http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/07/02/next-dhs-transition-study-now-available/ News and analysis of critical issues in homeland security today. Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:01:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/07/02/next-dhs-transition-study-now-available/#comment-111782 William R. Cumming Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:44:07 +0000 http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/07/02/next-dhs-transition-study-now-available/#comment-111782 A further thought on the NAPA report. Remarkable for what it did not analyze by the way. With the addition recently of 18,000 additional DHS positions to the law enforcement community (meaning criminal law enforcement) allowing 20 year and out retirements, perhaps the twin cultures of those who can retire after only 30 years and age 55 as opposed to the GUN and BADGE carriers, and the Coast Guard (Uniformed Military) should have been seperately analyzed. In fact I would argue for ALL criminal law enforcement activities of DHS to be overseen by the respective Judicary Committees of the House and Senate. Additionally all statutes vested authority in DHS or delegated by the President should have oversight by the Homeland Security Committee (which to my knowledge has never seen the Senate take up one of its authorization efforts) and the Senate's Homeland Security and Government Reform Committee. Failure of Congressional oversight is a clear and present danger to Homeland Security at this point and hope the 111 Congress does better. By the way the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. l521 et.seq.) should undergo a full policy review for its funding of non-humanitarian criminal law enforcement activity and I would recommend that no funding under that statute be used for criminal law enforcement programs, functions, or activities, at either federal, state, or local governmental levels. Provision of security to responders is a separate issue and should be excluded from this ban. A further thought on the NAPA report. Remarkable for what it did not analyze by the way. With the addition recently of 18,000 additional DHS positions to the law enforcement community (meaning criminal law enforcement) allowing 20 year and out retirements, perhaps the twin cultures of those who can retire after only 30 years and age 55 as opposed to the GUN and BADGE carriers, and the Coast Guard (Uniformed Military) should have been seperately analyzed. In fact I would argue for ALL criminal law enforcement activities of DHS to be overseen by the respective Judicary Committees of the House and Senate. Additionally all statutes vested authority in DHS or delegated by the President should have oversight by the Homeland Security Committee (which to my knowledge has never seen the Senate take up one of its authorization efforts) and the Senate’s Homeland Security and Government Reform Committee. Failure of Congressional oversight is a clear and present danger to Homeland Security at this point and hope the 111 Congress does better. By the way the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. l521 et.seq.) should undergo a full policy review for its funding of non-humanitarian criminal law enforcement activity and I would recommend that no funding under that statute be used for criminal law enforcement programs, functions, or activities, at either federal, state, or local governmental levels. Provision of security to responders is a separate issue and should be excluded from this ban.

]]> http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/07/02/next-dhs-transition-study-now-available/#comment-111096 William R. Cumming Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:04:51 +0000 http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/07/02/next-dhs-transition-study-now-available/#comment-111096 Interesting post and study! NAPA might also have identified the following current problems affecting the transition no matter which party wins and personally I believe Senator McCain will find DHS a bigger headache than Senator Obama if he wins. For one thing, he will still have no analysis of failures of DHS since march 1, 2003 when its doors opened for real. Example $30B invested in IT systems and processes that have largely failed and even destroyed old functions systems. Another, no real critical infrastructure protection program or cyber security effort. First documented of course 11 years ago this fall by a Presidential Commission. Third no effective integration of monies spent by HHS, DOD, and DOJ on HS with DHS. So much overlap and waste. One more, no decision on whether FEMA is an ops agency or something else. It certainly has had virtually NO policy role since March 1, 2003. Finally of course there is not even a single document listing statutory or executive authorities vesting legal authority in the Secretary DHS and certainly no adquate delegations, in particular to field personnel. Just one more shot across the bow, ask Secretary Chertoff under oath how he officially and otherwise relates to the DNI? Remember when the principal rationale to create DHS was the need for domestic intelligence. Always a sensitive issue legally and policy wise. Actually the Executive Branch has no largely decided to let the federal courts decide the limits on domestic spying with no real thought as to what is necessary or legal. So far despite the conservative nature of the courts as currently staffed the Executive Branch is now recieving outstanding approval from those same courts. Interesting post and study! NAPA might also have identified the following current problems affecting the transition no matter which party wins and personally I believe Senator McCain will find DHS a bigger headache than Senator Obama if he wins. For one thing, he will still have no analysis of failures of DHS since march 1, 2003 when its doors opened for real. Example $30B invested in IT systems and processes that have largely failed and even destroyed old functions systems. Another, no real critical infrastructure protection program or cyber security effort. First documented of course 11 years ago this fall by a Presidential Commission. Third no effective integration of monies spent by HHS, DOD, and DOJ on HS with DHS. So much overlap and waste. One more, no decision on whether FEMA is an ops agency or something else. It certainly has had virtually NO policy role since March 1, 2003. Finally of course there is not even a single document listing statutory or executive authorities vesting legal authority in the Secretary DHS and certainly no adquate delegations, in particular to field personnel. Just one more shot across the bow, ask Secretary Chertoff under oath how he officially and otherwise relates to the DNI? Remember when the principal rationale to create DHS was the need for domestic intelligence. Always a sensitive issue legally and policy wise. Actually the Executive Branch has no largely decided to let the federal courts decide the limits on domestic spying with no real thought as to what is necessary or legal. So far despite the conservative nature of the courts as currently staffed the Executive Branch is now recieving outstanding approval from those same courts.

]]>