Homeland Security in US History - Essay Example

Homeland Security: A Controversial Success No event in US history has more fundamentally changed the way Americans perceive national security and national defense than the terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers of September 11, 2001. Americans stood helpless as they stared angrily at their television sets, watching America's vulnerabilities being exposed by a small band of over-zealous religious radicals. Not since Pearl Harbor had America been so suddenly shocked into a war, with no warning and no time to prepare. US leaders acted with an aggressive swiftness designed to protect our homeland and secure American interests abroad. The Homeland Security Act and the Department of Homeland Security were rapidly implemented to minimize our vulnerability to future attacks, and make contingency plans to deal with and recover from an attack should one occur. The suddenness of the attacks on September 11, 2001, and the manner in which America was caught off guard, would shape our perception of the war on terror and frame America's response. Previous wars had unfolded methodically in the public's eye, such as the extended debate that preceded the Civil War. However, the War on Terror had no such incubation period to give the American public time to orient themselves to the new face of war. America was thrust into war "without any troops or plans in place to confront this particular enemy. Just as important, it occurred in a context of public indifference to or ignorance of the threat posed by terrorists" (Callahan, Dubnick, and Olshfski 555). The US had made few, if any, plans to deal with a terrorist arrack on US soil, and the discussion of terrorism was largely restricted to the law enforcement, investigators, and prosecutors that had confronted domestic terrorism such as the Unabomber and the attack on the Murrah Federal Building (Callahan, Dubnick, and Olshfski 555). The Congress took aggressive action and on October 4, 2001 introduced HR 3026 "To establish an Office of Homeland Security within the Executive Office of the President to lead, oversee, and coordinate a comprehensive national homeland security strategy to safeguard the Nation" (HR 3026). On November 25, 2002 George Bush signed into law PL 107-296, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which established the Department of Homeland Security (Gressle CRS-2, CRS-6). The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would consolidate intelligence efforts, provide for broad powers of investigation, and limit specific legal standards in regards to terrorism. The Homeland Security Act and the formation of the DHS gave the government sweeping new powers to patrol the US borders and took a more liberal approach toward domestic surveillance. The DHS was formed to consolidate intelligence and investigations when "The establishment of the Department of Homeland Security brought under one authority 22 federal entities with vital roles to play in protecting our Nation and preventing terrorist attacks within the United States (The National Security Strategy). Border patrol and customs has been especially challenged with 500 million people crossing our borders each year, and 21,000 containers entering the US through 350 commercial ports of entry every day (Bodenheimer). Bender reports that, "The Secure Border Initiative, costing more than $2 billion this year alone, is a major effort to increase Customs and Border Protection personnel, introduce detection technologies, and construct a fence along the border with Mexico". The DHS has also placed specific priority on the increased use of 'tamper-evident' containers, biometric identification technology, and radiation, chemical, and biological threat detection equipment (Bodenheimer). In addition, there has been an increased level of domestic intelligence activity designed to weed out suspected terrorist cells. Marrin describes these increased efforts as: Additional controversial domestic intelligence programs include the Justice Department's proposed Operation TIPS for public reporting of suspicious activity, the modification of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to increase the use of information acquired in court-approved wiretaps, and the creation of the Total Information Awareness program-since renamed the Terrorism Information Awareness program-to determine whether large-scale data mining could be a feasible way to track or catch terrorists. These activities have often been met with criticism and controversy as it was revealed that the government was needlessly spying on US citizens or scrutinizing their financial or private records. America treasures its liberty and its privacy, and Homeland Security has often been viewed as a trade off of liberty for security. According to Berkowitz, "They have been especially concerned about the possibility of using the CIA against US citizens, and do not want the FBI collecting information and maintaining files on people presumed to be innocent" (5-6). Relinquishing these rights places America on a slippery slope towards fewer freedoms that it may not be able to recover from. In many peoples' minds the saying 'Give me liberty, or give me death' is taken quite literally and very seriously. There has been little debate over the need for increased security against terrorism in the US, but there have been recent charges of mismanagement and ineffective operating procedures. The Boston Globe reported on November 30, 2008 that "a series of major projects - including a communication network linking state and locals officials in a crisis, a system to scan shipping containers for terrorist weapons, and a massive border-control initiative - face serious technical delays or cost overruns" (Bender). The cost overruns have gained additional attention as charges of pork barrel spending came into the public debate during this election year. It can be challenging to assess the risk factors associated with terrorism, and predict what an enemy might perceive as a high value target. Targets can range from rural areas that disrupt the food supply to metropolitan areas and the financial centers. Chemical plants, research labs, sporting events, and soft targets such as hotels all have justification for increasing security. However, the charges that spending on DHS projects has been politically motivated and allocated on the basis of political favoritism, rather than terrorist risk assessment, have not stood up to critical scrutiny. A 2008 study by Prante and Bohara confirmed that DHS grants were being awarded based on the risk of terrorist threats, and not on the basis of party politics (254). Still, the $50 billion budget in the hands of inexperienced management has "yet to implement laws requiring that maritime cargo be scanned for nuclear materials and that hazardous materials be rerouted around urban areas". While there remains a heightened importance for Homeland Security, there is a lot of work for the new administration to do. Among the controversies and the shortcomings of the DHS are also some significant gains. There has not been a terrorist attack on US soil since the implementation of the Homeland Security Act and the formation of the DHS. Airport security is tighter, much of it that is transparent to the traveler. The news has regularly reported on alleged terrorist activities that has been intercepted and eliminated. In a speech honoring the fifth anniversary of the DHS President Bush noted that "When this Department was established following the September the 11th terrorist attacks, it was hard to imagine that we would reach this milestone without another attack on our homeland" (Bush). The goal of preventing future terrorist attacks in America has been reached by the DHS, and it will require continued and increased vigilance to maintain that spotless record. In conclusion, when America was startled with the reality of being at war with an ill-defined enemy and no front lines, the government acted swiftly and effectively. The passage of the Homeland Security Act and the creation of the DHS have been instrumental in preventing any subsequent attacks within our borders, as new technologies and increased surveillance have contributed to a reduced level of terrorist threats in America. While there is some controversy in regards to costs and implementation, freedom and security, overall the programs have been a success. The goal of never again allowing a terrorist to strike US citizens in their homes or at work is a goal that needs to be maintained on an ongoing basis through continued determination and vigilance. Works Cited Bender, Bryan. "Homeland Security in Disarray, Officials Warn Delayed Projects, Reforms in Limbo Await Obama." Boston Globe 30 Nov. 2008: A19. ProQuest. American Public University. 19 Dec. 2008. Berkowitz, Bruce. "Intelligence for the Homeland." SAIS Review 24.1 (2004): 1-6. ProQuest. American Public University. 19 Dec. 2008. Bodenheimer, David Z. "Technology for Border Protection: Homeland Security Funding and Priorities." Journal of Homeland Security (2003). 19 Dec. 2008 . Bush, George W. "Remarks on the Fifth Anniversary of the Department of Homeland Security."Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents. 10Mar.2008:333-338.Research Library.ProQuest.American Public University. 19 Dec. 2008. Callahan, Kathe, Melvin J. Dubnick, and Dorothy Olshfski. "War Narratives: Framing our Understanding of the War on Terror." Public Administration Review 66.4 (2006): 554-68. ProQuest. American Public University. 19 Dec. 2008. Gressle, Sharon S. Homeland Security Act of 2002: Legislative History and Pagination Key. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2003. ProQuest. American Public University. 19 Dec. 2008. "HR 3026 Office of Homeland Security Act of 2001 (Introduced in the House); October 4, 2001." The Avalon Project. 2008. Yale University. 19 Dec. 2008 . Marrin, Stephen. "Homeland Security Intelligence: Just the Beginning." Journal of Homeland Security (2003). 19 Dec. 2008 . Prante, Tyler, and Alok K. Bohara. "What Determines Homeland Security Spending An Econometric Analysis of the Homeland Security Grant Program." Policy Studies Journal 36.2 (2008): 243-56. ProQuest. American Public University. 19 Dec. 2008. The White House. The National Security Strategy of the United States of America. Washington, DC: The White House, 2006. 19 Dec. 2008 . . Read More