I thank the vice chairman of the committee. There are over 30-plus professional staffers who staff both sides of the Intelligence Committee. On each side, there is a staffer designated for each of the intelligence agencies in this country. I would dare say today they know their particular portfolio of intelligence agencies as well as the employees who work inside that agency. They are experts. They are tasked with that degree of knowledge. Layered on top of that are 15 Members of the U.S. Senate whom the leadership on both sides have asked to spend countless hours behind closed doors--as the vice chairman said--typically in a bipartisan fashion to provide for every Member and for the American people our certification that we agree with what the intelligence community is doing; that it lives within the letter of the law; that there is some congressional oversight on a constant basis, in real-time, assuring Members and the American people of that accuracy. Why would you take away the tools we have to actually hold them accountable? I know appropriators believe this hinders their ability to spend money when we are in a continuing resolution period because of section 504. I am not sure I interpret it the same way they do. Just because an executive branch has asked for a pot of money, I have never considered that the committee couldn't go in, because of a vehement disagreement with the way some of it is being spent, and alter it.…
Richard Burr: “I thank the vice chairman of the committee. There are over 30-plus professional staffers who staff both sides of the…”
Share
More from Richard Burr
And the 12 that Roy has been in. But I have got to say that I never questioned whether Roy was going to be prepared, whether he was going to attend, whether he was going to absorb what he heard, and, more importantly, whether he was going…
I always like to bring things back to the present because I have a tremendous amount of respect for all four of you.
The faster, more predictable, and more accountable the programs are, the more patients stand to benefit from lifesaving, innovative drugs and devices.
it is clearly apparent by listening to this debate, if Senator Sanders had been on the PEB board, the PEB board wouldn't be making a recommendation and the President wouldn't be behind it. But that is where we are, short of a breakthrough…





