I’ve noticed questions about security clearances and Congress and the upcoming SCIF with the ICIG. I thought I’d share what I’ve learned from researching some of these same questions. Now, I’ve never been a Gov employee or held a security clearance, so if anyone has more first hand knowledge please chime in.
I’m leaving out a lot of detail here and am trying to just cover the high points. Links to references are at the bottom. Also, my personal opinions are at the bottom as well.
Note that I’m not saying these laws are good or bad, just that this is what’s on the books currently. It’s up to Congress to change them if they feel the need. But we should know them so we can temper our expectations and engage thoughtfully and effectively.
Congresspeople Don’t Need Security Clearances
Members of Congress aren’t required to hold security clearances. I would assume that this means all members of Congress are ‘cleared’ to access a SCIF, but they may not have access to information that requires sharing in a SCIF.
Importantly not all members of Congress are entitled access to classified information.
Who in Congress Gets Access To Classified Information
Title 50 and Title 10 laws stipulate how the DOD and the IC should share classified information with Congress and with whom specifically. Classified DOD information is primarily shared with the Armed Services committees. Classified IC information is shared only with the Intelligence committees. Congressional Leadership (majority and minority leaders) are allowed classified information as well. Some sub-committees in the Appropriations committees are also allowed some information on classified projects for the purpose of budgetary oversight. These laws essentially dictate the interface between the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch.
There are other laws regarding interactions between Congress and the IC and DOD (such as disclosure of SAPs) but the Congresspeople and Congressional committees involved are pretty much the same as described above.
The House Oversight Committee and Classified Information
Surprisingly, the Oversight Committees are not listed in law as requiring access to classified information. This is why Burchett and Luna can be ‘stonewalled’ by the DOD and IC. The law basically says they don’t need classified information to conduct their congressional business, and the DOD and IC are under no obligation, by law, to give it to them. So the UAP Caucus should not be under any expectation that they are entitled to any substantive information in a SCIF or otherwise.
However, the law does not stipulate what Congress can do with classified information once they receive it, only that they adopt rules to prevent its unauthorized disclosure. Each committee responsible for classified information has rules for how, and with whom, it can be shared, as well as the requisite security clearances for Congressional staff (remember, Congresspeople themselves are not required to hold security clearances). The rules differ slightly from committee to committee but they’re basically the same. Congresspeople from other committees can request in writing access to classified information from the Armed Services and Intelligence Committees. Each committees’ rules then dictate the procedures and timeline for how it gets decided if the request is granted or not. Usually there is an appeals process as well.
As of now, I don’t know if anyone from the House Oversight committee has written a request to the Armed Services or Intelligence committees for the information they seek. I would assume they have, but I’m not entirely sure. I’d like to know if they’ve exercised that option.
Power Within the House Oversight Committee
James Comer, as chair of the House Oversight committee, can issue a subpoena for deposition/testimony. This power was recently expanded, and the chair now only needs to consult with the ranking minority member before issuing subpoenas. It is probably the most powerful tool the Oversight committee can employ to conduct investigations and obtain information. However, as we saw in the July subcommittee hearing, witnesses can’t be compelled to testify to certain questions if it violates their (lifetime) security oath (which is different than a security clearance).
Subcommittee Chairs on the Oversight committee can schedule hearings whenever they want, but they themselves can’t issue subpoenas for testimony, so it would have to be voluntary like we saw with the July Subcommittee hearing.
Comer could create a task force or panel for UAP investigations within the Oversight committee, but he’s already said to AskaPol that he believes it should be in the House Science committee, not the Oversight committee.
House Select Committee
There is talk of creating a Select committee on UAPs in the House. This would require either a House resolution or enacting a law establishing the Select committee’s creation, so it would require a vote from the whole House at the least. We’ll see what traction this gets in the next year.
Personal Thoughts on Burchett, Luna, et al.
Burchett is not on the National Security subcommittee and his participation in the July hearing had to be approved by Comer. He is also not a chair of any subcommittee so he cannot schedule hearings. And he cannot issue subpoenas. His power is much more limited than he likes to let on. Nonetheless, he is drawing a lot of attention to the UAP issue, but I feel he’s projecting, for the public and the media, that he has more control over the situation than he really does. I’d be willing to bet other Congresspeople, the IC and the DOD know there’s not much he can do without the aid of others higher up in Congress.
I do not expect any substantive information to be revealed in the SCIF meeting in January, because of the above laws.
The fact that Burchett, Luna, et al. keep charging directly into the DOD and IC full steam demanding information, seems like a waste of time to me when there are other avenues they can take to get the information they want. They ought to know they aren’t entitled to classified information because they went through this same thing in their Eglin Air Force incident when Burchett and Luna were denied a classified briefing, but Gaetz was allowed some classified information, because he sits on the House Armed Services Committee.
In my opinion they should be requesting this information from other congressional committees (if they haven’t already); enlisting other congresspeople to push for a UAP panel, task force or select committee; and engaging with Comer to issue subpoenas and holding hearings within the Oversight committee. The UAP Caucus cannot do much on their own, they will need to work with other members of Congress in order to take substantive actions on this issue.
The full text of Title 50 and 10 are accessible at the Cornell Legal Information Institute, and Congressional committee rules are all publicly accessible on their respective websites: House Armed Services Committee, House Intelligence Committee, Senate Armed Services Committee, Senate Intelligence Committee.
submitted by /u/Majestic-Affect6168
[link] [comments]