Skip to content

June 26, 2014

King Statement on Stimson Center Report on U.S. Drone Policy

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Angus King (I-Maine), a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, released the following statement today in response to the release of the Recommendations and Report of the Task Force on US Drone Policy by the Stimson Center:

“As the nature of warfare constantly evolves and as the U.S. develops new technologies to defend our country and its global security interests, we must be vigilant in ensuring the increased use of these technologies, like drones, does not outpace our ethics,” Senator King said. “No one questions the need to meet the national security challenges that confront us across the globe, but we also have to be ever mindful that we are in keeping with the laws and values that define our nation. I commend the Task Force for highlighting an important issue that deserves a full debate and discussion, and I look forward to reviewing their recommendations.”

The Senate and House this month approved the Fiscal Year 2014 Intelligence Authorization Act, which includes an amendment authored by Senators King and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) based on legislation they introduced in May 2013 as S. 1035, the Targeted Strike Oversight Reform Act. The final provision was moved to the classified annex. Senators King and Rubio requested that this unclassified summary of the provision be made available to the public:

The King-Rubio provision requires the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to complete an independent assessment of the available intelligence supporting any determination by the Administration that an identified U.S. person is engaged in acts of international terrorism against the United States and meets the government’s criteria for approving the use of targeted lethal action. This provision will require an independent assessment of the nomination of a U.S. person for lethal strike to be completed within fifteen days. It also requires the DNI to immediately notify Congress in writing of the results of the assessment, and the identity of the U.S. person.

###


Next Article » « Previous Article