YOU ARE THE NEW GOVERNOR!

VLG Technical Note 2010-11-12

TOP DOZEN TOPICS AND QUESTIONS EACH NEW GOVERNOR
SHOULD ASK STAFF

1. I ask that each senior person in a management position provide a copy of the November 2010 Governor’s Guide to HS to his/her staff. Giving each person 10 working days to do so, please have each person provide a one page document [maximum length] expressing any concerns or disagreements with that documents information or suggestions and alternatives. These responses including your own one-pager should not be edited but collected and bound into a document for me personally and a copy of that bound document provided all other components involved in EM or HS in our state, and to each individual that provided comments. The one page document should bear the name of the individual but anonomus submissions may be submitted to me personally at _____________. These latter submissions should not duplicate anything in the attributed submissions.

2. Has the Attorney General of my state reviewed all mandatory and discretionary authority of the Governor [now me] for adequacy? If not adequate has proposed legislation been submitted to deal with defects? Can this be done this legislative term or is more drafting time necessary?

3. To what extent does HS and EM in my state rely on federal grants for EM and HS, or the National Guard when not federalized for emergency response, recovery, mitigation, prevention, protection, preparedness? I reverse the normal order of paradigms in case I must react immediately to some incident or event!

4. What open declared disasters and emergencies are now in existence and who declared them and when? What are total obligations by the federal government to date for those open incidents/events? What are total state obligations? Local obligations?

5. Are the NG units in our state up-to-date on CBRNE training? Logistics and operations? When and where was that training conducted? Who paid for it?

6. What is the total number of public safety personnel in my state and where and how are they dispersed? This includes, police, fire, EM, HS, public health, and EMT and HazMat!

7. Please have the most expert person on EMAC in our state government arrange a briefing that can be a webinar for all state employees and in that briefing indicate what our STATES obligations are, do we have that capability, and for adjacent states that are signatories what is their capability including fiscal to assist if EMAC activated? Also who activates EMAC for our state, am I the one?

8. Please prepare a letter to Secretary DHS and Administrator FEMA requesting permanent assignment of a liaison cell to our STATE EOC! Request documentation to accompany that request supporting the request?

9. What capacity does the private sector in our state have to assist in disaster ops including NGO’s and for profit sector?

10. Do we have any standby contracts for disaster ops and how are they funded, if at all?

11. ON a scale of 1-10 with 10 being fully operable, where do our STATE and our local governments stand on communications interoperability, redundancy, and robustness?

12. Who is the key expert in our state government on warning, notification, alerting, and mobilization and arrange to have that person or persons prepared a briefing for me and all state employees through webinar on those subjects including activation, prescripted messages, rumor control and other Emergency Public Information factors?

DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

Subtitle C of Public Law 108-458, enacted December 17, 2004, may be cited as the "Homeland Security Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Protection Act of 2004"! A key statutory amendment by that Act was to ensure that the civil rights and civil liberties of persons are not diminished by efforts, activities, and programs aimed at securing the homeland.
Further the DHS Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties was to report directly to the Secretary, and was to do the following:
(1) review and assess information concerning abuses of civil rights, civil liberties, and profiling on the basis of race, ethnicity, or religion, by employees and officials of the Department;
(2) assist the Secretary, directorates, and offices of the Department to develop, implement, and periodically review Department policies and procedures to ensure that the protection of civil rights and civil liberties is appropriately incorporated into Department programs and activities;
(3) oversee compliance with Constitutional, statutory, regulatory, policy, and other requirements relating to the civil rights and civil liberties of individuals affected by the programs and activities of the department;
(4) coordinate with the DHS Privacy Officer to ensure that programs, poliicies, and procedures involving civil rights,
civil liberties, and privacy considerations are addressed in an integrated and comprehensive manner.

The point of this post is to reinforce the notion that Civil Rights and Civil Liberties enforcement and protection is one of the key missions of DHS and I long ago concluded this would be a difficult mission of the Department. I was hopeful that the three Secretaries of DHS, all lawyers,would have sensitivity to this mission. So far not much evidence. It seems to me that the role of DHS would have almost made it a leader for the entire Executive Branch on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties with issues coming up almost routinely in organizations such as the FUSION CENTERS developed even before they were given a statutory mandate to do their jobs.

I would also have expected that outstanding individuals with a comprehensive background in compliance and enforcement of civil rights and civil liberties might have either led the organization or been close to its leadership.

Because the OIG/DHS can also investigate civil rights and civil liberties violations and compliance I would have thought that a detailed MOU between these organizations would be in existence and probably a series of joint investigatory manuals and procedures have been developed to ensure the statutory mandates are accomplished.

The funding and staffing of this organization would always be a key factor in its success yet its line item does not seem to reflect the special emphasis placed by Congress on this mission.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I do think that the whole arena of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties is one that could be worthy of the fullest attention of Congress and academics so that the leading violator of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties in the Executive Branch is not DHS officers and employees, and even more hopefully that a leadership stance for the entire federal government could be adopted by DHS.

HSARPA

Section 307 of Public Law 107-296, signed November 25, 2001, created a new organization in DHS. Specifically, the Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency with the acronym HSARPA, and patterned to some degree on the successful DOD unit previously named DARPA for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency which has a bright shiny new building for its current incarnation in Arlington, VA where I spent most of my life.

The statutory charter of HSARPA is of some interest, specifically:
"The Director shall administer the Fund to—
(A) support basic and applied homeland security
research to promote revolutionary changes in technologies
that would promote homeland security;
(B) advance the development, testing and evaluation,
and deployment of critical homeland security technologies;
and
(C) accelerate the prototyping and deployment of technologies
that would address homeland security
vulnerabilities"!

Assuming that no "Manhattan Engineering District" projects lurk below the surface what has this organization done, how is it staffed, how is it funded, and what are its prospects?

CRS in a 2006 report on Science and Technology and research in DHS stated the following:

"Title III authorized establishment of the Homeland Security Advanced Research
Projects Agency (HSARPA) to support applications-oriented, innovative RDT&E in
industry, FFRDCs, and universities. Extramural funding is to be competitive and meritreviewed, but distributed to as many U.S. areas as practicable. The law mandated creation
of university-based centers of excellence for homeland security; five multi-year awards ranging between $10 million to $18 million have been made for centers on: risk and
economic analysis of terrorism at the University of Southern California; agro-security at the University of Minnesota and at Texas A&M; on behavioral and sociological aspects
of terrorism at the University of Maryland; and on high consequence event preparedness and response at Johns Hopkins. DHS and EPA jointly fund a cooperative center on
advancing microbial risk assessment at Michigan State; there are plans for a DHS/Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory cooperative center on computational challenges
for homeland security. DHS also supports a university fellowship/training program, which plans to train 200 students in 2007, down from 300 in 2006, and up to 15
postdoctoral fellows. Regarding intramural R&D, DHS may use any federal laboratory and may establish a headquarters laboratory to “network” federal laboratories. DHS relies
mostly on the following DOE laboratories: Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore, Sandia, Pacific Northwest and Oak Ridge. A Homeland Security Institute (HSI), an FFRDC
operated by Analytic Services Inc., funded in May 2004, is authorized to conduct risk analysis and policy research on vulnerabilities of, and security for, critical infrastructures; improve interoperability of tools for field operators and first responders; and test
prototype technologies. A clearinghouse was authorized to transfer information about innovations. In addition, DHS created the Interagency Center for Applied Homeland
Security Technology (ICAHST), which validates technical requirements and conducts evaluations for threat and vulnerability testing and assessments."

The most recent DHS org chart I have shows that the word "Innovation" has been added to the HSARPA org block title.

What I am leading up to of course is that despite its charge of basic and applied research DHS generally and the S&T Directorate generally, and of course the Innovation/HSARPA org has seemed not to have fulfilled its ambitious statutory charter. Perhaps it was because DHS has been led by largely failed private practioner lawyers turned politicians and whose grounding in the hard science, research and development, and innovation is probably not just unknown but could be documented as being frightfully deficient to deal with science & technology, or basic or applied research issues. Just guessing of course. Perhaps they all were bench chemists in legal disguise.

What we do know is to the extent that contract money has been available few of the contracted for deliverables have made much or any impact on homeland security. And certainly little was innovative.

As I have some special expertise on FEMA and its role in applied and basic research the latter is easily disposed of in this post. FEMA never in any of its chartering statutes or executive orders or delegations has had a basic research charter. It did for almost 20 years have a coordinating role on research in the arena of earthquakes under its former leaderhsip role of the implementation of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977. That ended shortly after FEMA became part of DHS when NIST became the Executive Branch lead for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.

As a lawyer with some hard science background and as a senior lawyer in the independent FEMA OGC I looked desperately to hire a lawyer with technical credentials throughout my 20 years for FEMA. This never happened although it almost did twice. Another time another story.

When originally established under the Presidential Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, implemented by E.O. 12127 and 12148, FEMA's orginal org chart had a RESEARCH & MITIGATION Directorate. This organization was eliminated by the FEMA Director appointed by President Reagan in his almost total reorganization of the agency in September 1981. Research again never appeared as an organizational title in FEMA when independent. I was laughed off when I suggested that perhaps a Science and Engineering Directorate should be established given that FEMA was a large user of at least quasi-technical contractors under the so-called Brooks Law and had in at least one of it statutes the NFIP program authorizing statute at 42 USC 4001 and following the mandate to use the most "scientifically and technically correct" data for flood mapping.

Well the actual numbers of qualified scientific and engineering personnel in FEMA and DHS generally would make for an interesting survey. What I think we can conclude is that HSARPA is no DARPA in the making.

Hey TEA PARTY do you all know the technical difference between "basic" and "applied" research? Hoping you do and the DEMS and GOP does also. Or is blind faith in the contract community as the leading innovators likely to be the continued disaster of failure to reason things through at DHS?

HS/EM Generally

Okay a new group of Governors takes over by the middle of January, 26 to be precise. Post 9/11/01 many STATES decided to create another bureacratic organization when they created Homeland Security offices or some such. Always remember that in 26 states the head of EM is in fact the STATES National Guard Adjutant General, or STARC! Well time for confusion to end. Just as I have advocated that the Vice President of the US become the key crisis management official I now advocate that all STATES should standardize and make their LT. Governors a key official. Oddly in some states like the US originally, the LT. Governors don't have to be the same party as the Governor. This creates farce and mischief and problems for both COG [Continuity of Government] but even delegation and operational problems. A reform would be to have the Governor, LT. Governor, and STATE Attorney General all the same political affiliation. Why the STATES don't take more serious organizational constructs is amazing to me but perhaps the fact that they are at an almost all-time low in competence and actual capability makes one wonder why these "laboratories of democracy" will linger much longer other than as vestiges of a Constitutional construct that no one takes seriously any longer.

That stated NEMA (National Emergency Management Association) has put out a new EM/HS handbook for the new governors. Will try and make it available when I can access it. I am not a member of NEMA for various reasons and note for the record they welcome new members, as does IAEM (International Association of Emergency Managers)!

To my mind it is looking more and more likely that the new Governors will soon be screaming for direct revenue sharing as it now appears that civil servants in some states are starting to relocate just for the reason that salaries will be cut, staffing will be cut, and the prospects of actually recieving a promised pension is becoming almost non-existing. Well perhaps NEMA and IEMA could produce a guide to the officialdom of each state, with current salaries and other benefits including pensions. Then of course could rank them based on job prospects. Or even more important on capability.

By the way GAO has finally caught on to the notion that FEMA has not and will not develop and administer assessment tools on state capabilities. Thus, you could argue that relying on STATE self-assessment, meant the FEMA got what it deserved when it was blamed in part for the failings of the STATE of Louisiana in Hurricane Katrina ops.

I informally assess the entirety of the EM cadre in the US at less than 10,000 and hoping some academic studies this component of governance more closely. The members of this profession are definitely part of the "resilience" of our federal system so they should be given more dignity at least by comparison and analysis.

Eric Holderman in a recent post on Disaster Zone points out that even before the elections a majority of EM STATE Directors had less than 3 years experience. I pointed out in a comment that this was precisely why Public Law 920 of the 81st Congress created in 1950 for the federal civil defense program the requirement that either the STATE Director or Deputy Director of Civil Defense be a civil servant.

Well to the victor goes the spoils! The problem of course is that the victor in EM is often MOTHER NATURE.

Tenth Anniversary of 9/11/01-Chapter I

Some may find this an odd posting with 9 and 1/2 months to go until a decade will have past on 9/11/01. To my knowledge a fairly significant number of major book contracts have been let for discussion of the passage of that decade and to discuss US efforts to defeat terrorism by both nation-states and non-state actors. Perhaps of interest is those major "public intellectuals" who in the broadest sense have not really addressed the implications of government policy over that soon to be decade on the U.S. its history and domestic politics. I am fascinated as always with foreign relations and foreign policy [I had a minor in what would be called International Relations- almost 40 credit hours in college] but I don't pretend to be expert in my analysis or knowledge level. I do contribute from time to time to the blog SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS run by Col. Pat Lang,USA (RETIRED) later an SES in DIA and now retired. Also an excellent novelist on the civil war period. Most of my posts are questions on that blog and not really answers but I do find it very informative given the quality of the commentators and the blogger himself.
As many readers of this blog know I believe that ignorance of the world, its peoples, cultures, and languages not just in the citizenry but also the bureacracy and military is causing the US to have an ineffective and inefficient foreign policy and foreign relations that now threatens the basics of our democracy.

I believe one essential reform would be to eliminate the HOMELAND SECURITY Committee in the HOUSE of Representatives and also the ARMED SERVICES Committee and create two new committees. First a NATIONAL SECURITY committee incorporating both the defense and war fighting establishment and the homeland security portfolio. I would also do the equivalent in the SENATE. Perhaps consideration should be given to a joint National Security committee.

But to offset the bias likely to arise in the National Security Committee and to promote the federal system designed by our Constitution I would have a Joint COMMITTEE on FEDERALISM established with an impact statement on federalism accompanying each bill in each house of Congress as it reaches the floor for vote in the respective houses of Congress.

What does this have to do with 9/11/01 and the passage of the decade since that event? We now know that Congress is a leading problem in both foreign policy, foreign relations, intelligence operations, and homeland security. All commentators seem to agree but few agree on the fix.

It is unlikely given the Presidential choices outside of the sitting President and Hillary Clinton for the DEMs and none of the GANG of 12 running potentially for the GOP that anyone will be elected President in 2012 or even 2016 that have the remotest skill set necessary to determine US foreign policy over their time in office and the rest of this decade.

It fascinates me that the citizens and residents of the US think that the domestic economy is subject to Executive Branch control through its fiscal policy and regulation. It is not!

And in fact the STATE DEPARTMENT controls so little of US foreign policy, from armed conflict, intelligence, economic activity, foreign military assistance, key technology transfers that have military implications that it is almost laughable. STATE must have dramatic, permanent, and long lasting increased in its funding and staffing. I have suggested as a start no STATE Department budget each year but in fact a 10% automatic funding level based on the DOD and Intel budgets. We must not have as a nation in a globalized world with such lack of knlwedge, capability, or expertise.


More to follow!

What Should the GOP do?

Always remember it is the HOUSE that Constitutionally has the mandate that "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bill." Article I Section 7.

At this moment whatever the outcome of the fiscal policy debate between and among members of Congress and each HOUSE it is the FEDERAL RESERVE that by its actions both encouraged the various bubbles in the economy in last 30 years and also failed to observe their mission in their statutory authority other than fight inflation. Now the FED is the leader in the world wide currency war of the US struggling to retain some of its prestige as a reserve currency that has been frittered away by various President's including two formal devaluations by the Nixon Administration (going off of gold standard) and the so-called Plaza Accords entered into during the Reagan Adminsitration. At least the Executive Branch participated in these decisions. But always remember the Federal Reserve despite its Federal charter, like the American Red Cross, is actually an independent private entity owned by its membership and almost completely opaque in its decisions and operations. Some would argue that its principal clients are the so-called "Bond Ghouls" as in the inexperience new President William Jefferson Clinton announcing publically that he had "No idea the bond ghouls ran the country" before coming to Washington. That brilliant maker and destroyer of political appointee and flag rank careers Bob Woodward in his book "Maestro" fawningly discussing the brilliance of the then FED Chairman failed to discuss adequately the relationship of the FED to the Bond Market anywhere in that book. Now of course the FED offers low interest rates to the Banks so that they can in turn improve their balance sheets by buying government bonds. A Ponzi scheme worthy of a Bernie [Not Rachel[Maddow.

So whither thou goest, GOP? My recommendation is given the failure to capture a majority in the Senate and not having the White House either, the GOP should focus like a laser on the FEDS and its inherent conflicts of interests, and at a minimum make sure some organization can audit it. After all it earns money from its own operations and its salaries and benefits are not in any way controlled by the Executive Branch, nor the comings and goings of its members and staffs. The revolving door revolves fast elsewhere but never so fast as at the FED.

The real question for the GOP is to decide whether it is the WALL STREET party or the rest of the country. This choice normally could be dodged. But now since fiscal policy is controlled on the up-side by the HOUSE and GOP, monetary policy is the only escape hatch and both the FED and Administration have decided that a world-wide currency war is NO BIG DEAL and the US will win. I would argue that is not the case and the fact that so little has been written about the backlash from other governments is very remarkable.

One thing the man and woman on the street will notice is the rapid and permanent rise in the prices of gasoline that as in 2008 helped precipitate the financial collapse as EXXON and others made record profits when gas reached $4.00 per gal.

There is no question in my mind that the FED in its arcane calculations has almost none on board, and never has, who understand the world of energy and the world of housing. Hey they do understand the bond market however and oddly energy and housing in the past have been largely independent of that market. So have fun GOP and reign in the FED and its view that its decisions have consequences only for inflation, and not full employment or other social issues.

And while you are at it GOP let's have the private portfolios of FED members and staff subject to public scrutiney and we will see if they are betting their own dollars on the future of the USA.

What Should the DEMS Do?

Well with a shrunken majority in the SENATE with final outcome of 2010 elections not yet complete the DEMS clung to a bare majority in the SENATE. Looks like the Delaware race was key to GOP not gain majority in that house also. The numbers in the HOUSE are somewhat intimidating but hey just less than 800 days until next election. That one will probably see up to 25 new Congressional districts made safe for GOP by redistricting.

So I argue it is time for the DEMS to call the bluff of the GOP and the TEA PARTY.

I would argue that IMMIGRATION REFORM, IMMIGRATION REFORM, IMMIGRATION REFORM should be the principal issue for the Administration and for the DEMS in Congress. That's it the one major new initiative. The failure of the DEMS to overwhelmingly support the BUSH/Chertoff proposal, largely defeated in the SENATE by the GOP was a major error in stance.

Oddly some items are going to favor the taking on of this issue with three large subsets that cannot be avoided by the Republicans. First, MEXICO. By 2012 issues involving MEXICO will be huge with Mexican Drug Cartels having a major presence in over 200 US cities and violence endemic on the border. The return to Mexico of many workers driven south by the recession/depression will have some impact on Mexican politics. Second, the end of the CASTRO brothers rule of CUBA is becoming more likely. CUBAN policy and US posture towards CUBA is likely to become a major issue with Marc Rubio leading the charge on Cuban issues in the SENATE. His decisions could be crucial for future US/CUBAN relations. Third, the tragedy of Haiti, where on a bipartisan basis since the Haitian Revolution, the racist and paternalistic policies of the US towards the first free black nation in the world after the TREATY of WESTPHALIA in 1648 created the Nation-State system, means that the large scale "domestic" disaster continuing after last January's earthquake, will continue to be a nightmare for the OBAMA Administration, that cannot but regret its insignificant support of democracy in Haiti. FRANCE could also be a big help and still might be in Haiti for the US. It would start with an anti-corruption drive by the US, FRANCE, and the UN. Of course none of the above are stellar in their own internal anti-corruption efforts.

Next, what should the Republicans do? But that will come later after I see how the Committee Chairs line up for the GOP in the HOUSE.

One piece of good news is that it is looking like Peter King (R. of NY) will be the new HOMELAND SECURITY Chairman. His brain power and political skills are very high in the entire HOUSE and perhaps the first complete Authorization Bill ever for DHS and its programs, functions, and activities will result. He could start with identification of those programs, functions, and activities that have no business being in DHS. A somewhat lengthy list adding up to as much as 30% of the Department's total operations.

What the Tea Party REPS can contribute?

As far as I can discern the TEA PARTY has few if any elected positions where the individuals were registered as TEA PARTY as opposed to Republicans or Democrats. Whether of not that is accurate there are some responsible things that the TEA PARTY could contribute to the National Dialogue. Some of these are counterintuitive and I am not a TEA PARTY supporter although since about 1990 I have believed that the US is in an approximately 30 years realignment of its political parties and approaches to governance. I will also be publishing a short piece on both the DEMS and the GOP and what they should do. As always they all will be most skilled at doing what they cannot in fact accomplish and will be at their most destructive, often self-destructive, IMO.

I promise to get back to HS/EM shortly as this whole line of posts should be considered a deviation and just to place in context the political milieu that HS/EM will face over the rest of this decade.

So here is my TEA PARTY laundry list with which some may agree and many will disagree:

(1) Push for reorganization of the HOUSE committee structure, and push for a permanent JOINT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE on federalism.
(2) Push to make a number of DOD organizations primarily civilian organizations reflecting reality. A hard look at USACOE would be a good start.
(3) A consolidated National Security Budget including DOE and DHS and the incorporation of the Military Construction appropriation and VA into this budget.
(4) Push the STATES to eliminate the weakest units of their local governments in order to strengthen STATE governments.
(5) Push for direct federal assistance to the public safety budgets of the largest [perhaps the 5-600 largest municipal entities) on a permanent basis.
(6) Requst GAO to produce a recommended consolidation and updating of all reports mandated by statute from the Executive Branch to Congress and eliminate one-time reports without specific approval of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee in the Senate and the Government Reform and Oversight Committee in the HOUSE. But also specific reporting needs, and those on an emergency basis could be brough under a system to incorporate that effort into the standard reporting scheme.
(7) Request that a national security [including HS/EM]impact statement, an environmental impact statement, and a federalism impact statement, a science/tehnology impact statement, or justification for no such statement, accompany each bill when it reaches the floor before any floor vote. An emergency procedure could be utilized to deal with emergency needs.
(8) Rewrite the Stafford Act to allow the President to declare Catastrophic Disasters and Emergencies and vest authority in the Adminstrator of FEMA to declare all disasters below the level of a catastrophe, just as the Secretary of Agriculture has declaration authority, and the Small Businees Administrator. The Administrator FEMA would also prepare a one-time report on numbers of disaster and emergency declarations by STATE since 1950 ranked by number of declarations and also ranked by total outlays since the passage of Public Law 875 of the 81st Congress.
(9) Request each department and agency to prepare a list of all programs, functions, and activities authorized by appropriation act with no formal authorization language by any Committee of the Congress.
(10) Mandate the for each CRS or GAO report both of those entities prepare and appendix of their reports on the subject for the last decade on a rolling basis. Also an open recommendations of GAO on the same subject should be identified and status given.

Well that is it! Sounds simple but this would help the TEA PARTY IMO. Oddly beyond technical and administrative changes the votes are not yet there for the TEA PARTY to do more.

But Can They Govern--DEMS and GOP!

Well one post more until back to HS/EM. And very very sorry that we lost an important blogger at In Case of Emergency Blog. We need and I need all the help I can get. That blog focused on Individual and Family Preparedness, as did Dr. Ralph Swisher who in his 80's finally retired from running the Family Preparedness Program at FEMA, which started under the Civil Defense Program which ran from 1950-1994. He also is a gem and contributed much to the subject of Individual and Family Preparedness.

Well back to governance. The House Committee Chairs will be all important players. Note for example that Ralph Hall, the oldest member of the House of Representatives at 87 is scheduled to lead the Science Committee. Watching the committee assignments will be crucial to the success of the 112th Congress however one measures that success.

Clearly the early fights may show some tell tails as the LAME DUCK Congress takes up the Debt Limit Extension, continuation of the CR [Continuing Resolution] that funds the budget for this FY [Fiscal Year] the FY 2011!

And of course the formal election of the Speaker and various members of the Leadership of both parties in House and Senate. The new Congress reconvenes on Monday, January 3rd!

I expect the GOP to reorganize the HOUSE Committee structure but could be wrong. This will be the first substantial revision in four decades, and jurisdiction over key statutes and Executive Branch organizations, and thus contractors that support the Executive Branch and are key supporters of incumbents will become a major struggle. The current Committee structure is abominable IMO. Science drive programs in the Executive Branch and Science and Technology issues generally are mishandled largely due to the ignorance of the members of Congress on Science and Technology issues and lack of interest or curiosity to learn what they need to know. Or the Lobbyists that thrive on ignorance continue to dominate Congress. Note that the only Phyicist in the entire membership of HOUSE and SENATE was defeated on Tuesday for re-election.

AS to President OBAMA I think he might strongly need to consider that there may not be a second term. And of course that could change the way he governs. Now looking like his major contribution to history will be SCOTUS appointments and if he gets one or two more that will be an amazing effort to get his nominees confirmed. I would gear up now.

And it appears that destruction of the Global Economy by an Adminstration and FEDERAL RESERVE devaluing the dollar will be an enormous issue and the currency wars will dominate the rest of this decade.

Instant Analysis--Election 2010

ENERGY! Well instant analysis is ususally wrong and perhaps that holds for this post. TEA Party energy both helped and hurt the GOP and now the main question is how does that energy translate into focus on GOP pressure points and Congressional activity. I am guessing that a lame duck session will in fact be lame with the highest priority acting on the CR [Continuing Resolution] to keep the federal government running after December 3rd and also to lift the debt ceiling. Both these actions could provide an early indication of the rough slogging ahead for an administration that after two years seems to me to be sagging the sprinter's sag after the dashs and not reflecting the pacing of the long distance runner. Could be wrong of course.

Okay what to me are the three most important elections to focus on for long-term impacts. First is election of Cuban-American Marc Rubio in Florida where Crist might have won if the DEM had pulled out. Probably not important that Rubio outpolled Christ and DEM combined. But reason that election is important sets up Jeb Bush nicely for Presidential campaign for President in 2012 and makes really interesting how US reacts to death of Castro if it occurs in next several years. I argue that NO President can be elected without Florida, Texas or California and ususally needs combination thereof. Jerry Brown, newly elected Governor of CA is not going to run for President again so California will not have a favorite son. Does not mean that Florida and TEXAS, one or both will not have one in 2012.

Second most important election to federal office--Portman in Ohio. This guy is for real substantively. He will be dominate force in the Republican Senate that will exist after taking over majority in 2012. Only a huge Presidential turnout for DEMS and victory will keep Republicans from Senate majority in the 113th Congress IMO. Unless Hillary is on ticket one way or another no chance for DEMS to re-elect OBAMA in 2012. Still predicting his withdrawal. Biden's also.

Okay, third most important election to Senate is Blumenthal in Connecticut. He will be running the DEMS in the Senate before very long either as Minority Leader of Majority leader before this decade ends. Watching Blumenthal and Portman duel as freshman Senators will be refreshing fun and very very substantive fight for future of the Senate. The other DEMS are tired and Reid may want to give up as Majority Leader voluntarily but let's just see.

Fun new governor to watch, Kasich in Ohio. This guy is the ultimate political bull and the real real thing. He is going to rough march reapportioned Ohio in the Republican stronghold it was throughout the post-civil war period. This guy has rough edges but could be Presidential timber. His problem is Portman, his state's junior US Senator.

I would argue that virtually none of the newly elected DEMS or re-elected DEMS have the drive, energy, competence to be factors in the long run outside of Blumenthal in Connecticut. The DEMS bench is extremely weak and the Presidency of Barack Obama has shown so far no sign of mentoring and of note is another Congress with NO black US Senators.

Well all for now!

2nd Edition--DHS Risk Lexicon

DHS has now issued the 2nd edition of the Risk Lexicon. The preface to that document [posted on this blog under baseline docs] is of some interest to me.

Specifically, the Preface, in part, provides as follows:

"Clear and unambiguous communications among homeland security risk practioners, decision makers, and stakeholders is necessary to achieve integrated risk management. The DHS Risk Lexicon supports integrated risk management by defining a single language for risk management and analysis. The DHS Risk Lexicon makes available an official set of harmonized risk-related terms and definitions."

Certainly I also believe it is important that there be common understanding of terminology in risk assessment, and analysis, and implementation of decisions concerning risk.
So I thought it might be fun to see how the Risk Lexicon matches up with the organizational blocks of DHS and FEMA. I do realize this is somewhat unfair since the Lexicon is not designed to provide common terminology outside of RISK ASSESSMENT and ANALYSIS and certainly is not designed to provide organizational definition. But still it might be useful if organizations in DHS and FEMA understood what their specific missions and goals are, what legal authority has been delegated, and what they are expected to accomplish organizationally.

As this is quick and dirty analysis I list the term used in an organizational heading. Am sorry it is not alphabetized. So here goes! Let the eye of the beholder decide if these terms relate to the objective of the Lexicon as provided in the Preface to the document. And perhaps other definitional materials are available from DHS.

1. Disability;
2. Policy;
3. Program Analysis;
4. Protection;
5. Preparedness;
6. National preparedness;
7. Insurance;
8. Response;
9. Recovery;
10. Logistics;
11. Operations;
12. Immigration;
13. Customs;
14. Enforcement;
15. Border;
16. Intelligence;
17. Emergency Management;
18. Civil Rights;
19. Civil Liberties;
20. Counter Narcotics;
21. Transportation Security;
22. Credentialing;
23. Strategic;
24. Operational Process;
25. Technology;
26. Health;
27. Science;
28. Global;
29. Network;
30. Training;
31. Development;
32. Human Resources;
33. Secure;
34. International;
35. Transformation;
36. Human Capital;
37. Refugee;
38. Asylum;
40. National Security;
41. Domestic;
42. Coordination;
43. Detection;
44. Removal;
45. Student;
46. Exchange;
47. Incident;
48. Protective;
49. Research;
50. Continuity;
51. Command and Control;
52. Resources;
53. Transition;
54. Corporate Communications;
55. Test and Evaluation;
56. Business Operations;
57. Innovation;
58. Geophysical;
59. Watch and Warning;
60. Environment.

Of course while these terms may seem self evident in their meaning some mask organizational units that have almost no relationship to the words used to title that organization. What their [the words above] true relationship is to risk management and analysis is vague perhaps, nonexistent perhaps, but perhaps crucial to an organization that is charged with operations largely based on risk assessment and analysis, and that broad guage charter applies to both FEMA and DHS according to my reading of their statutory and other charter documents.

The All-Hazards Mandate!

Section 503 of PKEMA 2006 in one of its many provisions mandates the following guidance to the Administrator of FEMA:

‘‘(b) ALL-HAZARDS APPROACH.—In carrying out the responsibilities under this section, the Administrator shall coordinate the implementation of a risk-based, all-hazards strategy that builds those common capabilities necessary to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from, or mitigate against natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters, while also building the unique capabilities necessary to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from, or mitigate against the risks of specific types of incidents that pose the greatest risk to the Nation.’’

Okay so FEMA is supposed to be all-hazards and post for today is to ask the question is it?

Well we know that if there is a Presidential declaration of Disaster or Emergency under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Assistance Act, Public Law 100-707, which supplemented in part, rescinded in part, and amended in part the Disaster Relief Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-288) then FEMA can provide information and funding to other federal agencies and the STATES and their local governments.

If no declaration then the cupboard is largely bare for FEMA. There are other federal compensations schemes however defective or inadequate. For example, the NCP created under E.O. 12616 and E.O. 12777, and of course the Price-Anderson Act up for renewal every 15  years. What is remarkable is that NO legal opinion exists anywhere in any General Counsel or Chief Counsel office of the Executive Branch, or the Office of Legal Counsel of the Department of Justice, or the GAO or otherwise that has been made public that discusses the interrelationships of these various compensation schemes with the Stafford Act or discusses gaps in funding. All Commentators seem to agree that the STAFFORD ACT is NOT an all-hazards statute. STill it would be nice to know what gaps FEMA's believes exist. Over a decade ago the NGA took the position in a formal recommendation to the federal establishment that core-melt accidents be specifically addressed in the STAFFORD ACT.  And then of course post-9/11 many recommended that the STAFFORD ACT be specifically addressed to cover terrorism. Since a declaration by the President no matter how improper legally is totally insulated from judicial review and such a challenge is unlikely due to present rules on standing it continues to be the case that as far as declaration authority the President is largely above the law.

What makes the "New" FEMA compliant with the mandates of  PKEMA 2006 with respect to- all-hazards?  I would argue that FEMA is not even organized on an all -hazards basis and each component often has little understanding of other hazards not part of its portfolio and in fact has never conducted research legal or adminsitrative to see if any of the legal authority for any specific hazard for which they are administratively responsible might have all-hazards utility. A specific statute that might be suitable for such review is the EMERGENCY FOOD & SHELTER PROGRAM with authority under the so-called McKinney Act which might usefully be viewed as an emergency statute flexible in providing legal authority for ESF-6 Mass CARE and even other functions in any large scale events.

So my conclusion is that although mandated to be all-hazards FEMA has not done the basics, even organizationally, to in reality be all-hazards but counts on the willingness of any given President to violate legislative stricttures by a declaration to fulfill expectations of Congress and the residents of the US. This fundamental flaw could be easily corrected but it has not because few in the Excecutive Branch or Congress want to look at the Forest and not just the trees.

And DHS of course in not in anyway to be considered an all-hazard organizational entity but continues to focus on counter and anti-terrorism and its compartemented missions. 

Homeland Security/FEMA Leadership

As of October 13, 2010

Administrator - W. Craig Fugate
Deputy Administrator - Richard Serino
Chief of Staff - Jason McNamara
Director, Office of Executive Secretariat - Elizabeth Edge
Chief Counsel - Brad Kieserman
Deputy Administrator, Protection and National Preparedness - Timothy W. Manning
Assistant Administrator, National Preparedness - Corey Gruber
Assistant Administrator, Grant Programs - Elizabeth M. Harman
Assistant Administrator, National Continuity Programs - Damon Penn
Director, Office of National Capital Region Coordination - Steward D. Beckham
Administrator, U.S. Fire Administration (Acting) - Glenn A. Gaines
Associate Administrator, Response and Recovery - William "Bill" L. Carwile, III
Deputy Associate Administrator, Response and Recovery - Elizabeth Zimmerman
Assistant Administrator, Response - Robert J. Fenton, Jr.
Assistant Administrator, Logistics - Eric Smith
Assistant Administrator (Acting), Recovery - Elizabeth Zimmerman
Director, Office of Federal Coordinating Officer Operations - Theodore A. (Ted) Monette, Jr
Associate Administrator, Mission Support Bureau - David Garratt
Deputy Associate Administrator, Mission Support Bureau - Albert B. Sligh, Jr.
Chief Financial Officer, Mission Support Bureau - Norman S. Dong
Chief Administrative Officer, Mission Support Bureau - Delia Davis
Office Chief Procurement Officer, Mission Support Bureau - Jacob Hansen
Chief Information Officer, Mission Support Bureau - Jeanne Etzel
Chief Component Human Capital Officer (Acting), Mission Support Bureau - Kathy Fields
Chief Security Officer, Mission Support Bureau - Burt Thomas
Acting Administrator, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration - Edward Connor
Deputy Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administrator, Insurance - Edward Connor
Deputy Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administrator, Mitigation - Sandra Knight
Director, Office of Equal Rights - Pauline Campbell
Director, Office of External Affairs - Brent Colburn
Law Enforcement Advisor to the Administrator - Charles F. "Rick" Dinse
Director, Office of Policy &  Program Analysis - David J. Kaufman
Director, Office of Regional Operations - Patty Kalla
Director, Center for Faith-Based & Community Initiatives - David L. Myers
Director, Office of Disability Integration & Coordination - Marcie Roth

FEMA Regional Administrators:

Administrator, Region I - Don R. Boyce
Administrator, Region II - Lynn Gilmore Canton
Administrator, Region III - MaryAnne Tierney
Administrator, Region IV - Major Phillip May
Administrator, Region V - Andrew Velasquez III
Administrator, Region VI - Anthony "Tony" Russell
Administrator, Region VII - Beth A. Freeman
Administrator, Region VIII - Robin Finegan
Administrator, Region IX - Nancy Ward
Administrator, Region X - Kenneth Murphy

Federal Emergency Management Agency Directors:

Name  Term of Office
* Gordon Vickery April 1979 - July 1979
* Thomas Casey July 1979
John Macy August 1979 - January 1981
* Bernard Gallagher January 1981 - April 1981
* John W. McConnell April 1981 - May 1981
Louis O. Giuffrida May 1981 - September 1985
* Robert H. Morris September 1985 - November 1985
Julius W. Becton, Jr. November 1985 - June 1989
* Robert H. Morris June 1989 - May 1990
* Jerry D. Jennings May 1990 - August 1990
Wallace E. Stickney August 1990 - January 1993
*William C. Tidball January 1993 - April 1993
James L. Witt April 1993 - January 2001
*John Magaw January 2001 - February 2001
Joe M. Allbaugh February 2001 - March 2003
Michael D. Brown March 2003 - September 2005
R. David Paulison September 2005 - January 2008
* Nancy Ward January 2009 - May 2009
Craig Fugate May 2009 - Present
* Acting director

Link to;  FEMA Organizational Structure

National Flood Insurance Program

Some of the readers of this blog or my CV know that I was one of the principle lawyers for the National Flood Insurance Program authorized by 42 USC 4001 and following from July 1, 1974 to July 1, 1986. I have not posted previously on this blog on that subject but that restraint is now ending as we face the "reforms" that probably will be considered in the 112th Congress. The premise of the program is that existing mistakes of development in the nation's flood plains will be insured in return for wiser future development of those flood plains. Also the program had as one of its primary purposes the reduction of "free" federal disaster relief.

An argument can be mounted cogently that both aims of the program failed. But remarkably there is really not much that is studied as to what would have happened or might have happened without the program. The leading challenges to the program are because post-Katrina the program hovers with $20B in claims payments that had to be largely covered with appropriated funds.

Well this first post will be short but much more later. A first principle of the statutory scheme is that only disclosed hazards on the programs maps will be covered by insurance. This has never occurred and in Katrina, largely unmapped areas subject to localized flooding from non-mainstream rivers of oceans were flooded and costly. So I would renew this principle and make sure that in no event was a property with an unmapped 100 year flood [really the 1% annual occurrence flood] was covered by the federal government. This would encourage local governments to accept the maps and development restrictions and incentivize disclosure not non-disclosure.
Another suggestion is that all mobile and manufactured housing be excluded from coverage. The definitions vary but in fact most of these homes are located on developed lots that often are grandfathered into the future with no zoning or building code enforcement. Also physical damage coverage available from the private insurance sector is better coverage and cheaper than the NFIP.
ALSO, historically losses for installed and uninstalled carpets have amounted to in excess of 15-25% of losses and thus carpets however defined should be excluded from coverage. This is also a subject area of fraud since the NFIP has never required flooded carpet to be documented as to its total loss and as a result much is cleaned and reused while the program pays for new carpet.

A final suggestion is that definition A-2 of the term "flood" should be eliminated from the policy and in addition application and policy language added [as it once was] that any property found in violation of existing flood plain management regulations at the time of the loss would be VOID AB INITIO.

These seemingly minor changes are not minor at all an in fact would reform the program drastically.

Another suggestion would be that flood insurance would be free and handed out to all unmapped occupant owners of houses and they would be notified no more disaster relief ever. Also after each loss they would gradually begin paying premiums to cover expected aggregate losses in the areas flooded. And only the equity portion of the owned property would be federally insured. All mortgagee interests would have to be privately insured.

And finally the insurance aspects of the NFIP should be transferred to the Department of the Treasury and the mapping, mitigation, and land use aspects transferred to NOAA and those later aspects of the program should be under the oversight of the Science Committees of the House and Senate not the Banking Committees which has directed the program largely to benefit lenders who constantly argued the program was a burden on them. And NO MORTGAGE generated from the nation's flood plains should be allowed to be securitized and exempted legally or illegally with actual ownership of the property and recordation in local property records not accomplished. This would give incentives to disclosure bigtime.

CORRUPTION-- Some History

A recent world-wide survey by a responsible organization indicates that the US has dropped out of the top 20 nation-states with the LEAST official corruption.

Unfortunately, computer security has become an arena for corruption with a very hit and miss system in the US Government that theoretically is controlled by OMB Guidance from an internal control system established by OMB Circular A-120. The cross-over from those that can access and manipulate government computer systems and those who cannot which is basic to any internal controls system is frequently a weak system. GAO no longer truly audits the books of agencies since the rise of the Inspector Generals under the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended. Unfortunately, in a major gift to major contracts, the corrupt DCAA [Defense Contract Audit Agency] in DOD has most of the major contractors under its audit authority not just for major defense contractors but also for most large civil agencies. The actual result is few audits of consequence and contractors reviewed by DCAA are largely free agents and unlikely to face serious financial audits. Another new trick in recent years is that contractors have gotten the government to agree that computer systems and processes developed with governmnet funds are the proprietary data of the contractor and not owned by the government. Thus, efforts to recompete contracts are hobbled by this factor.

I was the Ethics program official in FEMA from 1992-1999 and was witness to the failures of a system designed by OGE [Office of Government Ethics] and independent federal agency to enforce their regulatory scheme through agency and department ethics officials. During those years not a single OGE regulatory change occurred that tightened the rules and all were in fact directed at less strict enforcement.

One of my tasks was to review the incoming financial posture of new Presidential appointees arriving in FEMA, including Non-career SES. Often this involved personalized financial planning, not one of my strengths, so that these individuals would not start behind the eight-ball so to speak. A significant number had back tax issues and these were from both parties. Ethics Officials, including OGE however are not given access to tax returns or credit information. A major failure in the system. Nor are debts listed by appointees or incoming personnel automatically.

Oddly each Senate Committee that holds the power to begin the Advise and Consent process has its own forms and procedures for review nominees.

Perhaps strangely, I have long been an advocate of decriminalizing the federal ethics rules and this is based on the absolute inability of the DOJ [Department of Justice} Public Integrity Office to provide guidance to the OGE and agency ethics officers on their processes and procedures.

A standard case in my FEMA years was a high ranking official receiving reimbursement for travel expenses from the government while also being advanced or reimbursed funds from a private sector organization. The conflicts of interest and favoritism of certain organizations who receive the benefits of high ranking officials speeches and other favors should be looked at closely. Personally I would adopt a rule no FEDERAL officer or employee can attend or give a speech to any group that does not allow open press access and make that speech available. Long ago this was the rule in the Treasury Department when I was there but no longer applies anywhere in the Executive Branch.

Before FEMA had a statutory IG, which was from 1979-1989, and coverage of that statute was opposed by non other that the non-statutory IG himself, there was almost no example of a successful internal investigation of corruption in FEMA and almost no recognition of how the system could be manipulated for personal financial gain. Several times I offered to help the OIG develop manuals which would allow the Audit, Inspection, and Investigation staff detect fraud, waste and abuse and was turned down flatly by both my GC and the IG.

The most famous Pas de Deux in FEMA history involved a Director who received kickbacks from FEMA contractors for expensive attendance at political events where most or all of the attendees bought their tickets to get around political donation rules. Both the IG and GC of FEMA when interviewed by outside authorities, specifically the WH and GAO, they took the position in writing that they were waiting for the other office to conduct an investigation first. This type of ballet was often what caused FEMA to have few internal control systems that were effective.

My reasons for decriminalization is also based on the fact that personal financial gain to a federal officer or employee is the raison d'etre for Ethics Rules, including financial gain to the family of that officer or employee. Thus, civil fines which are more readily enforced and restitution should be the order of the day.

Another major issue in my years in FEMA was enforcing the rule that no individual while employed by the federal government may represent any other person but immediate family on any case or issue adverse or potentially adverse to the government. This meant that the Audit Staff of FEMA's OIG, and all Federal OIG staffs, could not in fact have an outside Tax Preparation Service. I found that in FEMA almost all of the Audit Staff were preparing federal tax returns for compensation. Working with the IG himself We did get out a joint memo to the Audit staff nixing such outside employment. But since I had no investigative staff I often wondered if there in fact had been a cease and desist. The fact that I did not want to compromise or lose experienced auditors over this issue is an example of the problems raised by OGE and other federal rules.

The principle that any officer or employee should have finances of a spouse or children attributable to them is also something that should have been addressed long ago. More and more frequently I found "innocent" spouses that had no idea what their spouses or children were up to and how they were utilizing their access to the officer or employee.

I finished reading a while ago Doris Kearns Goodwin's wonderful book "NO ORDINARY TIMES" and its dicussion of the home front in WWII. Based on the standards of the times no one seemed concerned about conflicts of interest or outside activities. By current standards the administration of FDR was almost totally corrupt in failing to see that official positions were not abused.

One of the most famous examples, which also involved FEMA because of its administration of the Defense Production Act or at least a portion of it involved the National Defense Executive Reserve. This statute waived normal ethics rules but the waiver was long ago detemined to be inappropriate. During WWII many industry executives were so-called $1 A-YEAR men. Most probably thought these executives were donating their time and efforts to the WAR effort. In fact almost 100% of them continued to recieve full salaries from their former employers and often favored those employees. This type of corruption was not addressed until the passage of the DUAL COMPENSATION ACT of 1947. A statute seldom enforced but necessary that statute bars earned income from any federal officer or employee from an outside source without going through certain hoops. Oddly in my time OGE seemed completely uninterested in viewing this statute within their purview.

Much more could be written, but in my time the largest single allegation against a FEMA employee measured by financial self-dealing involved the theft of over $20M dollars. The individual was never referred for prosecution and in fact retired without a thorough investigation of the matter. She was employed by the Office of the Comptroller of FEMA which was always poorly staffed and in my time almost completely lacking in internal control systems.

According to a very competent employee (IMO) when the first Director of FEMA was told that 15 more accounting staff were desperately needed in the Comptroller shop to maintain financial control, that Direct denied the request stating that "financial control would just have to be lost" because of other agency priorities.

Well you get the picture!

Proof Of Life--Can DHS survive a Republican Congress?

It should be noted that somewhere between 88 and 110 Congressional Committees have some piece of oversight over DHS and its programs, functions, and activities. Oddly, since the end of the first George W. Bush Administration the Republican testiness demonstrated almost continuously with DHS has grown. Probably because there is a miniscule but brilliant Libertarian core in the Republican Party that really does think that Big Government and its intrusiveness is a problem of deep concern, as opposed to the TEA PARTY which is led largely by people who do not read or write and therefore don't think very clearly that also oppose big government.

Well DHS is really not such a big government big problem. What has happened is that most of the really critical programs, functions, and activities of DHS are understaffed while those that were part of the DOD culture in the past, and are now, who are housed in DHS continue to act as though DHS is a mini-DOD and does not have to rely on brains but can rely on contractors and brawn. Most of the large contracts of DHS have resulted in failed deliverables for one reason or another including primarily SIBNET, electronic border fences, IT etc. Some out of sight that failed that were large as far as the programs concerned was the MICHAEL BAKER/IBM effort at remapping the country's flood plains.

Well all of this makes for great sharpshooting or perhaps turkey shooting for a Republican Congress. They will really be having fun and some of it will be driven by very serious people that happen to align with the need for effective oversight of DHS.

And let's summarize. DHS for example failed to produce many many Congressionaly mandated reports, or if it did produce them even the slightest review of their formulation (usually by Contractor staff), specifics, and recommendations could drive DHS crazy with oversight. My guess is DHS will beef up its staff with fleeing Democratic staffers from a defeated DEM majority in the new Congress--the 112th.

The fact that much of DHS failed efforts track back to the George W. Bush Administration means that some work on oversight will have to be done to distinguish recent DHS failures from the long-term ones. This should not be too difficult.

If I was conducting the oversight I would just ask the Secretary DHS and her staff to explain exactly what was the role of DHS in various events, like the Times-Square Bomber, H1N1 Pandemic, BP catastrophe, etc. etc. And of course my critical threesome are WMD policy and implementation, Cyber Security [also computer security], and Domestic INTEL collection, analysis, and dessemination. There is no way that DHS can explain some of its efforts in these "discipines" without supplying rope to hang themselves. This is of course precisely why I expect massive cuts in DHS budgets and massive attempts to maintain the huge and unwieldy management oversight system of DHS which continues to draw funding and staff from critical ops. This is not a flat organization and in fact some units still have no real mission assignment grounded in statutory or Executive Order language or HSPD mandates. By the way the later two sources of authority, to the extent they are legal authority, look like revisions in the next year will wipe out most of the references to DHS, and only if they are put on an all-hazard basis will DHS retain any glimmers of authroity from those documents. And of course any resort to all-hazards authority strengthens FEMA not DHS which as all know is not really an all-hazard agency. And DHS is still reluctant to label its criminal law enforcement staff, the badge carrying, gun-toting staff, as federal law enforcement in any prominent way.

And of course the Republican's could reorganize the House Committee structure just to spit in the face of a poorly organized DEM Senate Majority.

Time will tell of course.

Recommendations to the New House Leadership

Assuming that the 112th Congress has a House of Representatives that is majority Republican what are my recommendations.

First, that Committee Chairs be picked on Comptence based on their education, training, experience, and not political longevity. Theoretically this is now the system.

Second! Stop authorizing federal programs, functions, and activities through appropriation statutes. Let the Authorizing Committees get to work.

Third! Combine the Homeland Security and Armed Services Committee into a new National Security Committee.

Fourth: Adopt a rule that NO MEMBER of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES may represent the interests of a contractor either in committee or on the floor of the HOUSE without first publically revealing the lifetime totals of contributions from that Contractor.

FIFTH: NO FOREIGN NATIONAL, even with dual citizenship, may be employed as Congressional STAFF.

SIXTH: All allegations concerning the ethics of MEMBERS shall be made public and all proceedings on those allegations shall be made public.

SEVENTH: The HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES shall establish a committee on FEDERALISM and any proposed statute shall be review by that Committee Staff and its members for federalism implications.Those recommendations shall be furnished to the entire membership of the HOUSE prior to any floor action on that legislation.

EIGHT: HOUSE Rules should be operated with a view to the fairness of those rules on the minority party. To the extent possible, HOUSE RULES should promote fairness and open government.

NINE: MEMBERS of EACH HOUSE/SENATE conference appointed to the Conference from the House of Representatives should to the extent possible represent the views of minority of the HOUSE, specifically this should be done by reflecting conference membership based on Committee ratios.

TEN: Consideration should be given to establishing a technically expert support organization on science and technology issues, including for example cyber security.


More to follow:

Reforming Governance In the US

Over and over again friends ask how could the US avoid the slide into the abyss during the rest of this century and becoming a third-world country. Well there are certainly long term strengths underlying the US system of governance and economics but stresses and strains are not only beneath the surface, but on the surface, and may be made chrystal clear by next Tuesday's voting.

So here are some suggestions that hopefully are bypartisan and non-partisan.

1. Issues of Congressional oversight are not just political arrangements but impact governance and should be study for their impact on Executive Branch policies and federalism. No way to predict the outcome of such a study but needs doing.

2. To the extent possible the budget should become a two year effort with 1/2 the Executive Branch in one year and the other in the successor. There may be Constitutional limitations that need addressing. One cut could be all truly civil agencies and one cut for defense appropriations which would include all programs related to national security and defense including the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Energy.

3. All programs, functions, and activities that are not currently authorized by an authorization statute should be reviewed to determine whether they should continue to be the subject of authorization by appropriation.

4. The impact of science and technology on the US is enormous and the 150 year period where the US to some extent led the world may be ending. So how science and technology impacts governance should also be studied. And of course other than Patents being discussed in the Constitution these terms are not in that document. 

5. The STATES must reduce the number of their local governments. The federal government could assist in this reduction by only providing grants to LOCAL Governments that have independent authority to tax, sue or be sued authority, or are specifically granted limitations on immunity from liability by the STATE governments.

6. A limitation on the staff making up the NSS of 20% for military officers in active status. Selection should be by the SECDEF not the individual services, and with approval of the Advisors to the President for National Security and Homeland Security.

7. The role of the National Guard should a matter of law, they should be a member of the CHIEFS OF STAFF and NORTHCOM should always be headed by a NG Officer. The other services could hold the Number 2 slots.

8. The membership of the INTEL community should be reduced to no more than 10 members now and in the future no more than 5. My suggestion would be to have those five dual hatted, meaning civil military responsibilities, but no longer under exclusive control of the SECDEF and instead the DNI would become the INTEL lead with oversight of Satellite INTEL, HUMINT, Cyber Security, SIGINT, etc.  Also domestic intelligence collection would be under the DNI and removed from DHS and DOJ except with specific Presidential approval as are covert ops.

9. Various immunity from suit statutes, such as 33 USC Section 701 that immunizes the USACOE from liability for flood control projects should be eliminated. And all federal programs, functions, and activities should have provisions for judicial review and enforcement of due process and equal protection standards under the Constitution.

10. The number of Cabinent Departments should be consolidated. And the authority of the Director of the Office and Management and Budget and Associate Directors of OMB be transferred to the extent possible to this reduced number of cabinent secretaries. Associate Directors of OMB should be subject to Senate Confirmation and Congressional appearances if this is not done. And each years recommendations to OMB on the budgets and passbacks should be a matter of public record.

11. All SES appointees should be term for a period of 5  years with one opportunity for renewal and non-career SES positions should be abolished as well as career positions in return for the term assignments. The SES could be removed for cause, other than political affiliation. Current SES members could apply but are not guaranteed a term appointment under the new system. All SES ethics forms would be review by OGE not the agency and tax returns would be available for these ethics reviews to the examiners. Each SES would have a published position description indicating what specific legal authorities he/she would be administering. At the end of the second five years, these Term SES would be allowed to immediately retire but with some recognition given to their length of service if less than 30 years total military and civil service.

12. The number of politically vetted positions in the civil service should be reduced by 50%.  All INSPECTOR GENERALS should be appointed for one 10 year term without renewal. EACH IG should have exclusive criminal referral authority for his/her department or agency. All IG's should be protected under the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended. And IG's should be protected from termination based on political affiliation.

Well that might jump start some reform. More later.

US Resilience

After considerable thought I have reorganized my brain and computer files so that the Term "RESILIENCE" is now the overarching EM paradigm and also the same for HS.

Thus, I include the terms (1) Protection; (2) Prevention; (3) Preparedness; (4) mitigation; (5) response;  and (6) recovery as subsets of resilience.

Time will tell whether this makes any sense. Each of these terms is not in my mind a ridgid category either linear in sequence, nor compartmented but overall I do seem attracted to organization efforts, policies, and programs, functions, and activities that support the Nation's resilience, STATE and their local government resilience, and family and individual resilience.

This term was utilized in the CSIS report by Amanda Dory on detail to CSIS from DOD entitled "Civil Security" issued in 2003!

My policy recommendation is that all programs, functions, and activities of DHS and FEMA should be looked at from how exctly they support resilience if at all or are organized to promote that concept. I actually believe the entirety of the Executive Branch might usefully also do that analysis.

Current Events-A Snapshot

Note I will be off blog from tomorrow through tuesday leaving only a week before an election that may see the beginning of the end of the Republicans or Democrats, and then again maybe not.

Okay some old favorites first:

1. Haiti--still 1.5 million people just offshore in this large scale DOMESTIC not foreign disaster are still without adequate food, medical care, shelter. Hey the US posturing continues, with Bill and Hillary in the lead of proclaiming concern while doing almost nothing. Big charities continue to sit on Haitian earthquake donations while doing little to leverage those donations. Science  is proceeding with findings of bedrock ridge that may have made things worse but opens potential for some mitigation. Foreign powers, CHINA, CUBA, VENZUELA contniue their efforts in Haiti below the reporting levels of US MSM. The one year mark could result in savage reviews of Obama Adminsitration performance. Key event in Haitian history forthcoming--their Presidential election with US as manipulative as ever on side of ruthless capitalism and sweat shops and no land reform.

2. BP Catastrophe--Environmental groups finally have organized their litigation. BP is using salami tactics to hide their finanical difficuly--selling a slice a at time hoping no one notices their cash flow problems. I personally think there will be no BP five years down the road and only the fact that UK and US pension funds heavily invested have allowed survival so far. Also no federal lawsuit yet filed against BP left solely to private litigants.

3. 111th Congess--I still predict the Senate will stay DEM but barely but HOUSE will not. But if it does stay DEM then Nancy Pelosi will again be Speaker and watch her revenge on non-supporters stupid enough to go public against her. The Speaker vote of course is a secret ballot and Donkeys and Elephants both vote.

4. The Lame Duck session--almost guaranteed now and almost guaranteed trouble for the Administration. The only slim reed to make that session productive is the Speaker who may be the only politician the DEMS have that expresses Biblical rightous indignation at events and other politicians. Go NANCY!  You go girl!

5. Saudi Arms Sale--This sale of conventional weapons will sail through and is fast tracked as US trys after the barn door is open to protect against Iranian breakout as dominant power in the "PERSIAN" gulf. The strange thing is the emergence of TURKEY as a major player in the world and middle EAST. If the Kurds did not exist they would really be flying high, economically, militarily, and culturally as still largely secular nation.

6. Iraq--formation of a government is basic to any kind of government hoping to have the semblance of other than dictatorship no matter how authoritarian. Inability to do so means chaos. US still does not indicate publically its exact role for 100,000K US nationals and contractors that will remain in Iraq after Easter.

7. UK--Headed to financial and military collapse. Desperation setting in as the wonderful period of English/British history from discovery of North Sea oil until today may be sunsetting. But hey maybe gas discovery and conversion will allow the British to "endure" as their coat of arms states.

8. Foreclosure crisis--Still being spun daily. Bottom line control over the question is with the Title Insurance Companies who have been left very vulnerable. If they do market withdrawal until the turmoil ends then residential real estate market really collapases. Looking like those who bought or sold residential real estate or refinanced in last 15 years have doubtful title to their property unless they paid cash and documents registered in local court houses.

9. Obama Administration--Well the rats have left or been fired or will be. Obama finally gets the fact that their may only be two years left for his time on world stage. The dangers of unpreparedness for the highest office and greatest responsibilities in the world now self-evident for his friends and foes. Too bad ego and hubris made him rush his time in the spotlight.

10. 2012 election--Still think Biden will get sick and Hillary on ticket. Notice it is Biden not Obama making all the statements about his remaining on ticket. Hillary play it cool and calculating. Yes--maybe we do have a twofer at STATE just like we did during the Clinton Presidency. Personally I think her self control and self discipline makes her the most feared potential candidate for the Republicans in 2012, and would not forgo possibility of a run when Obama announces he has had enough.

And for the Republicans in 2012 looking like Jeb Bush as the lead with Mitch Daniels as VP but long way to go.

AS you can guess I enjoy this frivolity although there is underlying concern that the US is being rapidly outsmarted and outmanueverd by at least 10 other nation-states at the moment.  Perhaps too bad some of that ferocious lobbying talent in DC is not shackled to the Ship of State and given the order ROW ROW in order to LIVE!