|
15. Introduction - Susan M. Collins
16. Homeland Security's National Strategic Position: Goals, Objectives, Measures Assessment - Sharon L. Caudle and Randall Yim
1. M. Aristigueta, Managing for Results in State Government (Westport, Conn.:
Quorum, 1999).
2. M. Aristigueta, L. J. Cooksy, and C. W. Nelson,’’The Role of Social Indicators in
Developing a Managing for Results System,’’ Public Performance and Management
Review 24:3 (March 2001): 254–69.
3. J. Wholey, ‘‘Making Results Count in Public and Nonprofit Organizations:
Balancing Performance with Other Values.’’ In K. Newcomer, E. T. Jennings, C.
Broom, and Al Lomax (eds.), Meeting the Challenges of Performance-Oriented
government (Washington, D.C.: American Society for Public Administration/Center for Accountability and Performance, 2002), p. 14.
4. D. Walker. 2001a. Homeland Security: A Framework for Addressing the Nation’s Efforts. GAO-01-1158T. Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Accounting Office (21 September). See also 2001b. Homeland Security: Challenges and Strategies in Addressing Short- and Long-Term National Needs. GAO-02-160T. Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Accounting Office (7 November).
5. Office of Homeland Security. 2002. National Strategy for Homeland Security.
Washington, D.C.: Executive Office of the President (July), p. 2.
6. White House. 2003. Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-8. Washington, D.C. (17 December), p. 2.
7. Gilmore Commission, V. Forging America’s New Normalcy. Fifth Annual Report to the President and the Congress, Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction (Arlington, Va.: Rand, 2003) p. 8.
8. U.S. General Accounting Office. 2004a. Evaluation of Selected Characteristics in National Strategies Related to Terrorism. GAO-04-408T. Washington, D.C. (3 February), table 2, pp. 5–6.
9. U.S. General Accounting Office. 2004b. Homeland Security: Selected Recommendations from Congressionally Chartered Commissions and GAO. GAO-04-591. Washington, D.C. (31 March). See also Government Accountability Office. 2004c. Homeland Security: Observations on the National Strategies Related to Terrorism. GAO-04-1075T. Washington, D.C. (22 September).
10. R. Falkenrath, ‘‘Problems of Preparedness: U.S. Readiness for a Domestic Terrorist Threat,’’ International Security 25:4 (2001): 147–86.
11. D. Kettl, Promoting State and Local Government Performance for Homeland Security (New York: Century Foundation Homeland Security Project, 2002).
12. Gilmore Commission, p. 2.
13. 9/11 Commission. 2004. The 9/11 Commission Report. Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, p. 364. See also R. Grimmett. 2004. Terrorism: Key Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and Recent Major Commissions and Inquiries. Report RL32519. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service
(11 August).
14. 9/11 Commission, pp. 395–6.
15. H. Hatry, Performance Measurement: Getting Results (Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, 1999). See also J. Bryson. Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations, rev. ed. (San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass, 1995).
16. P. Murphy and J. Carnevale, The Challenge of Developing Cross-Agency Measures: A Case Study of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (Arlington, Va.: PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government, 2001).
17. S. Spivak and F. Brenner, Standardization Essentials: Principles and Practice (New York: Marcel Dekker, 2001).
18. R. Yim. 2003. ‘‘Homeland Security: The Need for National Standards.’’ Testimony before the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, Princeton, N.J. (19 November). See also R. Yim and S. Caudle, ‘‘Homeland Security: Using Standards to Improve National Preparedness.’’ ISO Management Systems 4:1 (2004): 15–8.
19. National Fire Protection Association, Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management and Business Continuity Programs 2004 Edition (Quincy, Mass.: NFPA, 2004).
20. American National Standards Institute. 2004. ‘‘9-11 Commission Presented with Recommendation on Emergency Preparedness.’’ (News release, 29 April.)
21. ANSI-HSSP Workshop on Private Sector Emergency Preparedness and Business Continuity. 2004. Recommendations to the NFPA 1600 Committee. (Internal document dated 22 March.)
22. J. Milliman, J. Grosskopf, and O. Paez. 2003. ‘‘Responding to New Security and Environmental Threats: The Integrated Security, Environment, Health and Safety Management System Approach.’’ Unpublished paper provided by the authors
(9 December).
23. U.S.-Israel Science and Technology Foundation. 2004. Request for Applications in Integrated Security Management Systems Approach Pilot Studies, accessed 18 May at
http://www.usistf.org/04_D_03_PastRFPs.html
.
24. P. Schwartz and J. Ogilvy, ‘‘Plotting Your Scenarios.’’ In L. Fahey and R. M. Randall (eds.), Learning from the Future: Competitive Foresight Scenarios (New York: Wiley, 1998), p. 2.
25. Ibid.; and P. Schwartz, The Art of the Long View (New York: Doubleday, 1991), pp. 241–8. See also G. Ringland, Scenarios in Public Policy (Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2002).
26. G. Ringland, Scenario Planning: Managing for the Future (Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 1998), p. 115.
27. Ringland, 2002.
28. D. McClellan, ‘‘Delivering Strategic Intent.’’ Presentation to the World Future Society, Washington, D.C. (2 August 2004).
29. Gilmore Commission, p. 12.
30. Ibid., pp. 12–3.
31. ASIS International. 2003. General Security Risk Assessment Guideline. Alexandria, Va. See also Treasury Board of Canada. 2001. Integrated Risk Management Framework,
www.tbs-sct.gc.ca
.
32. C. Kelley, P. Davis, B. Bennett, E. Harris, R. Hundley, E. Larson, R. Mesic, and M. Miller, Metrics for the Quadrennial Defense Review’s Operational Goals (Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND National Defense Research Institute, 2003).
33. P. Davis, Analytical Architecture for Capabilities-Based Planning, Mission-System Analysis, and Transformation (Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND, 2002).
34. Ibid., p. 18.
35. Ibid.; and Office of Domestic Preparedness (ODP). 2004a, b. Request for Input on Universal Task List. Washington, D.C.: ODP, Department of Homeland Security (12 July and 13 August).
36. Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness (OSLGCP). 2004. Draft National Preparedness Goal. Washington, D.C.: OSLGCP, Department of Homeland Security (September), p. 6.
37. B. Wisniewski-Biehn. 2004. ‘‘Department of Homeland Security Office of Domestic Preparedness Training and Technical Assistance Division.’’ Presentation to American National Standards Institute Homeland Security Standards Panel, Falls Church, Va. (29 April).
38. ODP, 2004a.
39. ODP, 2004b.
40. OSLGCP, 2004.
41. Ibid.
42. F. Kaiser. 2001. Congressional Oversight. Report 97-936 GOV. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service (2 January).
43. Congressional Research Service. 2002. Congressional Oversight Manual. Report RL30240, updated. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service (17 January), pp. 1–3.
44. F. Kaiser. 2004. A Joint Committee on Intelligence: Proposals and Options from the 9/11 Commission and Others. Report RL 32525. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service (25 August).
45. J. Schneider and P. Rundquist. 2004a. Department of Homeland Security: Options for House and Senate Committee Organization. Report RS21360, updated. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service (13 August).
46. Ibid.; and J. Schneider and P. Rundquist. 2004b. House Committee System: Jurisdiction and Referral Reform Options. Report RS21643, updated. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service (24 March).
47. 9/11 Commission, p. 421.
17. Congressional Oversight Over Homeland Security and the Dynamics of Appropriation - Christopher Shays
1. Accessed 1 September 2004 at
www.house.gov/
.
2. Rules of the House of Representatives, Rule X, Clause 2 (d)(1); Rule XI, Clause 1 (d)(1).
3. Ibid., Clause 4 (c)(1) & (2).
4. Combating Terrorism: Federal Counterterrorism Spending (11 March 1999); Combating Terrorism: National Domestic Preparedness Office (26 May 1999); Combating Terrorism: National Guard Response Teams (23 June 1999); Combating Terrorism: Medical First Responders (22 September 1999); Combating Terrorism: Assessing the Terrorist Threat (20 October 1999); Combating Terrorism: Medical Stockpiles (8 March 2000); Combating Terrorism: Research Coordination (22 March 2000); Combating Terrorism: Domestic Preparedness (CT Field) (27 March 2000); Force Protection: DOD Chemical/ Biological Defense Plan (2 May 2000); Force Protection: Individual Protective Equipment (21 June 2000); Combating Terrorism: Threats, Risk, and Priorities (20 July 2000); Biological Weapons Convention Protocol (13 September 2000); Combating Terrorism: National Strategy (26 March 2001); Combating Terrorism:
Protecting Interests Abroad (3 April 2001); Combating Terrorism: Federal Response (Joint with Trans. Cmte.) (24 April 2001); Combating Terrorism: Medical Stockpiles (1 May 2001); Biological Weapons Convention Protocol(5 June 2001); Biological Weapons Convention Protocol (10 July 2001); Dark Winter (23 July 2001); Inter Agency Data Sharing and National Security (24 July 2001).
5. The 9/11 Commission Report, Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States (24 July 2004) at
www.9-11commission.gov
/, p. 106.
6.
www.gpo.gov/nct/
.
7.
www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/report/
2003/gilmore-commsion_vol5_15dec2003.htm
.
8. Charter of U.S. Commission on National Security/Twenty-First Century, Department of Defense (2 September 1999).
9. National Commission on Terrorism (Bremer Commission), Countering the Changing Threat of International Terrorism (June 2000), accessed 15 September 2004 at
www.mipt.org/bremerreport.asp
.10. Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction (Gilmore Commission), II. Toward a National Strategy for Combating Terrorism (15 December 2000), p. 17.
11. U.S. Commission on National Security/Twenty-First Century (Hart-Rudman Commission), III. Road Map for National Security: Imperative for Change (31 January 2001) at
http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Hart-Rudman3.pdf
, p. viii.
12. Ibid., p. 28.
13. Ibid.
14. Ibid., p. 112.
15. P.L. 107–296.
16. United States Government Accounting Office (GAO), Report to Congressional Requesters, Homeland Security Key Elements to Unify Efforts Are Underway but Uncertainty Remains, GAO-02-610 (June 2002) at
www.gao.gov/
.
17. Justice Stewart in Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184, 197 (1964).
18. Congressional Research Service, Issue Brief: Terrorism and National Security— Issues and Trends, IB10119, 5 (October 2004).
19. Federal law contains two major definitions of terrorism. The criminal code defines international terrorism as activities that: ‘‘A. involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State; B. appear to be intended—to
intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and C. occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.’’ A provision of the statutory title on U.S. foreign relations defines the terms somewhat differently, to mean: ‘‘(1) . . . terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than 1 country; (2) the term ‘‘terrorism’’ means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents; and (3) the term ‘terrorist group’ means any group practicing, or which has significant subgroups which practice, international terrorism.’’ 20. ‘‘National Security: The Ultimate Turf War,’’ National Journal (4 January 2003).
21. Ibid. Congressional committees with homeland security jurisdiction: Senate— Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, Subcommittee on Marketing, Inspection, and Product Promotion, Subcommittee on Research, Nutrition, and General Legislation; Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related Agencies, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Defense, Subcommittee on District of Columbia, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Subcommittee on Transportation, Subcommittee on Treasury and General Government, Subcommittee on Veterans, Housing and Urban Development; Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, Subcommittee on Personnel;
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Subcommittee on Financial Institutions; Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Subcommittee on Aviation, Subcommittee on Communications, Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs, Foreign Commerce, and Tourism, Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, and Fisheries, Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space, Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine; Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Energy, Subcommittee on National Parks, Subcommittee on Water and Power; Committee on Environment and Public Works, Subcommittee on Transportation, Infrastructure, and Nuclear Safety; Committee on Finance, Subcommittee on International Trade; Committee on Governmental Affairs, Subcommittee on International Security, Proliferation, and Federal Services, Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, Restructuring, and the District of Columbia; Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, Subcommittee on Public Health; Committee on Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism, and Government Information; Committee on Veterans’ Affairs; Select Committee on Intelligence. House—Committee on Agriculture, Subcommittee on Livestock and Horticulture; Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, FDA, and Related Agencies, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Defense, Subcommittee on District of Columbia, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, Subcommittee on Interior, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services,
and Education, Subcommittee on Transportation, Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government, Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies; Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Military Research and Development; Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, Subcommittee on Health, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations; Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government-Sponsored Enterprises; Committee on Government Reform, Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations; Committee on Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims; Committee on Resources, Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands; Committee on Science, Subcommittee on Energy, Subcommittee on Research; Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Aviation, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, Subcommittee on Railroads, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment; Committee on Veteran’s Affairs, Subcommittee on Health; Committee onWays and Means, Subcommittee
on Trade; Committee on Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security.
22.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema_strat_plan_fy03-08(no_append).pdf
.
23.
www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd39_frp.htm
.
24. 18 U.S.C. 2331.
25. Department of Defense Directive 3025.15, Military Assistance to Civilian Authorities (9 February 1997), p.1.
26. Combating Terrorism: Spending on Governmentwide Programs Requires Better Management and Coordination (GAO/NSIAD-98-93) (1 December 1997).
27. Observations on Federal Spending to Combat Terrorism (GAO-T-NSIAD-99-107) (11 March 1999).
28. Standing committees: Agriculture, Appropriations, Armed Services, Energy and Commerce, Financial Services, Government Reform, International Relations, Judiciary, Science, Transportation, Ways and Means. Select committees: Intelligence, Homeland Security.
29. U.S. House of Representatives, Select Committee on Homeland Security, accessed 8 October 2004 at
hsc.house.gov/schedule.cfm
.
30. U.S. General Accounting Office, Status of Open Recommendations, accessed
21 October 2004 at
www.gao.gov/docdblite/openrecs.php?fy¼&recflag¼ 2&query¼1&subhead ¼HomelandþSecurit
.
31. 9/11 Commission Report, p. xv.
32. Ibid., p. 105.
33. Ibid., p. 421.
18. The Department of Defense: Defending the Homeland and Defeating Enemies Abroad- Paul McHale
19. Emergency Planning: The Evolving Role of Regional Planning Organizations In Supporting Cities And Counties - Dave Robertson
Government Accountability Office (GAO), Homeland Security: Effective Regional Coordination Can Enhance Emergency Preparedness
(October 2004). GAO-04-1009.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Chief Administrative Officers Committee.
www.mwcog.org/committee/committee/default.asp?COMMITTEE_ID¼137
.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 2004. Partners in Preparedness: The Regional Emergency Coordination Plan at Work.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Regional Emergency Coordination Plan.
www.mwcog.org/security/security/plan.asp
.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, The Regional Emergency Coordination Plan Summary (September 2002)
20. Preparing a City for Terrorism - Martin O'Malley
21. Counterterrorism Legislation and the Use of the Rule of Law - Mike Kraft
1. Section 303 of the International Security Assistance and Arms Export Control Act of 1976, which created Sec. 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act (since modified in 2002, Public Law 107-115: Stat. 3147, 2153. 2155).
2. Section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (P.L. 96-72. Codified as 50 U.S.C. App. Sec. 2405). In 1988, ‘‘would enhance’’ was changed to ‘‘could enhance.’’ Also, the dollar threshold was lowered, making the provision more stringent.
3. Section 1202 of the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-399, 18 U.S.C 2332). Section 60022 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 added a death penalty provision.
4. P.L. 104-132 (28 U.S.C. 1602 et seq.)
5. 46 U.S.C. App. §§ 1801–1805.
6. P.L 103-322, Sec. s12005a.
7. E. O. 2947 and executive orders freezing the assets of other terrorist groups after 9/11 were issued pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (P.L. 95-223).
8. The provisions regarding FTOs and material support were signed into law on 24 April 1996 as part of AEDPA (P.L. 104-132, 110 Stat.). Although the bill had been drafted in response to terrorism overseas, it gained impetus after the bombing in Oklahoma City. The wording of the final draft suffered to some extent because the Clinton administration and the Republican-controlled Congress prodded each other to move quickly before various recesses.
9. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2339B.
10. P.L. 101-298.
11. Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intersect and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (P.L 107-56). USA PATRIOT is the acronym.
12. 46 U.S.C. Sec 761.
13. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2333.
14. P.L. 104-132 (28 U.S.C. 1602 et seq.).
22. Transatlantic Counterterrorism: Some Recommendations - Karen J. Greenberg
23. Trans-Atlantic Cooperation in the Fight Against Terrorism - Gijs de Vries
|
