GovernmentExecutive.com

After two and a half years in one of the most challenging leadership positions in Washington, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge on Tuesday afternoon announced his intention to step down by Feb. 1 or sooner, if the Senate confirms his yet-to-be-nominated successor before then.

Ridge, as the first secretary of Homeland Security, presided over the most extensive governmental reorganizations in five decades. The establishment of Homeland Security in the spring of 2003 brought together elements of 22 different agencies into a single Cabinet-level department. Both the White House and Ridge, who joined the Bush administration as the president's adviser on homeland security following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, initially opposed the creation of the new department. But once its creation by Congress became inevitable, the former governor of Pennsylvania embraced Homeland Security's leadership position like the good soldier he once was.

"Ridge's legacy is going to be largely very positive," said Jack Riley, associate director of the infrastructure, safety and environment division at RAND Corp. The job of bringing together agencies as disparate as the Customs Service, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Border Patrol, the Coast Guard and the Secret Service, among others, has proved enormously complicated, yet "the components are working together and they have a clear and focused mission," Riley said, citing that fact as one of Ridge's "great unheralded successes."

That's not to say the department doesn't continue to face enormous challenges. One key problem is that much of authority and responsibility for what generally is referred to as "homeland security" is outside the department's control. More than 90 percent of the country's critical infrastructure is owned and operated by the private sector, for example.

The department's ability to substantially improve security over time will depend on how well it can coordinate activity with the private sector, as well as support state and local law enforcement and emergency responders. While the department has administered millions of dollars in grants to state, local and private authorities, thus far the formula for distributing funds to those entities - a formula crafted by Congress - has been driven more by political risk than by the actual risk of terrorist threat.

Ridge's successor will face serious management challenges as well. The enforcement arm of the Border and Transportation Security bureau is experiencing serious budget shortfalls. This is perhaps most notable in the agency's failed detention program. Americans might be surprised to know that when the Border Patrol picks up illegal immigrants in some parts of the country, unless those immigrants are known to be dangerous or involved in criminal activity, they are likely to be released because there is simply not enough room for them in the agency's current detention system - nor is there funding to pay for their incarceration at other facilities. While those individuals are given a summons to appear before an immigration judge, it is widely understood that the vast majority of them will simply disappear into American communities.

Some of the department's most significant challenges relate to border security. The United States shares more than 6,000 miles of land border with Canada and Mexico. Despite a tremendous expansion of resources devoted to border security - mainly an increase in personnel and technology deployed to thwart illegal entry - more than 1 million people continue to enter the country illegally every year - most by walking across the southwest border.

Until Congress and the administration can address some of the difficult economic issues surrounding illegal immigration, the country will continue to be flooded with would-be workers, overwhelming the efforts of federal, state and local law enforcement officials along the borders.

At a press conference Tuesday, Ridge said, "There is enormous international dimension to securing the homeland," and he expressed some regret that the department had not acted sooner to reach out to U.S. trade partners. "Part of me wishes we'd have started a little bit earlier, but there were other things that it seemed at the time were higher priorities."

"Just pulling together the department is a legacy," says Gerald Epstein, senior fellow for science and security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. It may be years before it becomes clear how well or how poorly the department is really functioning, but he credits Ridge with setting the department on solid footing and moving its component agencies toward a common goal.

In the letter of resignation he hand-delivered to President Bush Tuesday morning, Ridge thanked the president for the opportunity to serve as the first secretary of Homeland Security. "One of the few consolations for the families affected by the tragedy of Flight 93 is the fact that the passengers and crew, knowing their fate, fought back to avoid an even greater tragedy. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to fight back."

COMMENTS

• These comments cover the broad range of perception out there about government employees and conditions -- and they are all, for the most part, true. The unfortunate fact is simply this: Management must vastly improve accountability over all elements of its mission. Previously acceptable processes and procedures are now deficient as a result of the changing world and cannot be allowed to survive. Fortunately, we will recognize our success when performance is free of inefficiencies and performance issues are adequately managed. When this happens, performance will be much easier to measure, assess and report. Then, over time, the broad range of perceptions will narrow. GovExec.com reader Posted November 11, 2005 1:59 AM
• DHS Contractor, with the experience that I have gone through at DHS, your comments are entirely out of line, insulting, and intolerable. First of all, my statement did not complain that I am not guarateed a raise simply for coming to work - I complained that I was hired with a guarantee of a future salary that DHS now intends to yank away from me. I was sent to NYC as a GS-5, which isn't even livable. I survived my first two years thanks to the fact that I found found 3 roommates, and in the process I incurred about $20,000 in credit card debt. The reason I agreed to go through this was specifically because I knew I would progress to the GS-13 level in five years which would then allow me to make up for the tremendous amount of debt I would inevitably incur. If I hadn't had that guarantee, I wouldn't have accepted the job because I wouldn't have been able to afford that amount of debt. The fact that I agreed to accept this burden only because of my progression to the GS-13 level, and the fact that DHS now intends to yank that guarantee away after I have accepted the job on those terms is criminal. And let me tell you another thing. I was sent to one of the busiest groups in my office for my first several years in which I worked about half of all weekends and 80% of all holidays, in which over 50% of my shifts went until midnight or later, and in which I averaged over 60 hours a week for almost two years. My summers were completely ruined for three consecutive years in a row. I once went two and-a-half months with not a single weekend off, and I once came down with a 104 degree fever due to sleep deprivation from work. I did all this while watching 95% of the rest of the office work 9 to 5 Monday thru Friday and nothing more. Given this, your statements that my comments are typical of a government employee who "doesn't want to work hard", and that you are constantly amazed at the "incompetence" that is rewarded are so out of line that they are bordering on criminal as far as I'm concerned. People like you should keep your mouths shut when you don't have a clue what you're talking about, as you clearly did not here. GovExec.com reader Posted May 23, 2005 11:01 AM
• I find the submission from the ICE Special Agent very telling of our dysfunctional government that promotes and advances people simply for hanging around. His letter complains that he isn't guaranteed a raise simply for coming to work and actually has to do a good job in order to advance like the private sector. Here are his comments: "We have planned our futures based on our ascension up the scale in a set time frame guaranteed when we were hired. For everyone in ICE, where budget problems are beyond comprehension, we're on a one-way elevator to hell. For all who have bought homes, are counting on making mortgage payments, have had children, are planning on our children's education, etc, based on our future progression on the GS scales we were hired under, we're in serious trouble....When the day comes where I'm not making as much as I would've under the GS scale, and where that loss is money I was counting on when hired, I will initiate a class-action lawsuit. I hope you all join me. I also hope you write Congress every chance you get and to expose this atrocity by going directly to the media when you can." As a member of the private sector that works with government daily, I am constantly amazed at the level of incompetence that exists and is rewarded. The government preferentially hires less qualified individuals based on various factors. Good people typically get frustrated and wind up quitting out of frustration. What is left to ascend the ranks are these unqualified people who simply "hang around". What's more, the government system makes it almost impossible to fire these people. The entire government personnel system guarantees that good people will leave and lazy incompetent people will hang around. GovExec.com reader Posted February 1, 2005 12:43 PM