4 April 2005

What was Congress thinking?

The following article is excerpted from the 1 April 2005 edition of “The Journal of Commerce”.

…. [A]lmost overnight Congress recently passed a bill intended to help the family of the late Terri Schiavo get the brain-damaged woman's feeding tube restored. But the very steps which Congress undertook in passing the bill, which granted the family no new legal rights, are the very things that are wrong with much of the legislation currently being passed, and certainly are emblematic of everything that is missing from a thoughtful discussion, regarding security.

…. Congress passed the bill which established the Department. of Homeland Security. Was it well thought out? Most would say the effort was sincere, but no, it wasn't well thought out. For example, there are years of history in which the investigative arm of Customs and the trade facilitation/enforcement arm of Customs were in the same agency but often Memoranda of Understanding were needed for specific types of background checks and investigative work to be concluded in a timely fashion. What genius thought putting the agents in one section of DHS and Customs in another was going to work? It hasn't and we are now hearing rumors the two halves of a very important whole may be reunited.

Similarly, if Congress was serious about heightening security, that would be reflected in the budget allocations. There is really little dispute that if the U.S. is to be safer than it was pre-9/11, it will require international agreement and implementation regarding security standards.

Where is the push in that direction by Congress?

Similarly, there is widespread agreement that for Customs to perform meaningful cargo screening, it needs better information and earlier in the process. Manifest data is almost meaningless, given how easy it is to misdescribe cargo. Why didn't Congress put sizable amounts of money into development of the Automated Commercial Environment? If Customs is ever going to be able to receive shipment specific data from exporters and importers, the computer system needs to be overhauled now and not in another five to seven years. Yet, we are three years past 9/11 and, while progress has been made, little of it has direct and tangible security benefits….

Returning to the structure of DHS, there are discussions occurring about moving Customs' international affairs activities into the International Affairs section within DHS. This would seem to be such an obvious consolidation….

What about the Customs Commissioner's position? Did it strike anyone as odd that Customs and Border Protection became the only organization which reported to the secretary through an undersecretary? The commandant of the Coast Guard and the director of the Secret Service report directly to the secretary. Requiring Customs to report through an undersecretary as a recipe for confusion and turf wars, exactly what has transpired. Of course, a major contributor to the mess was the lack of clear divisions of authority between Customs and the Transportation Security Administration, something else for which we can thank Congress.

Isn't it about time Congress took the time to do a proper job instead of passing laws which, in retrospect, look to be passed strictly for the sake of seeming to have done something? Isn't it about time to talk about the white elephant in the room that everyone wants to ignore? While it is true the efforts of the government have made it that much more difficult for targets of opportunity to be found, if we learned anything from 9/11 it is that terrorists don't act rashly or happen upon an opportunity. They act after much planning and effort. So, do you really feel any safer than you did on September 10, 2001?