OMB Watch will not let the government criminalize "leaked" information. Read our letter to Senator Graham urging him to not include the provision in the upcoming Intelligence Authorization bill. Dear Senator Graham: I am writing on behalf of OMB Watch to urge you to not include a leaks criminalization provision in the upcoming Intelligence Authorization bill. As you know, the Administration has indicated it is in the process of looking at this issue to determine whether there is a problem, and, if there is, how it should be addressed. At this point, the Administration has not indicated that this provision is needed, nor is it being sought by them. OMB Watch is a nonprofit research and advocacy organization dedicated to improving government accountability and strengthening citizen participation. A key mission of OMB Watch is promoting an open, transparent government. We have worked with local, state, and national organizations on issues that pertain to advancing the public's right-to-know for the past 15 years. Last year, we raised strong opposition to the provision in the Intelligence Authorization bill. An authorization bill is not the venue for presentation of legislation that has profound First Amendment implications. Indeed, as President Clinton stated in his message vetoing the Intelligence Authorization Act last year, because this same provision was included therein, the provision is "overbroad and may unnecessarily chill legitimate activities that are at the heart of a democracy." This provision has important balance-of-power implications as well. As Justice Stewart wrote in the Pentagon Papers case, "the only effective restraint upon executive policy in the areas of national defense and international affairs may lie in an enlightened citizenry - in an informed and critical public opinion which alone can here protect the values of democratic government." This provision would place all control in the hands of the executive branch. If it is, indeed, the intent of Congress to delegate to the executive the definition of the law in this area, it is not an act that should be undertaken lightly, and certainly not as part of an authorization bill. Time needs to be allowed, as House Judiciary Committee Chair Sensenbrenner has noted in his letter to your counterpart in the House, Chairman Goss, for a public hearing process, in which various interests are able to express their views, could build a better understanding of the problem of unauthorized disclosures of classified information and highlight the desire to develop an appropriate solution to this national security problem. We urge you to not include this provision in your Chairman's mark. Thank you