Rep. Porter Goss was nominated this week by President Bush to be the director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

The question of what job he would actually fill – and what authority he would have – has not been answered. The Sept. 11 commission has recommended significant changes in the way the intelligence community is organized, including the appointment of a cabinet-level director of national intelligence who would have budgetary authority of the diverse elements responsible for America’s spy work and analysis. President Bush has endorsed the idea of a DNI, but his vision would create a job with sharply more limited power.

It’s a precarious time to appoint a new CIA director. The country faces unspecified threats from terrorists, a national election is approaching and if President Bush is not re-elected, any new director would likely have a very short tenure, adding one more difficult transition to an already complicated process of reforming the intelligence community.

Goss has been criticized for his partisanship and has sharply attacked Sen. John Kerry, who is challenging Bush for the presidency. Goss’ opponents say he has politicized the House Intelligence Committee, which he has chaired.

Partisanship in Washington should not eliminate a qualified person from a position of authority. Party fights are inevitable for someone serving in Congress. The president can choose his own advisers – and will be held accountable for their actions.

Goss also is a former CIA covert operative and has an abiding affection for the agency. According to published reports and the book “Ghost Wars” by Washington Post editor Steve Coll, Goss romanticizes the cowboy days of CIA operatives in the 1960s and early 1970s. He was chairman of the House committee responsible for oversight of intelligence when the country was attacked on Sept. 11 and during the bungled predictions about Iraq’s nonexistent weapons of mass destruction.

He has been a consistent defender of the agency, doubting the need for a lengthy investigation of its failures. Not until almost three years after Sept. 11, when a confrontation with the CIA was politically unavoidable, did he rebuke his former colleagues.

Whether Goss can oversee the reform of the CIA depends exactly on what job he’s being offered and what specific vision he has for changing the agency.

It will be up to the Senate, during confirmation hearings expected in September, to seek answers to these important questions.