Report: Dems should address rail security, grants process
A report offering advice on how congressional Democrats can best implement remaining recommendations from the 9/11 Commission said grants should be re-evaluated, rail security should be treated with more urgency and foreign diplomacy should be improved.
The report, written by an analyst in the Global Business Services division of IBM on his own time for his Homeland Security Watch blog, suggested that homeland security committees in the 110th Congress conduct oversight hearings on "processes and methodologies" employed when the Homeland Security Department issues grants for port, transit, rail, bus and trucking security.
Christian Beckner, the author, also said congressional Democrats, who have said they will fully address the 9/11 Commission's recommendations within the first 100 hours of taking control of the House, should undertake oversight of biometric passports. The Transportation Security Administration should be required to submit data to lawmakers prioritizing vulnerabilities and defining priorities that will guide budget decisions, the report said.
Beckner praised House Homeland Security Committee Democrats for a report they commissioned over last summer, calling it a "solid roadmap" to improving rail security. The House Homeland Security Committee's incoming chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., has been an ardent critic of rail security and said he will make this a priority in 2007.
According to Beckner, a significant increase in funding is needed for bomb-sniffing dogs, surveillance, security training and improved protection of rail yards.
Other issues highlighted in the report include the full funding of "signal corps units" in high-risk urban areas like Washington and New York. These would expedite public safety addresses to promote communications continuity when a disaster strikes.
DHS officials did not respond to questions seeking comment on the study.
The 110th Congress should initiate a better dialogue with African and Middle Eastern nations, the report said. Beckner also called on Democrats to establish improved relationships with Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Somalia.
The report said Somalia has the potential to become one of the "new terrorist sanctuaries" and encouraged Congress to hold hearings to determine the Bush administration's strategy for preventing anti-U.S. forces from establishing influence there.
Beckner recommended that lawmakers "sponsor a congressional delegation" to meet Saudi leaders, seek continued funding for programs promoting education in Pakistan and push to strengthen Afghanistan's society in light of a resurgent opium-driven criminal culture.
"The new Congress can and should hold hearings looking at the executive branch's public diplomacy efforts, which have struggled mightily in the last few years to establish a trusted dialogue with citizens of Muslim countries, especially in comparison with the successes of public diplomacy during the Cold War," the report stated.
COMMENTS
- Sure is good to know that Mr. Taxpayer is footing the bill for all of the costly, and (in his opinion) wasted security measures. The problem is, how exactly would he run the TSA or CBP cheaply. I bet he wouldn't pay extra for holidays, or overtime, or a minimum wage. There would be no pension or healthcare benefits, etc. The reality is that we are losing the war on terror because of our innate stupidity and inability to focus on anything for more than three or four days (daze). As a gratefully retired federal officer I understand the difficulties in agencies sharing information, and there are better ways to do things. But to knock the efforts of an entire federal agency (TSA) without any apparent professional knowledge is just plain spite. Sorry, just the facts. GovExec.com reader Posted December 14, 2006 2:00 PM
- We already spend far too much on airline security, and as a traveler I pay $25 for every ticket to get the incompetent guards that TSA provides who make me remove my shoes and go through long lines to get on airplanes that are not secure anyway! Do you really expect an IBM analyst to recommend anything other than the government spend more money on security and hire IBM to do it! Ask the American people how much they are willing to give each year to fund security. I bet it is far lower than the government currently funds. Taxpayer Posted December 12, 2006 6:35 AM
