A leaky administration.

Byline: The Register-Guard

Unauthorized disclosures of classified information are nothing new in Washington, D.C., a city that has more leaks than a vintage pick-up. But the Bush administration's outing of an undercover CIA officer to the media is in a shameful - and dangerous - class of its own. This affair should be investigated by an independent prosecutor.

Earlier this week, the Justice Department announced it will conduct a full criminal investigation. U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft is a former client of White House political guru Karl Rove, who has been cited as a possible source of the leak, and the attorney general's political roots run deep in the administration. He should acknowledge the need for an aggressive, nonpartisan investigation and name an independent counsel.

An investigation by Ashcroft's Justice Department, even if it is thorough and fair, would automatically be viewed as suspect by many. Bush appointee Ashcroft is not the right person for the job.

There can be no questioning the severity of this crime. This was not another instance of a D.C. whistleblower exposing official waste or fraud. Nor was it an attempt to smear the reputation of an elected official for political gain. The naming of an undercover agent is a reprehensible crime, one that can expose the agent to risk and destroy his or her career, and that can endanger the lives of contacts in other countries.

Here's what we know: On July 14, columnist Robert Novak reported that ``two senior administration officials'' had told him that the wife of former U.S. ambassador Joseph Wilson was an operative of the CIA. The column ran eight days after The New York Times published a column by Wilson suggesting that the Bush administration had exaggerated the nuclear threat from Iraq.

Two key questions must be answered. The first is who told Novak, as well as several other columnists and reporters, the name of the CIA agent. The second concerns motive: Was this intended as an act of retaliation and intimidation, a message to anyone else who might question administration policies? Or was it - this seems unlikely - merely an unauthorized blunder in which the White House played no role? Or were there other forces at play?

The allegations come at a time when questions are mounting about the Bush administration's justification for the invasion of Iraq. Leaders of the House Intelligence Committee recently sent a letter to the CIA citing "significant deficiencies" in prewar intelligence. Last week, the leader of the U.S. search for weapons of mass destruction issued an interim report stating that none had been found. Meanwhile, the president is asking Congress to spend $87 billion more for the occupation and reconstruction of Iraq.

When word of the leak first surfaced several weeks ago, the White House dismissed concerns as politically motivated. On Tuesday, the president said he views the disclosure of a CIA operative's name as a serious matter and vowed to take "appropriate action" against anyone responsible.

Bush has an opportunity to show whether he means what he says. An independent counsel should be appointed to ensure Americans get the truth they deserve.