Accurate, Focused Research on Law, Technology and Knowledge Discovery Since 2002

You Are Here: Home » Censorship, Civil Liberties, Congress, E-Government, Government Documents, Legal Research, Legislation, Privacy » Objectivity of CRS Reports on Domestic Surveillance Issues Challenged

Objectivity of CRS Reports on Domestic Surveillance Issues Challenged

by on

There have been several recent congressional communications and related articles addressing whether or not authors of CRS reports on issues pertaining to domestic surveillance have demonstrated bias in their research. Links to relevant documents are in chronological order, as follows:

  • Letter from Congressman Peter Hoekstra, Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, to Director of CRS, Daniel P. Mulhollan, dated February 1, 2006: “…I expressed concern that CRS should not speculate on highly classified intelligence matters on which it could be erroneously viewed by the public as an authoritative source, amd that its previous work was not conducted in a thorough and objective fashion. Subsequently, CRS has issued another memorandum with similar problems. I ask for immediate action on your part to ensure that CRS truly provides “comprehensive and reliable” legislative research that is “free of partisan or other bias.”
  • Letter from Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Congresswoman Jane Harman to the Director of CRS, Daniel P. Mulhollan, dated February 7, 2006, which states in part: “We have found these CRS documents very helpful in conducting our oversight responsibilities, and disagree that they are “speculating with respect to highly sensitive national security matters” as Chairman Hoekstra asserts. Indeed, the legal analyses provided by CRS have been especially informative given the Executive Branch’s unwillingness to provide information to the Congress or to the American public as is appropriate.”
  • Letter from House Judiciary Chairman Sensenbrenner to CRS Director Mulholland, dated February 8, 2006: “I am writing regarding the January 5, 2006 Congressional Research Service (CRS) memorandum entitled Presidential Authority to Conduct Warrantless Electronic Surveillance to Gather Foreign Intelligence Information. Following the release of the CRS memorandum I asked two outside constitutional experts to review the memorandum and both [letter from Prof. Alt and letter from Prof. Eastman] have expressed concerns that the memorandum is based on an incomplete analysis of the law.”
  • WSJ, February 9, 2006 (sub. req’d): Expert on Congress’s Power Claims He Was Muzzled for Faulting Bush
  • Roll Call, February 9, 2006 (subscription req’d but the following abstract appeared on the site’s hompage) “Senior Specialist Under Fire for Criticizing Agency: One of the top analysts at the Congressional Research Service said that Director Daniel Mulhollan has ordered him to apologize by close of business Friday for writing a memorandum that criticized Congress’ nonpartisan research agency for an “incoherent” policy that advocates neutrality and suppresses the analytical skills of its researchers.” [Link]
    • LinkedIn

    Sorry, comments are closed for this post.