The conclusion of your article
Careful examination of the Bush
administration’s record on homeland
security invites the inescapable conclusion
that President Bush has given homeland security
more lip service than action. While some progress
has been made, not nearly as much has been done as
might be expected given that Bush has declared
homeland security to be his highest priority.
There are several reasons why the president has
not followed through on his promises to make the
nation more secure. First, the administration has
put far more energy into overseas operations,
believing that assertive overseas military action
trumps efforts to strengthen the defense of the
homeland. Second, in line with this administration’s
overarching effort to cut the size of the federal
government and devolve governmental functions to
the state and local level, the Bush administration
has simply not devoted the resources—financial,
political, and administrative—to ensuring a strong
and effective federal role. Along these lines, the
president’s overriding commitment to slashing taxes
has led him to underfund efforts to improve
intelligence coordination, communication, and
border control.106 Most significant, however, is that
the president and his key advisors are ideologically
constrained when it comes to dedicating themselves
to homeland security. His administration’s antigovernment
stance led them to reject comprehensive
overhauls of the identification system and to oppose
instituting a student visa tracking system. The
president’s belief that homeland security, like crime
fighting in general, is a state and local responsibility
has led him to limit federal support to state and
local governments, putting much of the burden of
homeland security on cash-strapped states.
Most disturbingly, President Bush’s inattention
to domestic security has led us into a war on terror
without the benefit of America’s secret weapon:
entrepreneurial spirit and overwhelming
technological superiority. Though the terrorists have
the advantage of stealth, secrecy, and suicidal fervor,
we should be fighting back with our own strengths,
including our adaptability to changing
circumstances, our creative drive, and our ability to
quickly develop and implement new technologies
through both private and public funding. President
Bush has devoted much rhetoric to bringing our
entrepreneurial spirit to other elements of
government, but on homeland security he has
consistently sided with the ponderous,
underfunded status quo over fostering the kinds
of innovations that will help keep our citizens
safe.
President Bush’s strong words and dramatic
settings for speeches have helped make Americans
feel safer. It is time for Bush to move beyond mere
words, however, and implement the policies that will
thwart terrorists and make Americans safer not in
theory, but in reality.
While I agree that an Admin whose domestic goals are to cut taxes and shrink government is "congenitally" ill suited to formulate an effective Homeland Security, I think the problem goes deeper. This is an extremely ideologically driven Admin that ab initio has single mindedly pursued an agenda that existed prior to its "selection". Homeland Security was not part of that agenda, nor, except in an ancillary way, is there any benefit to "important contributors". Hence, from this Admin's perspective, it's a necessary step-child - given only "lip service".
JMO
lurqer |
