September 12, 2018

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

By Carrie Cordero

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

  • Video
    • August 2, 2022
    National Guard offers signing bonus amid recruitment hurdles

    Military readiness expert Kate Kuzminski speaks to NewsNation about the effects that today's recruiting challenge will have on future readiness. Watch the full interview from...

    By Katherine L. Kuzminski

  • Video
    • July 20, 2022
    U.S. military facing biggest recruiting shortfall in decades

    The U.S. military is facing a recruiting shortfall, with officials saying there are not enough people signing up to serve. Katherine Kuzminski, Senior Fellow and Director of t...

    By Katherine L. Kuzminski

  • Commentary
    • Lawfare
    • June 19, 2022
    Overturning Roe: What Might This Mean for Military Culture?

    With the repeal of Roe, women stationed in states that either have a trigger law or are poised to enact more stringent abortion bans will be faced with sharp reductions in the...

    By Dr. Kyleanne Hunter

  • Commentary
    • June 7, 2022
    Sharper: Pride in National Security

    In order for the United States to maintain its strategic advantage, the national security community must be able to access the nation's top talent and draw from their strength...

    By Anna Pederson, Nathalie Grogan & Katherine L. Kuzminski

View All Reports View All Articles & Multimedia