November 13, 2002: Explanation of the change in wording in S 2667 regarding intelligence gathering

Peace Corps Online: Peace Corps News: Headlines: Peace Corps Headlines - 2002: 11 November 2002 Peace Corps Headlines: November 13, 2002: Explanation of the change in wording in S 2667 regarding intelligence gathering

By Admin1 (admin) on Wednesday, November 13, 2002 - 11:49 pm: Edit Post

Explanation of the change in wording in S 2667 regarding intelligence gathering

PCOL previously published an op-ed piece which pointed out that one of the changes that appeared in Senator Dodd's Amended Peace Corps Bill (S 2667) that passed the Senate on October 16 was that the phrase "...No Peace Corps personnel or volunteers should have any relationship with any United States intelligence agency..." which was part of the original bill was dropped from the Amended Version of the bill and raised the question of why this phrase had been dropped.

Read and comment on this excerpt from an email from Dave Hibbard of the Peace Corps Charter which explains the reason that this phrase was dropped. The email also says that both Senator Chris Dodd and Representative Sam Farr, the authors of the original bill, are comfortable with that language. The issue has been raised and the question has been answered.

S 2667 is not a perfect bill - there is no such thing. But the bill is a huge step forward for the Peace Corps and for the Returned Volunteer community. For the record, PCOL supports passage of the Amended S 2667 by the House of Representatives during this lame duck session. Read the email at:

Explanation of the change in wording in S 2667 regarding intelligence gathering*

* This link was active on the date it was posted. PCOL is not responsible for broken links which may have changed.

Explanation of the change in wording in S 2667 regarding intelligence gathering

The Peace Corps and White House objected to the inclusion of the wording about intelligence gathering (spying) because it IMPLIED that there may have been intelligence gathering in the past (which has never been the case) so all 3 parties (WH, PC and Senate Foreign Relations) agreed to leave it out. The language now includes the point that the Peace Corps will strictly do its own recruiting thus dissociating it from the Freedom Corps. And there has been no effort to place the Peace Corps under the Freedom Corps. There was a certain amount of political give and take to get to where we are now. However, both Chris Dodd and Sam Farr (and Mark Udall) are all comfortable with the language.

I hope this helps. At some point we all need to trust the process and support the bill. It will never be perfect, but its a lot more and better than what previously existed.

Click on a link below for more stories on PCOL

Top Stories and Discussion on PCOL
Dodd's Amended Bill passes in SenateElection 2002:  RPCVs run for office
Peace Corps Volunteers Safe in Ivory CoastA Profile of Gaddi Vasquez
Sargent Shriver and the Politics of Life911:  A Different America
USA Freedom Corps - "paved with good intentions"PCV hostage rescued from terrorists
GAO reports on Volunteer Safety and SecurityPeace Corps out of Russia?
Help the New Peace Corps Bill pass CongressUSA Freedom Cops TIPS Program

Top Stories and Discussion on PCOL
Senior Staff Appointments at Peace Corps HeadquartersFor the Peace Corps Fallen
Senator Dodd holds Hearings on New Peace Corps LegislationThe Debate over the Peace Corps Fund
Why the Peace Corps needs a Fourth GoalThe Peace Corps 40th plus one
The Case for Peace Corps IndependenceThe Controversy over Lariam
The Peace Corps and Homeland SecurityDirector Vasquez meets with RPCVs
RPCV Congressmen support Peace Corps' autonomyPeace Corps Expansion:  The Numbers Game?
When should the Peace Corps return to Afghanistan?Peace Corps Cartoons

Some postings on Peace Corps Online are provided to the individual members of this group without permission of the copyright owner for the non-profit purposes of criticism, comment, education, scholarship, and research under the "Fair Use" provisions of U.S. Government copyright laws and they may not be distributed further without permission of the copyright owner. Peace Corps Online does not vouch for the accuracy of the content of the postings, which is the sole responsibility of the copyright holder.

This story has been posted in the following forums: : Headlines; Advocacy



By Admin1 (admin) on Monday, December 02, 2002 - 11:33 pm: Edit Post

Here are the original articles on Senator Dodd's Amended Peace Corps Bill which sparked the original concern.

Comparison of Senate and House Versions of the Bill

The Senate and House Versions of the Peace Corps Bill were originally identical. However the Senate Version (S2667) was amended on October 10. Compare the amended bill with the original bill.

Comparison between the Senate Version (S2667) and House Version (HR4979) of the Peace Corps Bill

RPCVs comment on the bill

NPCA's Pre-Election Update on the Status of the Peace Corps Bill 24 October 2002

The NPCA and Peace Corps Fund comment on Senator Dodd's Peace Corps Bill 21 October 2002

Op-ed: The Tequila Worm is Missing: What happened to the Dodd bill and what RPCVs can do 21 October 2002

Add a Message

This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.