Democrats charge Homeland Security Dept. hasn't kept 33 of its promises

Democrats Cite Gaps in DHS Record

Wednesday December 28, 2005 4:32 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5508227,00.html

Associated Press

{snips}

A report released Tuesday by 13 members of the House Homeland Security Committee says that nearly three years after the cabinet department's creation, gaps still remain in federal efforts to defend the nation against terrorism - including at ports, borders and chemicals plants.

The department also fails to share alerts and other intelligence quickly with state and local officials, according to the Democrats' report, which analyzes public statements and congressional testimony that outline Bush administration security goals since 2002.

. . . according to the report, the department has failed to:

-Compile a single, comprehensive list prioritizing protections for the nation's most critical and potentially vulnerable buildings, transportation systems and other infrastructure.

-Install monitors at borders and every international seaport and airport to screen for radiation material entering the country.

-Install surveillance cameras at all high-risk chemical plants.

-Create one effective network to share quickly security-related intelligence and alerts with state, local and private industry officials.

-Track international visitors through a computerized system that takes their fingerprints and photographs as they enter and exit the country.



House Homeland Security Committee Democrats: http://hsc-democrats.house.gov/

Homeland Security has nothing to do with actually stopping terrorism. If that happens as a biproduct, that's fine with them, but it has more to do with controlling what goes on in this country. Bush had to create a brand new 'Fatherland' department to institute his fascist policies.

Should he/she disband it? Doesn't Congress have oversight of the agency? What is their responsibility in directing the organization?

Several weaknesses in our national security have been outlined by Democrats. They expect the bureau that they agreed to create will address these concerns. They have to be diligent in ensuring that the department will not exceed or abuse its mandate. But, I won't go so far as to suggest that we should dismantle all of the security measures they have established since 9-11. Maybe the department should go, but I'm convinced that we need some response to the increasing threats to our nation that Bush's meddling has aggravated. That's what I think the Democrats are trying to address.