If the Congress and the president create the position of a national intelligence director it has to be a meaningful post with real authority. To do anything less would be to merely add to the unimaginative bureaucratic morass that is being blamed in part for not preventing the 9/11 attacks.

Unfortunately, President Bush has proposed creating a position that does not control the budgets of the nation's 15 separate intelligence organizations. Nor would the new office have any real power to force the agencies to work together and share what they know, or to appoint the directors. It would be, as Republican Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania said, "just a shell game and a shell operation."

We hope the president isn't merely acceding to the wishes of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who likely is not eager to give up part of his own budgeting authority. He currently controls $32 billion of the $40 billion overall national intelligence budget. Understandably, leaders do not want to relinquish power, but the president would be better off rejecting the recommendation to appoint a security chief rather than to create one that is meaningless.

And maybe people should be considering whether that's the way to go. The 9/11 Commission did not make a compelling argument for the creation of an entirely new post. Or, rather, it did not explain why the director of Homeland Security, a new Cabinet post created after 9/11, could not take on the extra intelligence duties, including budgeting, that seem to be lacking. Granted, intelligence often goes beyond homeland security, but the things with which spies concern themselves ultimately affect the welfare of Americans at home.

If, however, the president gets his way, a new position would be created outside the White House, and it would not have the authority to decide who leads the 15 intelligence agencies or how their money is spent. That sounds very much like an added layer of needless bureaucracy.

It would be left to Congress to force a different, more meaningful path — one that includes paring down the many congressional committees that oversee intelligence. That could present an impossible political challenge during an election year.

The overriding concern ought to be preventing further attacks on the United States. The most effective way to do that is for all intelligence agencies to communicate and coordinate, and to use their resources effectively. If a new post is required in order to make that happen, it must be done logically.

Looking for comments?
Find comments in their new home! Click the buttons at the top or within the article to view them — or use the button below for quick access.