Combating Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction

Streamlining executive branch authority and focusing responsibility will not be enoughto produce a new approach to combating proliferation. Congress must also put its housein order.The number of congressional committees with oversight and budgetary responsibility forproliferation-related programs complicates efforts to manage these programs effectively.In the House of Representatives, at least ten committees share responsibility for theauthorization of funds and oversight of proliferation-related programs in the departmentsand agencies, while an even greater number of sub-committees is responsible forappropriating funds for these programs. A similar problem exists in the Senate. Withresponsibility so widely dispersed, it is difficult if not impossible for Congress to deal withproliferation in a consistent and coordinated fashion.The Commission urges Congress to examine its programmatic and budgetaryorganization in order to improve its processes for considering WMD-related matters. TheCommission commends the Senate Armed Services Committee’s decision to consolidateits consideration of these matters in an Emerging Threats sub-committee.Recommendation 2.5: Congress should consolidate the number of reports onproliferation required from the executive branch.Congress should consolidate the WMD-related reporting requirements it has imposed onthe executive branch. Currently, the executive branch must submit scores of reports toCongress. Although many of these are triggered by specific events—such as a decision towaive sanctions—nearly two dozen are required at some regular interval, usually once ayear. (See Appendix F for a list of these reports.) The Commission urges Congress tostreamline these requirements so that the President would be required to submit onecomprehensive annual report providing Congress with all of the information it needs—andhas requested through the current reporting requirements—about proliferation. IfCongress feels that some data should be updated more often, it could require a second,less comprehensive, report to be due at some appropriate interval after the annual report.18