The government refuses to release the findings of a comprehensive study on contracting at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), National Security Agency, and other federal intelligence agencies on the grounds that it is classified information and is sensitive to national security. The amount spent on federal contracts government-wide has doubled, from $209 billion in FY 2000 to $384 billion in FY 2005, but this does not include money spent on intelligence contractors, the figures for which are unknown to the public.

The New York Times reported last week that, concerned about the heavy reliance on contractors, senior intelligence officials completed a study on the number of contractors working at federal intelligence agencies. There has been greater reliance on contractors to conduct intelligence work since 9/11 due to a rapid increase in demand. The Times states that 25 percent of intelligence work is contracted out. The rest of the findings of the study, though, remain classified, as do the budgets and number of employees for all intelligence agencies.

Since 1999, the CIA has refused to disclose its budget, and it also refuses to release its annual budgets dating back to 1947, except for 1997 and 1998, in which the overall intelligence budget information was voluntarily disclosed by then-director George Tenet, and 1963, in which the CIA budget was shown to be in the public domain and was released under FOIA.

Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists has sued the CIA multiple times to release budget information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The best argument for the refusal to disclose, according to Aftergood, is that the decision to disclose would create a precedent for the disclosure of additional information, which could potentially threaten the nation's security. "I have yet to meet any intelligence professional at any level who claims that disclosure [of the intelligence budget] would pose a threat," states Aftergood. "It's a rhetorical straw man that's been empirically refuted."

There was no documented harm following the release of the 1997 and 1998 budgets and no further disclosure of sensitive intelligence information. Moreover, John Negroponte, the former director of national intelligence, publicly revealed that there are an estimated 100,000 federal intelligence employees, another example of disclosure without harm or further disclosure of sensitive information.

When it comes to intelligence activities, the government needs to ensure that potentially damaging information is not released, but it is just as important that other information essential for exercising oversight and accountability is publicly available. Unfortunately, the balance has traditionally been skewed towards concealment due to the general nature of intelligence work. As the 9/11 Commission recommended, the overall intelligence budget and spending by individual agencies should be publicly released in order to promote accountability and reduce secrecy and unnecessary complexity. To institute the Commission's recommendations, the Senate passed Improving America's Security Act (S. 4), which requires the disclosure of the aggregate totals requested and appropriated for intelligence activities. This provision has been formally opposed by the White House. The companion House bill, Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act (H.R. 1), does not include a similar provision.