The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 Policy Brief

Defining the Problem
The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 is the Intelligence Community funding authorization tool for the Fiscal Year 2017. The bill is regarded an important congressional oversight element and, in essence, “sets policy and authorizes resources for intelligence, counterterrorism, war fighting, and cyber security activities” (U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Selection Committee on Intelligence – HPSCI, 2018).
May
Biblical guidelines: There are quite a number of references to intelligence gathering in the Bible. As a matter of fact, there are numerous biblical instances of intelligence gathering for not only political, but also tactical reasons. For instance, Joshua (in the Old Testament) sent spies on a covert operation to gather the relevant information in readiness for the City of Jericho’s attack. In Joshua 2:1, it is stated thus: “then Joshua son of Nun secretly sent two spies from Shittim. ‘Go, look over the land,’ he said, ‘especially Jericho.’ So they went and entered the house of a prostitute named Rahab and stayed there” (Joshua 2:1, The New King James Version). Protection of the nation’s citizens has been the prerogative of those in leadership. They have a responsibility to guarantee the nation’s safety by engaging in acts to preempt the enemy’s move.
Constitutional guidelines: In the preamble, there are provisions for not only the provision for the common defense, but also the promotion of the general welfare (U.S. Const. Preamble). These, in essence, lend support for the bill.
Can
Political Feasibility: The public confidence in intelligence gathering has in the past been shaken by various occurrences and blunders made by the intelligence community. For instance, the “intelligence” regarding the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq came out to be wrong. The intelligence community’s “smarts” was put to question. Occurrences such as these have “helped erode public support”…. and in that regard, “accelerated the call for Intelligence Community reforms” (Sapolsky, Gholz, and Talmadge, 2017, p. 195). The general public, however, appreciates and respects the role intelligence gathering efforts play in keeping Americans safe from a myriad of threats including, but not limited, to terror.
Financial Feasibility: Of relevance in this case is the Intelligence Community Management Account whereby $519 million was being sought for fiscal year 2017. This was a 3% increase for the previous period (CBO, 2016). There have been concerns on whether too much is being spent on intelligence gathering efforts. As a matter of fact, Congress was in this case asked to consider caps with a report by Every CRS Repot (2016) pointing out that “as Congress considers the FY2017 NIP and MIP budgets, and balances the need to protect both national security and taxpayer dollars, coming to agreement with the executive branch on how much is enough lies at the heart of much of its oversight responsibility and power of the purse.”
Should
There are two concerns worth noting – shaken public confidence in the intelligence community and concerns from stakeholders to the effect that there is simply too much going into the intelligence activities of the U.S. government. It should, however, be noted that intelligence gathering efforts are a key duty of the state when it comes to the enhancement of national security. At a time whereby the U.S. faces several hostile players in the global arena such as North Korea, and at a time when the threat of terror attacks is still alive, the relevance of gathering actionable intelligence on the activities and conduct of those the U.S. government considers valid threats cannot be overstated. In so doing, the relevant stakeholders should be brought into the loop so as to address cost concerns.
References
Congressional Budget Office - CBO. (2016). Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Washington, DC: CBO.
Every CRS Repot. (2016). Intelligence Community Spending: Trends and Issues. Retrieved from https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R44381.html#_Toc466559962
Sapolsky, H.M., Gholz, E. & Talmadge, C. (2017). U.S. Defense Politics: The Origins of Security Policy. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.
The Holy Bible, the New King James Version. (1984). Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House.
U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Selection Committee on Intelligence – HPSCI, 2018
U.S. Const. Preamble.