Book reviews

Homeland Security

General Accounting Office—http://www.gao.gov/

Congressional Research Service via Web pages of 0-7656-8045-9man Mark Green (R-

Wisconsin) and Congressman Christopher Shays (D-CT)—http://www.house.gov/markgreen/

crs.htm; http://www.house.gov/shays/resources/leginfo/crs.htm

Department of Homeland Security—http://www.dhs.gov/

National Governor’s Association—http://www.nga.org/

ANSER Institute for Homeland Security—http://www.homelandsecurity.org/

Web sites examined. All were visited more than once from May through August 2003.

This review compares selected Web site content of homeland security documents provided

on three federal government Web sites, one state governmental Web site, and one research

organization Web site. The Web sites of the General Account Office (GAO), Congressional

Research Service (CRS), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), National Governor’s

Association (NGA), and the ANSER Institute for Homeland Security were those visited.

GAO reports

The U.S. GAO reports are a major source of information and documentation on the

progress of homeland security issues. The GAO has produced a large number of valuable,

authoritative, and interesting reports related to a wide variety of homeland security issues. As

of the August 2003, more than 160 reports have been issued. The full text of these reports

may be found on the GAO’s homepage http://www.gao.gov/ and scrolling to ‘‘GAO Reports’’

and then to ‘‘Homeland Security’’ or directly at http://www.gao.gov/homelandsecurity.html.

They may also be found by using the GAO report search engine. A link is also provided from

the GAO homepage to the closely related ‘‘Terrorism’’ site. This review focuses on a few

selected representative GAO reports listed under ‘‘Homeland Security’’.

The ‘‘Homeland Security’’ site is updated frequently as new reports are issued and made

available in electronic form. Chronological coverage begins with GAO reports issued in

October 1998, therefore documenting homeland security issues well before the September 11,

2001, attacks. Most reports link to the full PDF text of the report. A few reports are not

available in full text but may be obtained in paper from the GAO if desired. All entries also

link to an abstract of the report’s content. Many of the more recent reports also include a link

Government Information Quarterly 21 (2004) 505–515

to ‘‘highlights’’ stating why the report was produced, along with a brief summary its findings.

Report abstracts include a listing of subject terms germane to that specific report. Reports are

organized on the Web site in chronological order by report date and include the all-important

report number for specific identification.

A broad range of subjects are covered by the reports. Some reports target very specific

areas such as undeclared air shipments, the improvement of funding data provided to the

congress, postal service issues associated with anthrax testing, and the SARS outbreak as

related to improvements in the public health and the response to bioterrorism and emerging

infectious diseases. Other reports may deal with broader issues such as border security. While

some GAO publications are in the form of detailed reports, others are in the form of testimony

given to various congressional committees.

Although it might be presumed that not much attention had been given to consideration of the

potential for terrorist attacks in the United States prior to 9/11, a perusal of GAO reports issued

prior to that time indicates otherwise. Congressional concerns about federal expenditures and

coordination in combating terrorism resulted in a report titled Combating Terrorism: How Five

Foreign Countries Are Organized to Combat Terrorism GAO-NSIAD 00-85 (April 7, 2000),

which reports on the allocation of resources to combat terrorism in five selected countries:

Canada, France, Germany, Israel, and the United Kingdom. Its findings note the similarities

between the programs of these countries, notably, among other things, that the majority of

governmental agencies combating terrorism are organized under one leading government

ministry, with added interagency coordination with other relevant ministries. Other findings

discuss the basis of the allocation of resources to this task. One of these is that due to limited

resources, funding is usually based on the likelihood that terrorism might actually occur, rather

than on an assessment of the overall vulnerability of the country to terrorist attacks.

Another report, and a large substantial one of over 200 pages, entitled Combating

Terrorism: Selected Challenges and Related Recommendations (GAO 01-822) September

20, 2001, summarizes challenges perceived and recommendation suggested prior to 9/11.

Although issued after 9/11, the report was prepared prior to those events. This report covers

much ground and presents considerable detail, which is organized into sections on the federal

government’s role in combating domestic terrorism, overall leadership and coordination

responsibilities, progress made in developing a national strategy, improvement in federal

response capability, federal assistance to local governments, and implementation of a strategy

to counter cyberterroristic threats. The text of the report contains several tables useful in

helping to organize some of the information presented in a more visually absorbable form.

One of these tables, ‘‘Terrorist Incidents in the United States 1980–1999,’’ rather surprisingly

shows that terrorist ‘‘incidents’’ worldwide actually declined from a high of fifty-one in 1982

to zero in 1994 and then to ten in 1999. The ‘‘Executive Summary’’ section presents several

‘‘Recommendations for Executive Action,’’ which include designating a single focal point for

responsibility and authority.

The main focus of Homeland Security: Key Elements to Unify Efforts are Underway but

Uncertainty Remains, GAO-02-610 (June 7, 2002) was to survey and summarize the progress

made on unifying homeland security efforts up to mid-2002. Information was gathered by the

GAO’s review of documents and interviews with officials from several key government

Book reviews506

agencies, state and local governments, and other relevant organizations, which are identified in

Appendix 1. This report’s findings indicated that although some key elements for a unified

effort, such as the establishment of the Office of Homeland Security, were beginning to take

shape, a truly unified approach had not yet been achieved. In addition, other key elements, such

as a national homeland security strategy and effective private sector partnerships, were at that

time still only in the initial stages of development. This report also pointed out that important

budgetary decisions could not be consistently made across all agencies since some key

concepts, including that of homeland security itself, had not yet been officially given definition.

A report that puts into focus progress made in defining national strategies is Combating

Terrorism: Observations on National Strategies Related to Terrorism, GAO 03-519T (March 3,

2003). It discusses the implementation of national strategies related to terrorism and presents a

summary of the background work GAO has done for congressional committees over a period of

several years on these strategies. Ten newly developed national strategies related to terrorism

are identified. These have been devised to replace the single federal strategy issued by the

Attorney General in 1998 entitled Five Year Interagency Counterterrorism and Technology

Crime Plan. Each of ten new strategies is focused on a specific area, for example, National

Security Strategy of the United States, National Military Strategy of the United States, National

Strategy to Secure Cyberspace, National Strategy to Physical Protection of Critical Infra-

structures, etc. A table included in the text of the report lists each strategy and indicates who

issued the strategy and the date it was issued, plus an abstract of the contents of each strategy.

Unfortunately, no citations are provided to permit easily finding the full text of the strategy

document. TheGAO had not yet evaluated these strategies due to their newness and notes a lack

of specific performance goals and measures to evaluate the effectiveness of these strategies. It

therefore notes what the importance of the performance goals of individual agencies has and

notes as a specific example several goals that the U.S. Department of State set to measure

progress in reducing the potential for international terrorists attacks.

Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Department of Homeland Security,

GAO 03-102 (January 1, 2003) is a report in the series ‘‘Performance and Accountability

Series: Major Management Challenges and Program Risks,’’ which focuses on a different

area, that of management implementation. The series provides separate reports on each

cabinet department and most major independent agencies. This report focuses on the DHS

and opens with a brief, but enlightening snapshot profile of the agency itself that puts into

perspective the size and scope of the agency, namely, that it was established on January 24,

2003, with three intended primary objectives:

1. preventing terrorist attacks within the United States;

2. reducing the vulnerability of the United States to such attacks; and

3. minimizing the damage and assisting in the recovery from attacks that may actually

occur.

The daunting challenges faced in implementing these objectives are put into the perspective of

a department that will combine twenty-two federal agencies specializing such varying disciplines

as law enforcement, border security, biological research, computer security, and disaster

Book reviews 507

mitigation will very likely become the third largest government agency, have a budget of almost

US$40 billion, and contain 170,000 employees. Describing in some detail the ‘‘enormous

management challenge’’ task faced in the integration of so many agencies, it also notes that there

still will remain a significant number of agencies that are not targeted for integration, but which

still need to be included in ‘‘overall homeland security strategy.’’ However, the report concludes

that failure to meet these challenges is not really an option since the success of this new

department is vital to the security of nation. This is a theme echoed in other reports.

The problem of adequate information sharing between the many agencies dealing with

homeland security is addressed in Homeland Security: Information Sharing Responsibilities,

Challenges, and Key Management Issues, GAO 03-715T (May 8, 2003). This report finds that

despite the improvements that have been made, the need still remains to develop a

‘‘comprehensive and coordinated national plan to facilitate sharing on critical infrastructure’’

to develop better information sharing capabilities between the federal government and state

and local governments, and also with the private sector. In addition to identifying factors that

have contributed to the successful sharing of information, the report also addresses various

potential barriers that may be encountered and why these occur. Among the topics discussed

are the development of new systems to address the present lack of connectivity and

operability existing between government databases and technologies.

This problem was more recently investigated in Homeland Security, Efforts to Improve

Information Sharing Need to be Strengthened, GAO 03-760 (August 27, 2003). This is a

highly critical report from the GAO to the Secretary of Homeland Security, which faults

federal information sharing efforts in terms of the inadequacy of information being shared,

dissatisfaction with the timeliness, accuracy and/or relevance of the information that is

shared, and the undermining of information sharing efforts with state and local governments

created by the federal government’s attitude that terrorism prevention is still primarily a

federal responsibility. The report recommends that the Secretary of Homeland Security work

with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Defense, the Office of Budget and Management,

CIA, and other appropriate federal, state, and local officials to correct these problems. It is

interesting to note that in attached comments on the GAO report, the DHS and the

Department of Defense are both in general agreement with its findings, while the Justice

Department contrarily considers the GAO’s findings to be ‘‘fundamentally incorrect and

unsupported by the reliable evidence,’’ also stating that it feels that for the GAO to review

intelligence activities is inappropriate since that area is ‘‘beyond GAO’s purview.’’ There are

number of other interesting appendices with this report, including one specifying existing

information sharing initiatives between various agencies and survey responses to questions

asked of federal, state, and local agencies by the GAO in preparing the report.

Two documents that address state and local issues as components of homeland security are

Combating Terrorism: Critical Components of a National Strategy to Enhance State and

Local Preparedness, GAO 02-548T (March 25, 2002) and Key Aspects of a National Strategy

to Enhance State and Local Preparedness, GAO 02-473T (March 1, 2002). Both are reports

of testimony before the House Subcommittee on Government Efficiency. Among the

recommendations are for regulatory standards to be set and determining who will set and

implement or enforce them. In connection with this, report 02-548T cites five models of

Book reviews508

shared regulatory authority. Among the other needs cited are those for regional coordination,

mutual aid agreements and the sharing of resources among various jurisdictions, and the

possible use of other federal programs to serve as models for funding proposals. Report 02-

473T cites the three most important key aspects of state and local preparedness, these being

‘‘definition and clarification of the appropriate roles and responsibilities of federal, state, and

local entities,’’ the ‘‘establishment of goals and performance measures to guides the nation’s

preparedness efforts,’’ and the ‘‘careful choice of the most appropriate tools of governments

to best implement the national strategy and achieve national goals’’.

Another interesting report on a different aspect of homeland security is DOD Needs to

Assess the Structure of U.S. Forces for Domestic Military Missions, GAO 03-670 (July 11,

2003). Among the topics explored in this report is how domestic military and nonmilitary

DOD missions differ and how they have changed in response to potential terrorist attacks.

The key differences are summarized in a useful table. Strategy has changed from a focus on

external defense parameters to a new focus on internal as well as external defensive measures.

One of the conclusions of this report is that the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act (20 Stat.145),

which forbids the direct use of federal military in civilian law enforcement unless authorized

by the constitution or by acts of congress, will not impede federal military homeland security

efforts. The report also discusses the problems associated with maintaining combat profi-

ciency and with personnel deployment created by homeland security missions. The report

also notes the recent establishment to two new organizations intended to address long-term

policy direction, planning, and implementation, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of

Defense for Homeland Security, and the U.S. Northern Command.

Congressional Research Service

The CRS has also issued a number of reports concerned with homeland security. Since the

CRS considers its research primarily for member of congress, it does not routinely make them

available to the public. However, there are two alternative sites where at least some of these

reports may be found online. The sites that perform this service are those of Congressman

Mark Green (R-WI) http://www.house.gov/markgreen/crs.htm and Congressman Christopher

Shays (D-CT) http://www.house.gov/shays/resources/leginfo/crs.htm. While many CRS stud-

ies are also found on the U.S. Department of State Web site, that site seems to include only

those concerned with the foreign affairs aspects of terrorism and so does not include those

related more specifically to domestic homeland security issues. On these Web sites, CRS

studies are listed alphabetically by title and organized in three groups based on whether they

are Issue Briefs (IB), short reports of less than six pages (RS), or longer reports (RL). At this

time, there are far fewer CRS reports on homeland security available on the Web than there

are GAO reports. Both provide a critical analysis and report findings and recommendations.

While GAO reports tend to reflect the auditing, evaluating, and investigative charge of the

agency and mainly cite other GAO reports, the CRS reports have the feel of providing more

of an overall issue summation and may provide many footnoted citations to a variety of

documents relevant to the topic being addressed.

Book reviews 509

Department of Homeland Security: State and Local Preparedness Issue, RL31490 (May 5,

2003) provides an good overview of the various issues and efforts that have beenmade to address

the abilities of state and local governments to meet security threats and to respond to them should

they actually occur. There is a good summation of the issues involved, a discussion of

administrative coordination, as well an outline of the debate issues that are affecting this topic.

Also provided is a valuable appendix containing a table listing giving the particulars on domestic

preparedness program proposals found in a selected DHS-related bills. Another useful feature is

the inclusion of citations to other related CRS reports. For example Homeland Security:

Standards for State and Local Preparedness, RL31680 and Risk Assessment in the President’s

National Strategy for Homeland Security, RL21348 are both cited as related CRS reports.

However, neither has yet appeared on the Web and therefore the bibliographical citations given

here are very useful in increasing awareness of the existence of these additional reports.

Department of Homeland Security

The Department of Homeland Security Web site http://www.dhs.gov/ provides a link

through the press room and library pathway the publications and reports, page http://

www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?theme=85&content=285. This page provides link to the

full text of several important core documents on homeland security. Among these is the

National Strategy for Homeland Security, which outlines in detail the rationale and

strategy for homeland security doctrine and actions. The basic objectives stated are to

prevent attacks within the United States, reduce attack vulnerability in the United States,

and to minimize the damage should an attack actually occur. The report then proceeds to

describe the security situation and concerns in six major areas:

1. intelligence and warning;

2. border and transportation security;

3. domestic counterterrorism;

4. critical infrastructure and key assets;

5. defending against catastrophic terrorism; and

6. emergency preparedness and response.

Actions and major initiatives are discussed and the summarized in a ‘‘national vision’’ box

for each area. Also identified and discussed are twelve major initiatives seen as vital to

improving homeland security.

Another important link from the ‘‘Press Room Publications and Reports’’ page is to

Public Law 107-296 of November 25, 2002, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which

provides in a PDF the full text of all 1717 sections of this law, which forms that basis

for subsequent homeland security organization and actions. Among other things provided

are speeches and statements for the current year and press releases and news by date

archived back to January 2002 and a link to other reports such the National Strategy to

Secure Cyberspace, National Strategy for Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructure,

Book reviews510

the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan, and Securing the Homeland,

Strengthening the Nation. The latter is a report that discusses homeland security and its

various components in terms of the 2003 Federal budget.

National Governor’s Association

The NGA home security Web site http://www.nga.org/ provides access to a consid-

erable amount of information focused on administering security on the state level.

Performing a search from the main NGA Web page under the term ‘‘homeland security’’

resulted in 286 hits. Many, but not all of these, were also found via a search of the

NGA homeland security link http://www.nga.org/center/security.

Among the important documentation is the Governor’s Guide to Emergency Management:

Volume 2: Homeland Security. This 130-page study sets out the major issues to be addressed

in dealing with a terrorist attack. It begins with an overview outlining the basics of what every

governor should know and then proceeds to discuss in ten chapters the major areas of

concern, including communications, infrastructure, bioterrorism, agroterrorism, chemical

terrorism, nuclear and radiological terrorism, and cyberterrorism. Each chapter includes

background information on the ‘‘nature of the threat.’’ Recommendations on actions to be

taken by the governors are specified and summary checklists of these actions are included.

Annotated references to other related Web sites are given. A final chapter provides

information on the U.S. federal government ‘‘Federal Response Plan’’ and on federal support

agencies, with Web links to the relevant agencies. Another section, dealing with federal

technical assistance training and resources, links to the Office of Domestic Preparedness

(DOJ) and to FEMA’s Office of National Preparedness. Two appendices conclude the

document, one providing addresses and Web links to thirty-five federal agency offices and

twenty-eight nonfederal organizations concerned with emergency preparedness, the other

linking to the Web sites of the homeland security agencies in twenty-eight states.

States’ Homeland Security Priorities, linked from the NGA security page under ‘‘States

HS Priorities’’ or also by an NGA homepage search, is an NGA Issue Brief that presents the

results of an analysis of the states written responses to the Office of Homeland Security’s

request state input in compiling the national strategy. It identifies ten priorities for the states,

among which are the coordination of effort by all levels of government, receiving and

disseminating intelligence information, securing borders, airports, and seaports, and the role

of the National Guard.

A couple of NGA policy positions on homeland security, linked on the NGA homepage under

‘‘NGA Policy Positions,’’ are the Executive Committee’s Homeland Security Comprehensive

Policy (EC-5) and the Human Resources policy Terrorism and Homeland Security Policy (HR-

10). While the former is a generalized single page policy statement, the latter is a more detailed

five-page report focusing specifically on policy issues that address terrorist actions.

‘‘From the Legislative Update’’ feature provides information on legislative issues

concerned with homeland security. For example, Homeland Security Legislative Update

consists of a twelve-page report outlining the NGA’s position, including identifying various

Book reviews 511

sections of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 that have addressed specific NGA concerns.

This report also comments on other topics such as plans for developing the Office of

Homeland Security and several pages on homeland security funding issues. Another report,

CBO Releases Homeland Security Cost Estimate, provides a report from the Congressional

Budget Office (CBO) on cost projections for implementing a Department of Homeland

Security. Among the findings are that this would cost an estimated US$3 billion additional

dollars for the 2003–2007 period, this being in addition to the net expenditures already

existing to maintain the ongoing activities of the transferred agencies. It is estimated that

these costs would rise to US$31 billion by 2007.

ANSER Institute for Homeland Security

The ANSER Institute for Homeland Security http://www.homelandsecurity.org/ provides a

somewhat different perspective inasmuch as it is not a governmental related site, but rather a

nonprofit research organization established in 2001 intended to study and evaluate homeland

security issues. It provides a number of interesting resources. ‘‘Virtual Library’’ links to an

extensive array of Web sites, including presidential executive orders and homeland security

directives. It also provides links to GAO reports on homeland security organized by subject.

Another category is ‘‘Homeland Security Statistics.’’ Among the reports provided are those of

the Center for Strategic and International Studies. An interesting example of one of the CSIS

reports is Where the Money Goes in Homeland Security, a thirty-six-page report that outlines

federal spending patterns over the FY98-FY01 period, including many charts and graphs.

‘‘Current News’’ is organized under seven topics such as national strategy, intelligence and

warnings, critical infrastructure and key asset protection, border and transportation security,

etc., and links to full text articles from a variety of news sources. Unfortunately, the content of

this site is purged on a monthly basis. The ‘‘Weekly Newsletter’’ provides access to a range of

resources including the full text of reports under ‘‘What’s New,’’ including a GAO report on

assessing the mission of the Defense Department in meeting domestic terrorism and another

on the inadequate bioterrorist response capacity in U.S. hospitals.

The ‘‘Weekly Newsletter’’ also provides the full text of articles from the U.S. national

and international presses, state and local news, private sector news, and commentary. The

contents of this site are archived back to January 2002.

Two other valuable features are links to the online Journal of Homeland Security and to

‘‘Institute Analyses.’’ The journal’s declared aim is to provide for ‘‘discussion and analysis’’

for a wide range of homeland security-related issues on an interdisciplinary basis. For

example, ‘‘New Terrorists, New Attack Means? Categorizing Terrorist Challenges for the

Early 21st Century’’ ‘‘seeks to characterize terrorists of both the new and the old schools and

then to examine the most likely attack means to be employed by each.’’ Another article makes

the case for the establishment of a national missile defense system while another examines the

Navy’s role in homeland security. Articles are archived and the entire list can be browsed or

they can alternately be viewed under three catalogues: ‘‘Organization for HLS,’’ ‘‘HLS

Threats and Responses,’’ or ‘‘Strategies for HLS’’.

Book reviews512

‘‘Institute Analyses’’ contains a number of reports analyzing various homeland security

issues. For example, National Strategy for Homeland Security: Finding the Path Among

the Trees, 008 (July 2002) provides an analysis of the national strategy document issued

by the Office of Homeland Security. An analysis of the content of this document

concludes that it is more a plan than a strategy and is concerned more with

vulnerabilities rather than threats. Key themes are examined. Among the findings are

that authority and responsibility sharing federalism are the most important concept in the

plan, that accountability lines need to be established for tracking and feedback purposes,

that fiscal responsibility needs to established for fund planning and expenditure, and that

efforts need to be made to prioritize efforts beyond traditional bureaucratic limitations.

Also noted are points missing from the document. These include a positive lack of

pandering to political interest groups, the need for a more coherent central budgeting

system, better standards for acquisitions procurement, improving educational programs

and personnel policies, and the need to address the difficult problem of merging

intelligence with law enforcement activities. This analysis concludes with a reminder

that the existence of a national plan will help to make a terrorist attack more difficult

through the objectives of mobilizing national power, reducing vulnerability, minimizing

damage, and speeding recovery, but can never be seen as providing as a strategy that will

prevent all attacks.

Other reports of interest are ANSER Summary and Analysis: A Quick Look at the Proposed

Department of Homeland Security, 006 (2002), which outlines the key objectives of

establishing the department and provides an overview of the organizational structure of the

department, noting the many strong points of the proposal and the prospects of success for the

department. Note is taken of the fact that the president has a unique role in the process,

inasmuch as he is the only person with the authority and clout to coordinate the federal effort

and then coordinate it with state, local, and private entities. Also noted is the strategic cycle of

homeland security duties, these being defined as prevention, preemption, attribution,

response, and deterrence. These elements are also discussed in a short report Homeland

Security: The Strategic Cycle, 004 (May 2002). Finally, the report ends with a discussion of

additional elements seen as requiring further action.

The sources cited here that are indicative of the vast amount of information on homeland

security are electronically available from both federal and other organizations concerned with

homeland security. These resources, taken in aggregate, provide a vast resource of informa-

tion that can be tapped for researching homeland security, its history, and implications for the

future.

Roger Anderson

Anschutz Library, University of Kansas Libraries,

University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA

E-mail address: randerson@ku.edu

Fax: +1-785-864-5705

doi:10.1016/j.giq.2003.10.001

Book reviews 513