Debate will last 3 days.

Mr. Brandel, of New York, submits on behalf of himself, Mr. Shanks and Mr. Long a bill to International Relations and Armed Services

A BILL
To authorize the formation of a new inter-service unit of defense, to combine the training of clandestine agents and traditional military units, with the intent of providing unique and novel capacity to aid intelligence and antiterrorism operations abroad

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Elite Military Intelligence Armed Service Corps Act'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds the following:

(1) Current military forces are unable to carry out intelligence missions, due to lack of training in necessary areas.

(2) The intelligence community abroad is unable to carry out necessary action, when required, against targets that would pose a threat to the United States and its interests, due to lack of appropriate training and necessary armaments

(3) There is an inherent necessity for a section of military operations that are able, within the limits of a single unit, to both detect and react to an obvious threat

SEC. 3. Establishment of an Elite Military Intelligence Corps

(1) Upon the acceptance of Congress and signing of the President of the United States, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on behalf of their respective departments and in conjunction with the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, on behalf of the Agency, will immediately commission the training of a cross-disciplinary troops, to receive:

(a) Special forces training under military guidelines from all four departments of the armed services
(B) Clandestine training under the normal guidelines of the Central Intelligence Agency which will prepare troops to:
I. Collect data and analyze a suspected threat
II. React accordingly to a proven threat

(2) Upon passing of the Act, the CIA along with the Joint Chiefs of Staff will immediately appoint a governance council to regulation the training and use of troops abroad.
(a) The council shall consist of equal, in number and jurisdiction, members from both the Intelligence and Military communities
(B) Act solely on the best interest of the United States and will be free, under set regulation, from restriction by any member of either contributing party, outside of the governance council

(3) All over seas operations will be controlled by the governance council with the exception of:
(a) an already existing situation abroad, be it intelligence, military or both and in which case will be under the jurisdiction of:
I. the Central Intelligence Agency for all operations immediately pertaining to the collection and analysis of data
II. the Chain of Command for the Armed Services for all operations immediately pertaining to actions requiring force against a suspected target

SEC. 4 Establishment of Training Curriculum for All Members of the Aforementioned Corps

(1) Before the conscription of recruits into the Corps a set guideline for instruction will be decided upon by a panel of Intelligence and Armed Services community members, and authorized by the Congress

(2) Assignment of troops to the Corps will be in two distinct modus
(a) existing officers in any of the four branches of the Armed Services will be eligible for EMIC training upon recommendation of a superior office and application to the program, to be approved by the governance council, and pending CIA approval, based on normal entrance standards
(B) existing clandestine agents, to be approved by a superior officer of the Agency, and pending Armed Services approval, based on normal entrance standards

(3) All troops, regardless of previous training and affiliation will become members of the Corps, answerable solely to the governance council
(4) All troops, regardless of previous training, will undergo a rigorous training curriculum as set aside by the aforementioned governance council, and will take into account
(a) Assumed neutrality of previous training, such that all troops are training from scratch to be able to operate on both sides of EMIC operations
(B) Any recruit not meeting standards for either body, will not be allowed to train or operate under the EMIC, for the safety of the troops as a whole on the individual recruit
(5) All matters concerning the amendment of governing principles and training guidelines for the EMIC will be the business of the governance council of the EMIC, unless an agreement can not be met, in which case, set amendment will be recommended for review of the Congress

Mr. Chairman,

A few questions for the sponsors of the bill if they are inclined to answer.

1. What would this force do that current special forces are unable to do?

2. What oversight would this force be subject too?

At a first glance this stikes me as certain members legislative masturbation over the idea of some-one semi-legal super-commando force, and I'm inclined to oppose it for that exact reason.

If a member can pursuade me otherwise I'd be willing to reconsider.

Thank You.

I respectfully yield.

Mr. Ellison, I ask that you speak respectfully of other congressmen and government officials at all times in this committee.

If I may address the committee as to the intent of this legislation, I would very much like to.

For you consideration Mr Chairman,

Firstly, let me say I am extremely taken aback by the comments of Congressman Ellison, and I would ask that the respectful and professional tone be maintained, particularly in the presence of his colleageus in the federal government.

In defense of this legislation, those educated in the field of strategic and operational intelligence are well aware of the unforunate and perhaps irreconciliable rift between the former and the latter. How do we then secure our troops, secure the accuracy of their operations in real time and apply it to settings where that sort of cooperation could be critical?

We find ourselves in this modern era increasingly confronted by issues of diplomacy, counter-terrorism, defense home and abroad all at a concurrent instance. These unique challenges require unique solutions.

Just like it was counter-productive to seperate foreign and domestic intelligence gather, this legislation tries to bridge operational and strategic intelligence, with the intent of being able to run effective operations on the ground in a variety of settings, to the benefit of both.

How do we approach sensitive terrorist strongholds where delicate SIGINT is the target, but do so in a situation of war, such as we have no, or even of normal confrontation? No longer can covert ground missions be launched by the IC alone, its just not feasible.

From my Office's point of view, in response to Mr. Ellison's rude contestations, having a military division trained in the retreival and as importantly the processing of strategic as well as operational SIGINT, in order that they can best respond. Perhaps Mr. Ellison would like to be responsible for the invaluable intelligence lost because the military could not react independent of my department, had to wait and lost it. Or perhaps, the esteemed Congressman would be willing to make the phone call to the family of the soldiers we lose when they are forced into a situation wherein they have to approach SI but can't do so in real time, or have to wait for processing in Washington/Langley?

I yield Mr. Chair, thank you