1. United States
2. Maine
3. Letter

I write again out of concern for the proper balance between secrecy and accountability within our system of government. Recent reporting by The Wall Street Journal describes an extraordinary circumstance involving a whistleblower complaint filed against the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, by a U.S. intelligence official—one that, according to the report, has been withheld from Congress for months. I was deeply unsettled to learn that this complaint is said to be secured in a safe, its contents deemed so sensitive that their disclosure could cause “grave damage to national security.” While the protection of classified information is a solemn and necessary duty, it must not become a pretext for insulating senior officials from lawful oversight. Our constitutional structure presumes that secrecy, though sometimes essential, is never absolute. What troubles me most is not the unknown substance of the complaint, but the reported refusal to share it with Congress despite the passage of eight months. The legislative branch was entrusted precisely to serve as a check in moments such as these. When oversight is delayed indefinitely, accountability withers, and public confidence erodes. History teaches that free governments do not falter because secrets exist, but because the mechanisms meant to supervise them are neglected or bypassed. If allegations are unfounded, transparency—within lawful bounds—serves to clear the innocent. If they are substantial, delay only deepens the harm. I respectfully urge you to press for clarity on this matter: to ensure that Congress is afforded the access necessary to fulfill its constitutional responsibility, and that established whistleblower protections are neither weakened nor ignored. Vigilance in defense of institutional integrity is not disloyalty. It is fidelity to the Republic itself