acquisition workforce that probably more than 5 percent is needed.

Your point that a one-size-fits-all approach should not be taken is a good one.

It is far more fun and interesting and press-worthy to put the dollars into program people, or to launch some new initiative.

I believe that you need to understand that there will be resistance to this in some agencies despite their evident need because they are going to want to spend the money on other things.

I think Congress should be able to call Carol Browner, the President's energy and environmental czar, to ask her about the negotiations that she conducted with the automobile industry.

I think it creates a real problem when Congress specifically creates in law a position that is Senate-confirmed, that is accountable to us, thus a person we can call up before us, and then the White House...does not fill the statutorily…

I personally believe that it is undermining the promises that President Obama has made to the American people for increased transparency and accountability.

This issue has been of concern to me for many months.

I will continue to call them 'czars,' at least to the conclusion of this hearing and until a solution is found.

When Congress passed the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, which we wrote in 2004, we created by statute a Director of National Intelligence.

The basic strength of our country, of a democracy, is transparency.

Private meetings are not the same as public hearings. And they are not. The public cannot see them.

I am not proposing that the President be barred from creating these new positions to focus on important policy priorities.

The responsibility of Congress to oversee the Executive Branch is fundamental to our constitutional system.

We thank Members of the Committee who have added their names as cosponsors or indicated their support for the legislation.

In light of that Executive Order or memorandum, could you please explain, in case we get this question, why our legislation is still needed?