WHO IS GOING TOO FAR?

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00552R000707220027-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 23, 2010
• Sequence Number: 27
• Publication Date: August 30, 1981
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/23: CIA-RDP90-00552R000707220027-6
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
30 August 1981
0. r"t
Who Is Going 11 oo Far?
The Reagan administration has been
reversing previous policies adopted by
Republican as well as. Democratic
administrations in a number of fields, and
now it wants to "ease" limits on how
intelligence agencies spy on Americans.
That could be a dangerous reversal for the
rights of citizens.
It is unclear just how tar the- present
administratiion will go. Richard Willard,
chief of the Justice Department's Office of
Intelligence Policy, says physical
surveillance of Americans'"is an example of
where the Carter administration may have
gone too far in putting restrictions on
intelligence activities," but Mr. Willard did
not spell out the restrictions to be eased.
Still, there are hints. A first draft of
proposals by an inter-agency task force on
which Mr. Willard serves was. leaked to the
press last spring. It would have allowed the
Central 'gawc4..Agency to conduct
omestjc bugging and break-ins, and to
infiltrate domestic groups with foreign ties
in efforts to influence their activities. The
draft also would have eliminated the
requirement that the attorney general
approve each instance, of . such intrusive
tactics as electronic bugging, television
monitoring, break-ins and mail opening.
Because 'of intelligence abuses, such as
spying on and harassing groups exercising
their constitutional liberties to work for civil
rights or protest against the Vietnam war,
the Carter administration limited
surveillance of U,S residents to lawful FBI
investigations or efforts by other agencies to
watch their own employees or contractors.
The draft proposals would have reversed the
rA trictions; hence; disclosure of information
about them caused an uproar.
The CIA is not supposed to be involved in
domestic spying, much less in trying to
disrupt `domestic political groups. The
Federal Bureau : of Investigation is the
domestic intelligence agency. FBI Director
William Webster himself has cautioned
against relaxing controls on domestic
intelligence operations involving Americans.
Why should the CIA be allowed broader
range to engage in them?
Beyond that, some of the electronic
bugging in the past was done without court
warrants as required by law, many of the
break-ins were blatantly illegal, and so were
mail openings. Neither the CIA nor the'FBI
should be allowed to conduct' illegal
activities, with or without the approval of the
attorney general, but eliminating eyen the
requirement giving that official some control
over such intrusions on constitutional
liberties would leave the agencies, or their
agents, free to do as they choose.
So the inter=sgency task force drew up a
second draft. That was reported to have
partly restored the attorney general's role in
approving some intelligence operations, and
to have trimmed the CIA's' domestic
.activities. "The CIA never: wanted to get
involved in domestic spying," Mr. Willard
explained. Then who wanted not only to
involve it in domestic espionage, -against its
will, but to enlarge its powers?
The two 'drafts, and 'Mr.: Willard's
generalizations about "going too far" in
limiting intelligence activities, are enough to
raise questions as to whether the
administration may go too far in enhancing
the' power of government to interfere with'
the ideas'and associations of citizens. Recent
history demonstrates that the nation has
already had far too much of that.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/23: CIA-RDP90-00552R000707220027-6