September 12, 2018

What the 9/11 Commission Report Had to Say About Congressional Oversight

As longtime Lawfare readers know, I often take a moment around the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks to reflect on some current issue of national security law and policy significance. I do this, in part, to mark the anniversary itself. As I noted two years ago, as time moves on, there are many working in the national security field currently—whether in government, academia, think tanks, advocacy organization and journalism—who did not experience the attacks and the legal and policy changes that followed in a professional capacity. For those of us who were working in the field of national security at the time, our professional lives were shaped, in significant part, by the attacks themselves, and the work that followed. The anniversary also serves as a useful time to bring awareness to the many lessons of the 9/11 Commission Report, which was issued in 2004. With each passing year, I continue to marvel at the report’s continued relevance, even as the threat landscape shifts.

This year, Congress is on my mind. And given a current political environment that has, unfortunately, pulled intelligence matters into the political arena, Congress’s role in intelligence oversight is of heightened importance. In light of today’s global national security challenges, and accompanying importance of U.S. government policymakers basing decisions on sound information, America needs a Congress capable of and devoted to meaningful intelligence oversight.

As is often the case on matters of continued relevance to the intelligence community, the 9/11 Commission had something to say about the role of Congress in intelligence oversight:

"Of all our recommendations, strengthening congressional oversight may be among the most difficult and important. So long as oversight is governed by current congressional rules and resolutions, we believe the American people will not get the security they want and need. The United States needs a strong, stable, and capable congressional committee structure to give America’s national intelligence agencies oversight, support, and leadership (9/11 Report, p. 419)."


Read the Full Article at Lawfare

  • Commentary
    • Defense One
    • November 22, 2024
    To Improve Recruiting, Make Medical Standards Match Retention Ones

    Standards exist for a reason, but excluding people who could thrive in the military unnecessarily impairs readiness....

    By Kareen Hart & Taren Sylvester

  • Commentary
    • Sharper
    • November 20, 2024
    Sharper: Trump 2.0

    Donald Trump's return to the White House is widely expected to reshape America's global priorities. With personnel choices and policy agendas that mark a significant break fro...

    By Charles Horn & Gwendolyn Nowaczyk

  • Podcast
    • November 18, 2024
    Team America

    Kate Kuzminski, Deputy Director of Studies, and the Director of the Military, Veterans, and Society (MVS) Program at CNAS, joins to discuss President-elect Donald Trump nomina...

    By Katherine L. Kuzminski

  • Podcast
    • November 12, 2024
    The All-Volunteer Force and Mobilization with Katherine Kuzminski, CNAS

    Katherine Kuzminski, the Deputy Director of Studies, and the Director of the Military, Veterans, and Society (MVS) Program at CNAS, joins Squaring the Circle to discuss the al...

    By Katherine L. Kuzminski

View All Reports View All Articles & Multimedia