Should all in congress have security clearance?

Insight on the News, Nov 12, 2001 by John Elvin

As noted in Insight last week (see "Bush Issues New Marching Orders," Nov. 5), there's considerable concern about the leaking of information from classified briefings. But just who is leaking information? President George W. Bush suggests it is members -- or at least a member -- of Congress. The recent tragic events and their aftermath have created a peculiar situation where Congress says it's not getting enough information about what's known and what's being done. Yet when the Bush administration offers some secrets, all of a sudden they turn up in a newspaper.

Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) has responded with a proposal that would require all members of the House of Representatives to go through security-clearance procedures such as those applied to members of the House Intelligence Committee.

Paul Weyrich, the president of the Free Congress Foundation, brought up an interesting point in expressing his support for Myrick's bill in an interview with CNSnews.com. He said that a number of members won't even apply "for fear they might get turned down."

On the other hand, the issue raises a serious constitutional problem of the separation of powers. All executive offices, including intelligence agencies, are created by Congress and operate under congressional oversight. How can a mere creature of Congress pass judgment on its masters, elected by the people?

Well, Congress is charged with a lot of responsibilities regarding our national defense and foreign policy that require a working knowledge of the nation's security apparatus. Congress needs to be fully informed for many reasons, including its oversight role in the balance of power. But you would think it would be in the best interests of the country to require that anyone with that kind of power go through a serious security check. What's to fear? Is it possible that a person could have the audacity to run for high office while carrying some kind of baggage that might make them potentially untrustworthy?

Heh-heh. Okay, of course it's possible. Anyone who has spent time in the grandstands observing the political circus might even be inclined to say it's pretty darn probable. But it's no joke. Myrick puts the matter in perspective: "There must be accountability for leaking sensitive information that could cost American lives,"