Department of Homeland Security

[SloopJonB]

What do you folks think about the purpose / effectiveness / need for the Department of Homeland Security? From watching the news over the past few years it seems that all the effective counter-terrorism has been done by the CIA, FBI and Special Forces.

At the time it was created I had some reservations about the DHS.

First, the name - that "Homeland" sounds a little too much like "Fatherland". There is just something a little creepy about it somehow.

Second, the woman put in charge of it seemed utterly ignorant of the reality of the terrorists - she was STILL under the impression that some or all of the 911 killers came via Canada. For the new head, that seemed like pretty basic ignorance of the essential causative reason for the formation of the agency.

Third, why was there a need for a huge new bureaucracy? There was already the CIA, FBI, NSA, DEA, ATF and the rest of the alphabet soup - all tasked with finding, tracking, monitoring and resolving threats, both foreign and domestic.

Since, as I noted, it seems that the CIA, FBI and Special Forces are the ones getting the results, what exactly does the DHS DO except suck up huge sums of money?

[Tempest]

There's also the USCG as part of that group...

As to the " intent" or purpose, I think it was to better coordinate the intel and the efforts. There was little cross agency sharing of data and intel. In corporate systems I call it "Silo" management. One hand doesn't know what the other is doing, and each is protective of their own " Turf"

I believe the FBI was more geared toward, post event prosecution than prevention. They largely dealt with crimes and criminals after the crime had been committed..( at least that is my understanding of the " stated" problem.

The agencies were probably not going to simply start cooperating with each other without a mandate and a central leadership. It would be a major shift in their agency
" Culture" Remember the " Wall" that was cited in the 9/11 report?

That's my simple understanting of the " Purpose". As to the effectiveness, it would seem that at least on the surface something is working....I don't think the CIA, the FBI and Special Forces...or DOD...played all that well in the sandbox..before HS.
It's probably better to have a large bureaucracy that works, than many that don't.

Just very, uninformed observations on my part....I have no inside information on the situation.

As far as the " Fatherland" thing. If they're watching me..they've got to be bored to tears..
And, if I did break the law..I'd be caught in a NY minute. I've peed in more jars and have been fingerprinted and photgraphed more time than Dillinger.

[imagine2frolic]

It's a joke, and huge waste of money. All for fear of profiling a person. Hey if a one armed man robs the bank. Don't stop granny, or the lady pushing a baby carriage. Look for a one armed man. Research is what is needed behind the scenes.

Colonialism is dead, and we need to get the hell out of the middle east, and anyplace else we have our fingers attatched. As far as wars. War is about killing people. It was said by someone, possibly Patton. You kill enough, and this includes some civilian colateral that eventually they get tired of dying, and surrender. What we need is change, and what we got from Obamas has been chump change. Although we got even worse from Georgie Porgie the Bush.

It's kind of funny how one gets elected, and has modest means. In a few years they are very wealth. Not on the paycheck they recieve. We need to start with those people first. Give them a little taste of what it's like to serve hard time, and quit slapping thier hands, and sending them back to class. They need to learn some hard lessons like the common person does. Live within your means, and don't be a bully, or pay the price.......i2f

[kd3pc]

the DHS and their current leader are the poster child for bureaucracy

..there are or were some 18 organizational elements/units/compartments (terminology changed a dozen times now, at a huge $$$ cost for no good reason) that comprise the DHS...it was a CF from the get go...as the powers that be did not understand a thing about "classified systems" ala the USCG and those of the "civilian" agencies. The whole concept that once an "un-class" system processed classified data, it too became classified was too much for them to handle...so they bought duplicate systems out the ying along with contractor hours to make it "work". Many master chiefs retired rather than put up with civilian "officers" tasking and "explaining their orders"....to them, of all people.

For many weeks, even months..the USCG was all but crippled as all of their "systems" - payroll, ship movement and supply, housing, orders, etc were all run on classified systems...that the DHS could no longer touch, feel, see, audit, manage or even reboot...as there were few if any cleared people on the DHS side..so they all sat in limbo

Sadly to the point Tempest made, the data is still very much siloed and off limits except on a need to know basis...so that problem is actually worse than it was prior to DHS, as you now have OEs that can not even see all of their data...and about 95% of that data is managed by contractors offsite from the offices such that even the section chiefs have no direct control over "their" data. Checks and balances as well as certification and accreditation of systems is poor at best - non-existent in many cases, and millions being spent, but no "deliverable" ever being provided back...but they really don't seem to care. Things limp along, and they pat themselves on the back for doing such a great job. Upper management positions are a revolving door of career gov't hacks all looking for a name, only to find out here is not the place. Middle management is mostly contractor oversight.

Then you add in the cobbled together network that allows DHS to talk to those other 3 letter agencies, as well as the Navy/MarineCorp network, and all the other "secure" stuff and you have DHS...

They could not find their way from one end of their own organization if they had to..

And their "new" building on the old St Elizabeth's Mental Hospital site will be the next pawn in the budget battle on the hill. The neighborhood is so rough the construction workers go out in groups or not at all, and the DC gov't is providing grants for "fast food, coffee and lunch" providers to step up ...as these types of business simply can not handle the crime in the area once DHS/USCG moves over the river...Planning Agency Approves Homeland Security Complex

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by Tempest

As to the " intent" or purpose, I think it was to better coordinate the intel and the efforts. There was little cross agency sharing of data and intel. In corporate systems I call it "Silo" management. One hand doesn't know what the other is doing, and each is protective of their own "Turf"

I figured that was one of the major reasons, along with "appearing" to be doing something significant.

Re: inter agency co-operation, I think the cheapest and best way to correct that would be for Big O to gather all the executive ranks of the three letter agencies in a big conference room and tell them this;

"Turf protection stops NOW and full inter-agency co-operation STARTS now. The purpose of your agencies is the protection of the American people, not the continued existence of a bureaucratic fiefdom. If I hear of any further incidents of a lack of co-operation by any of your agencies, the heads of that agency (you) will be terminated for cause that same day. The effectiveness of inter-agency co-operation will be monitored and audited and you will all be held responsible for the results. There will be no further discussion of this - you are all responsible for ensuring this message gets passed down to your staff and implemented forthwith. The same immediate termination for any further incidents will apply to them and the enforcement of it will rest with you. You have 90 days to implement this."

Think that would get their attention? If not, promptly and publicly firing a few of them down the road certainly would IMHO.

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by kd3pc

And their "new" building on the old St Elizabeth's Mental Hospital site

There seems something poetic about that.

[PBzeer]

The original thinking for DHS was due to a lack of coordination between the various security agencies. It was supposed to oversee the sharing of inter-agency info, and make sure nothing fell between the cracks. Of course, like most things in Washington (maybe now you folks can understand why we want smaller government), it has morphed into something far larger, and more useless.

[WouldaShoulda]

Originally Posted by PBzeer

The original thinking for DHS was due to a lack of coordination between the various security agencies.

Isn't it obvious??

If one has a lack of coordination between the various security agencies, what's needed is another security agency!!

[PorFin]

Originally Posted by SloopJonB

...for Big O to gather all the executive ranks of the three letter agencies in a big conference room and tell them this;

"Turf protection stops NOW and full inter-agency co-operation STARTS now. The purpose of your agencies is the protection of the American people, not the continued existence of a bureaucratic fiefdom. If I hear of any further incidents of a lack of co-operation by any of your agencies, the heads of that agency (you) will be terminated for cause that same day. The effectiveness of inter-agency co-operation will be monitored and audited and you will all be held responsible for the results. There will be no further discussion of this - you are all responsible for ensuring this message gets passed down to your staff and implemented forthwith. The same immediate termination for any further incidents will apply to them and the enforcement of it will rest with you. You have 90 days to implement this."
.

If only it were this easy...

I am not a fan of DHS, but I'll comment on a few of the earlier posts.

Most of the comments are about the obvious failures of DHS, but they should not have been a surprise to anyone with experience in attempting to adjust bureuacratic inertia.

As others have noted, the selling point for DHS was to "streamline," "synchronize" and "coordinate" intel sharing among the various departments and activities. This is kind of the new car smell selling point. Eventually, folks figure out that the new car smell goes away and you figure out that it did nothing to make the car better.

One important factor that no one's mentioned yet is that the Director of Homeland Security is a cabinet level position. This gives the President (theoretically) one belly button in cabinet meetings to push instead of doing so through subordinates. COnversely, it also gives the organizations represented by the Dir, DHS a voice in cabinet meetings. Most importantly, this voice finds itself of use in budget battles. It's far more difficult for congress to deny funds to something called "homeland security" than it is to quietly carve dollars off of smaller agency budget lines.

The resulting failures should have been predictable, perhaps even anticipated.

All of the existing organizations involved had their own personalities, reporting chains and operational cultures, and were being asked to change how (and in some cases why) they did business. There was initial resistance, which was to be expected. This resistance impeded efforts to make it a glitch-free blast off.

Getting plugged into the (several) different classified info pipelines ain't an easy task. It's not like it just takes a modem and running prepackaged ISP connect software. We're talking about entirely new and redundant systems -- often layered to compartmentalize sensitive data, and to provide increasing levels of security as that data becomes more sensitive. Like it or not, compartmentalization is an important aspect of overall operational and information security.

I share the view that Janet Napolitano is a bad fit at DHS. Her experience as a governor and jurist -- while useful -- was not sufficient to prepare her to wrangle this bureaucratic beast. And she has not shown many signs of growing into her job.

[Sailormon6]

It's simplistic to think that the sole reason for the formation of the Department of Homeland Security was to engender a spirit of cooperation among all the agencies. At the time of 9/11, the agencies couldn't have cooperated to the extent needed, even if they had been of a mind to do so. Each agency stored it's information in it's own database, and they needed to combine their data so that each agency could search and find information relevant to it's separate function. It might be that the agency has coordinated the various agencies and combined their databases to the extent needed, and perhaps the agency has fulfilled it's original purpose. If so, it might be appropriate to eliminate the agency. Does anyone here actually know whether the agency has achieved all it's goals, and by doing so, made itself unnecessary, or are we just blowing smoke?