Why are Democrats always putting up road blocks to prevent homeland security?

Question

The new Congress takes an old approach to homeland security.


Members of Congress head home this week with precious little to show for their months of grandstanding on the Hill. However, as the clock counted down to August recess, lawmakers were able to get one “signature” bill off to the president, an act purporting to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

Those hoping the bill would provide a clear strategic direction for homeland-security policy will find this “signature” as inscrutable as that of a drunken doctor writing in haste. But the bill does clearly show, however, that the way Congress “does” homeland security has changed significantly under it new Democratic leadership.

That’s not to say that everything about the bill is wrong-headed. The so-called 9/11 bill includes several positives, embracing measures that homeland security experts have long advocated. Among these are provisions:

Lowering the minimum amount of security grants that Washington must give each state. Unlike most of the bill’s provisions, this one actually was recommended by the 9/11 Commission, which was rightfully concerned that homeland security grants were becoming little more than vehicles for pork-barrel spending projects. This reform will allow the Department of Homeland Security to focus more money on the highest homeland security priorities.

Requiring periodic strategic assessments similar to the Defense Department’s Quadrennial Defense Reviews. It makes sense to take time occasionally to review whether what’s being done is actually accomplishing anything useful.

Promoting reform and encouraging a modest expansion in the Visa Waiver Program. Efforts to increase opportunities for America’s friends and allies to visit the U.S. while making terrorist travel more difficult are long overdue.

Nor did the final bill include every bad idea incorporated in the original bills offered in the House and Senate. For example, bill conferees dropped a measure that would have expanded union rights over the Transportation Safety Administration. The erstwhile “union protection” provisions would have made it virtually impossible for TSA make timely changes in its passenger screening procedure in response to ever-evolving security threats.

Unfortunately, the bill does contain a good deal of junk. Some requirements will actually make America less safe, needlessly siphoning time, effort, and resources away from the kind of work that actually thwarts terrorists. Among the key strategic missteps are provisions that:

Increase spending based on criteria unrelated to actual security risks. Though they tightened up one state grant program, lawmakers wound up creating new grant programs, beefing up existing (and unfocused) grant programs, and injecting wasteful state minimums into more grant funding formulas. They also adopted a host of earmarks from congressional leadership. In the end, Congress could not resist buying a bigger barrel and stuffing it with even more pork.

Require ports and airlines to scan every container entering the United States. While this initiative “polls well,” most security experts find the idea preposterous. The scanning will produce so much data (and poor-quality data at that) that it will bog down rather than inform security operations. By the time anyone dockside will be able to review pictures of, say, a container of sneakers sent from China, odds are the shoes will have already been stocked, sold, and walking around the country for weeks.

One measure of how far the bill has missed its strategic mark is how found in how very few of its more than 700 pages of provisions pertains in any way to recommendations actually made by the 9/11 Commission. Inspecting every container of frozen fish, for example, was never suggested in the commission report.

How curious that the so-called 9/11 bill can come up with so many frothy original ideas, yet scrupulously avoid so many hard-nosed recommendations from the commission. For instance, whatever happened to the idea of further consolidating the jurisdiction of congressional committees over the Homeland Security Department. The new law studiously ignores this basic housekeeping reform so strenuously sought by the commission.

What Congress cobbled together shortly before recess was pretty much standard kitchen-sink legislation — a hodgepodge of measures styled mostly to please various stakeholders and deliver on campaign promises. Some are good, some bad, and some indifferent. This “new” way of doing homeland security looks an awful lot like the traditional way Congress legislates.

The contrast with how Congress approached homeland security shortly after 9/11 could not be more striking. In the wake of the attack, legislators purposefully created the Department of Homeland Security, passed the Patriot Act (which has actually helped stop terrorist attacks), and reformed the intelligence community. The post-9/11 congresses governed a nation at war.

Until this year.

This year, Congress slaps together a mediocre bill, bats it over to the president, and goes on vacation.

Answer 1

why are republicans constantly putting up roadblocks to prevent peace?

Answer 2

Just maby the world is more a GLOBAL thing now day then to play securetyfors for the nursery.. oh sorry your homland office it is. Yes you need to check your fenses We all get it. But you also have to get that you cant bild a bunker with pipol in it that is unhappy.. soner of later they will find somtign incomon wiht the ones you call enemis and then your ohn popol is not yours any more. Ther are more frends in the world then ther are enemis. Grow up america dont be sutsh a bully just cous you can. you will always lose in the long runn if ya dont fine a way to make freinds.

And how come milions of republican funded bills take money form say a posibel HELTH PLAN FOR KIDS.. how can ther be money for stupod prayer cirkels and other bullshitt when ther are acly kids dying ..starving being shott in your streets? GET YOUR PRIORETYS strate.. you care more for your prisoners in levenworht then for your ohn por kids. REALETY CHECK PIPOL

Answer 3

Democrats promised to implement the recommendations of the 911 commission. They are finally delivering on that promise. It has taken Congress four years and the changing of the majority to finally accomplish this. The Democrats are finally getting serious about actually protecting us against terrorists rather than implementing unconstitutional repression.

Answer 4

All of you people who have self belief fatherland secure practices isn't something like nazi Germany would desire to do a sprint diagnosis. Use to be that the FBI dealt with all enjoyed ones themes interior the scope of the form and federal regulation and the CIA stored tabs at something of the worldwide. So we had those 2 originations, why create a third orginisation?? Why does this one get to function outdoors the form and federal regulation? Why can it "detain" human beings indefinitely devoid of representation? present day very public occasion, the yankee who all started kickass torrents replaced into arrested in Poland by ability of fatherland secure practices. This replaced into no longer a terrorist internet site, it replaced right into a record sharing internet site for in general music movies and alertness. Squarely interior the FBI's wheel abode yet pass to the cyber web internet site, seized by ability of fatherland secure practices. Why? by using fact decrease than fatherland secure practices he would properly be held indefinitely, is additionally tried in "specific" court docket complaints that would desire to be "categorised" and the final public won't have get admission to. basically the latest occasion...awaken!!!!

Answer 5

Ok, how about this for the most basic Homeland security?

George Bush...Close the borders.

He didn't do it on 9/11 (with a Republican majority in Congress), and he won't do it now.

But you still support him? Talk about a hypocrit (you and him).

Answer 6

Way too much BS after your question
Didn't read
think shorter and get right to the point
too much BS

Answer 7

yeah your right, the constitution does not need to be followed.

"Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin

Answer 8

Why do conservatives always advocate for war?

Answer 9

Because they are Americans.... Hahahahahaaaaa ;)