National Intelligence Director Good Thing? Bad Thing?

The Kerry/Edwards 'platform' has been strongly pushing this concept of a central agency over all the intelligence agencies in the last week or two, and the concern is real. Won't happen under Bush but Kerry (and now supported by Edwards who initially wanted even a stronger central agency) says he'll put it in.

My concerns are similar to BPB's in any case, however. The danger of one person having authority over all intelligence activities is likely to narrow the focus too much and put too much pressure on the agencies to produce a unified 'opinion'.

Ok I agree and I am a conservative. I like Bush but I think he is to whishy washy. I think that One person in control of so much has too much authority and power it should be a board or a new cabinet appointment.

MJK

Bad idea.
More bureaucracy.
More wasted money.
More room for corruption.

And, BPB, if there is a sexist political party, it sure as hell ain't the GOP. The NATIONAL SECURITY head is a woman. First time that's been done, and it is no pie position like HHS or Labor. It is MEAT. Man appointed or not (if thismistake is allowed to occur), the Bush administration has proven itself with valued placements of women and other minorites.

whatever you say.....

I think we should leave the CIA and FBI as they are, with no new agency ( to add to the problem), and simply assign agents to actively attempt to disprove, or poke holes in each bit of intel mined.

The uncontested 'groupthink' was the problem. You should have half the agents directed to contest the popular theories.

Also, so the groupthink doesn't happen within the pro- and con- circles--they should be re-assigned, and mixed within the other circle every couple of years, or they'll get entrenched and become warring factions....and two sets of groupthink, rather than one.

The Bush administration is talking overhaul of the intelligence agencies and no doubt are studying how to fix the problems that exist. I can't see them adding another bureaucratic layer however, while Kerry/Edwards are on record that they intend to do just that.

Whichever way it goes, look for a decent fight from the FBI, CIA, etc.

start screwing around with these guys and someone will probably end up dying under tragic and fishy circumstances.....

Don't you think two guys in black trenchcoats from CHI-cago showing up on the White House porch would be viewed with some suspicion?

Dunno.

Having just come from a centre of power where no bastard knew what the other bastards were doing - and where agencies competed with each other, hence keeping secrets (because of a general atmosphere created by the government, re resourcing, not because they would normally do so) and there was NOBODY who had a clear overview of what was happening - leading to insane lack of co-ordination and such, I am all in favour of someone having access to all the information - and being able to co-ordinate and such.


Pessimistically speaking - which kind of reflects life, I guess - well, the old saw about power ain't there for nothing.


How would this position be monitored and kept honest?

I supose it's not too inappropriate to expect that politicians in general (not naming names) have a track-record of being quite... unreliable when it comes to either handing out real authority or being 100% for investigating or divulging information.