Although Negroponte's supporters insist he has a strong mandate from the president, other observers see the need for legislative adjustment as a sign the ambiguous and deal-laden language that resulted from months of wrangling over the law has left the new intelligence chief's authority unclear in several key respects.

Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told United Press International it would be 18 months to two years "before we understand fully how this bill will be implemented by this presidency."

Hoekstra cited the example of the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law to make his point that there are often unintended consequences to legislation.

"We provided as much clarity as we could," said Hoekstra, adding that "until we get practical experience" of how the law works out, he saw the committee's role as "closely monitor(ing) the implementation" of the existing law, rather than designing legislative fixes.

But even the most ardent advocates of the new intelligence post acknowledge that a great deal turns on how the incumbent finds his relationships with other Cabinet officials developing.

The law provides "sufficiently clear and strong authorities (for the new post) ... provided he has the support of the president," one of the bill's architects, Sept. 11 Commission Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton told UPI.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., the ranking member of the Sena te Select Committee on Intelligence, believes the ambiguities in Negroponte's powers will actually be an asset for the new director, a spokeswoman said.

"The lack of defined authorities gives him the opportunity to define them for himself," Rockefeller's spokeswoman Wendy Morigi told UPI, "especially since he enjoys the support of the president."

The support of the president is crucial, Hamilton said, citing what he called the "very strong" declaration about the powers of the new post made by President Bush when he announced Negroponte's nomination.

"If the president backs him, he'll succeed. If he doesn't, he won't," said Hamilton, who said new legislation would be superfluous.

Nonetheless, a bill drafted by a bipartisan group of senators on the Armed Services Committee is in consideration and others are thought to be in the works.

The Military Reorganization Act, introduced last week by Sens. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., and Ben Nelson, D-Neb., would create a single point of contact for the new intelligence chief within the eight intelligence agencies inside the U.S. military.

The bill would create a supporting command, called INTCOM, headed by a four-star general, which would control all the military's intelligence assets, parceling them out in response to requests from the intelligence director and from other combatant commands in the military.

Currently, the highest-ranking military officers in charge of intelligence are the three-star generals who head the National Security Agency and other Pentagon intelligence outfits.

"INTCOM will bridge an important gap between the (new director) and the array of military intelligence entities," said Nelson.

A Senate staff member who helped draft the bill told UPI the command would also receive requests from combatant commands for intelligence "packages" - combinations of assets they would control in the same way that they currently receive support they request from the military's transportation command.

"They will own those assets," the staff member said of the combatant commands relationship with the package they are assigned by the new command.

"This four-star is there to juggle the requirements of the (director) and the combatant commanders," said the staff member. "It's his job to see that everyone gets what they want."

Its sponsors see the bill as a necessary fix. "The problem is the span of control that the new (intelligence chief) has within the military," said the staff member.

The Department of Defense, which contains the four service intelligence agencies (Air Force, Army, Navy and Marine intelligence) and four national agencies, including the ones that build, own and run U.S. spy satellites and other electronic eavesdropping equipment, absorbs about three-quarters of the defense budget and employs about two of every three of the government's intelligence professionals.

"A lot of people don't understand the size of the intelligence agencies within the military," explained the staff member, adding that senior military officers had told the bill's sponsors that there was a need for a four star to lead Defense Department intelligence.

Despite this, it was not at all clear that the proposal will be welcomed by the Pentagon.

"As a general principle, any administration would be opposed to such an intrusion on the prerogatives of the commander in chief," one former senior defense official told UPI, adding that the president, in consultation with senior military officers, ought to decide how the military was structured.

Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., chairman of the Intelligence Committee, is reserved about whether legislative changes are necess ary for Negroponte to succeed.

"This wasn't the best possible bill," he said recently of the intelligence-reform law passed last year by Congress, "but it was the best bill possible" -- a reference to the long and bitter rearguard fought against the idea of a powerful new intelligence director by the Pentagon and its congressional allies.

Roberts added that negotiations over the new director's relationship with the military had been particularly fraught. "Late at night, in the Capitol, you could hear the bulldozers piling up turf against the doors of the committee rooms," he said.

Indeed, the changes proposed by Chambliss and Nelson highlight what many see as the biggest challenge faced by the intelligence director - his relationship with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

"No law is self-executing," said Hamilton. "There will be bureaucratic struggles, of course. (Negroponte) will need to be very tough minded to prevail."

Hamilton predicted that Rumsfeld would "try to test" the authority of the new chief.

He said lawyers from the Department of Defense - as well as the FBI and the CIA - were doubtless already pouring over the small print of the bill, "looking for loopholes ... for confirmation of their agency's right to resist the (new director's) orders."

"The president will, I hope, back him up," he added.

The Chambliss-Nelson bill is likely to be referred to both the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, but it was unclear last week which would take the lead in considering the legislation.

Robert's intelligence panel seemed at best lukewarm to the idea that legislative changes might be necessary already.

"Our view (on that) will be informed by (Negroponte's) view," said a senior staffer.

The staff mem ber said Negroponte's confirmation hearing, expected in the middle of April, would be a chance for members to ask him, "What do you think your authorities are, and what do you plan to do with them?"

The staff member added that the Silberman-Robb Commission on the intelligence failures regarding Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction would also have a role to play in defining how the intelligence director would operate.

A White House spokeswoman confirmed that the president had asked the commission to look at how the new director's role might impact the collection and assessment of intelligence about weapons of mass destruction.

"The president wanted the additional information and analysis," Dana Perino told UPI.

All rights reserved. � 2005 United Press International. Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by United Press International. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the prior written consent of United Press International.

Related Links
SpaceDaily
Search SpaceDaily
Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express

Thanks for being here; We need your help. The SpaceDaily news network continues to grow but revenues have never been harder to maintain. With the rise of Ad Blockers, and Facebook - our traditional revenue sources via quality network advertising continues to decline. And unlike so many other news sites, we don't have a paywall - with those annoying usernames and passwords. Our news coverage takes time and effort to publish 365 days a year. If you find our news sites informative and useful then please consider becoming a regular supporter or for now make a one off contribution.
SpaceDaily Contributor $5 Billed Once credit card or paypal		SpaceDaily Monthly Supporter $5 Billed Monthly paypal only