Please find below an example of UPI's continuing coverage of the Department of Homeland Security. I hope you find it interesting. You may link to it on the web here:
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20050718-014041-4920r If you have any comments or questions about this piece, need any more information about UPI products and services, or want to stop receiving these alerts, please get in touch. Thank you, Shaun Waterman UPI Homeland and National Security Editor E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 202 898 8081 DHS reforms now face skeptical lawmakers By Shaun Waterman UPI Homeland and National Security Editor WASHINGTON, July 18 (UPI) -- Many of the changes to his department mooted by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff last week require congressional approval, but face skepticism on several fronts from lawmakers, some of whom are angry over what they say is the department's failure to consult with them. Under the Homeland Security Act, which set the department up, Chertoff enjoys enormous authority to reorganize the department without congressional approval. But the creation of two new undersecretaries -- for preparedness and policy -- and the elimination of the two they will supplant, does need legislation. And the reorganization also means money will have to be moved around the budget, which will require amendments to the department's 2006 appropriation legislation. Even those elements of the reforms that require neither legislation nor budgetary change are subject to congressional scrutiny via the so-called 872 letter process, named for the section of the law that requires the homeland security secretary to notify congress of proposed changes to the department's structure. And lawmakers on both sides of the aisle warn Chertoff may face tough sledding on Capitol Hill. The House and Senate versions of the department's appropriation bill, for instance, both zero out funding for the planned Screening Coordination Office -- a single team of officials charged with developing policies and procedures for the dozen or so programs run by different homeland security elements that involve checking against terrorist watch lists the names of airline passengers, foreign visitors, port workers, truckers hauling hazardous materials and other groups of people. "There is continuing skepticism about this office," a senior Senate staffer told United Press International, citing ongoing concerns about the development of the Secure Flight airline passenger screening system. The system's poor record on privacy issues has attracted criticism from Republicans and Democrats alike. Homeland Security officials say they will renew their efforts to sell a slimmed-down version of the office to lawmakers as negotiations on reconciling the two bills continue. "We're going to make a strong pitch (on Capitol Hill) about why the Screening Coordination Office is necessary," Deputy Secretary Michael Jackson told UPI. Congressional sources said the department would likely work with appropriators for behind-the-scene changes to avoid being bogged down in floor debates. "The department is pressing to implement these (changes) via (amendments to the appropriation bill in the joint House-Senate) conference," the staffer said. He warned this could mean the conference would not happen until after the August recess. A lot of information would be needed to make the necessary changes to the bill, the staffer said, adding that homeland security was "not a department with a reputation for being nimble," in responding to congressional requests. Other lawmakers, meanwhile, are troubled that Chertoff did nothing to strengthen his department's financial management -- which many see as the sine qua non of improving its performance. Rep. Todd Platts, R-Penn., chairman of the House government reform management, finance and accountability sub-committee wrote to Chertoff last week expressing concern that the proposed reforms "missed a valuable opportunity to strengthen the role of (the department's) chief financial officer," which he said was especially important because homeland security had not yet been able to get a clean audit since it was stood up in March 2003. Observers say that the authority of the department's chief financial officer -- and of its chief information and procurement officers, too -- is hamstrung by the existence of counterpart chief officers in all 22 of the so-called legacy elements: the federal agencies that were merged into the department. These legacy officials report to their agency heads, not to their departmental counterpart. Critics say this undermines the latter's authority. Jackson acknowledged kin a news briefing last week that the new structure maintained "the dotted line relationship between the (chief information officer) of a given operational component and the department's (chief information officer.)" Daniel Prieto, a former Democratic staffer on the House Homeland security Committee who now heads the Homeland Security Partnership Initiative at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, said the department seemed to believe that no new authorities were needed for its officers. "They think they can fix this by just focusing on it harder," he told UPI. Platts, who says the new structure still does not bring the department into conformity with legislation governing the financial management of federal agencies, plans a hearing on the issue later this month and has invited Chertoff to testify. As Chertoff rolled his planned reforms out in front of an invited audience of Department of Homeland Security employees last Wednesday, officials were putting the final touches to draft legislation and other congressional documents designed to implement the changes he wants. Chertoff had already briefed key lawmakers earlier in the week, but several congressional sources said the briefings were "very broad brush, very thematic," and lacking in any kind of detail. Some lawmakers on several congressional panels that still claim jurisdiction over parts of the department and their activities say they were not briefed at all. "Let's make this perfectly clear," wrote Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Max Baucus, D-Ga., of the Senate Finance Committee, in an angry letter to Chertoff Friday, "a good public relations effort does not substitute for adequate Congressional consultations." The senators said it was "unacceptable ... to learn about the proposed restructuring and other key changes to the (department) in the media and through speeches instead of through consultations." The senators said they were effectively excluded from a briefing held by officials despite assurances they would be kept informed. They renewed a demand for "any and all third-party reviews, audits, and evaluations conducted" as part of the review process that led to the changes. Cynics painted many lawmakers' concerns as a reflex action to protect their jurisdiction -- the time-honored congressional tradition of turf-protection. But other observers countered that Platts' subcommittee has done yeoman's work on the decidedly un-sexy issue of the department's chaotic financial management, and pointed out that, at least on the House side, even those on the committees of primary jurisdiction felt that the department could have consulted more closely with them. "We were never asked, 'what do you think?'" Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, said. Thompson added that lawmakers had yet to see details of the planned re-organization, and that, partly as a result, "I think it will encounter some questions." In particular, Thompson cautioned, committee members will be looking for guarantees that the new structure will avoid "embarrassing departmental SNAFUs" like the listing of a miniature golf course in a database of critical infrastructure; or the inclusion of members of Congress on the "No-fly" list of suspected terrorists and their associates. Prompted in part by concerns about inaccuracies in the "No-fly" list, Chertoff's predecessor, Tom Ridge, first mooted a Screening Coordination Office in the department's 2006 budget request unveiled last February. Officials said then the planned office would take over the administration of all the department's screening programs, including US-VISIT, the ambitious and so-far successful effort to biometrically verify the identities of all foreign visitors. But in what congressional critics see as an effort to placate them, Chertoff's planned reorganization shrinks the role envisioned for the office. "The plan to put everything in that office was not Secretary Chertoff's plan, and that is not his intent," said Jackson. Instead, Jackson said, the new vision was of an office, based within the department's new policy directorate, that would "find common operating components that can be shared across (the department's screening programs) -- name checking technology, computer back-up systems ... and a common-sense architecture of how we protect privacy (and) manage the public's capacity to come in and identify errors." Decisions about where the programs should reside, however, would be made on a case-by-case basis, said Jackson, adding that at present only US-VISIT would be moved lock, stock and barrel into the new office. One official said that given the excellent track record of US-VISIT on privacy and accuracy, the move should reassure lawmakers that the new office will take those issues seriously. Copyright (c) 2001-2005 United Press International -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
