How Congress plans to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. How Might Congress Improve Information Sharing In Government?By Cliff Montgomery – July 18th, 2007How might Congress implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, whose findings on our intelligence community became such a sensation? That was the question behind a June 26th, 2007 Congressional Research Service report.We quote from the paper below:“The Final Report of the National Commission of Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (hereafter the 9/11 Report), was published in July 2004 and included numerous recommendations to enhance…terrorism information and intelligence sharing across the federal government, as well as between the federal government and state and local governments.”Terrorism information is defined as ‘…all information, whether collected, produced, or distributed by intelligence, law enforcement, military, homeland security, or other activities relating to(A) the existence, organization, capabilities, plans, intentions, vulnerabilities, means of finance or material support, or activities of foreign or international terrorist groups or individuals, or of domestic groups or individuals involved in transnational terrorism;(B) threat posed by such groups or individuals to the United States, United States persons, or United States interests, or to those of other nations;(C) communications of or by such groups or individuals; or(D) groups or individuals reasonably believed to be assisting or associated with such groups or individuals.'”The primary interest of these changes was to deter, detect, and ultimately prevent terrorist attacks such as that which took place on September 11, 2001. On December 17, 2004, Congress passed the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA), P.L. 108-458.”The law included many of the initiatives outlined in the 9/11 Report, including the codification of the Director of National Intelligence position and the establishment of a National Counterterrorism Center.”The law also created an Information Sharing Environment (ISE)…to facilitate ‘…the means for sharing terrorism information among all appropriate Federal, State, local, and tribal entities, and the private sector through the use of policy guidelines and technologies.'”While the IRTPA directed substantial changes in the Intelligence Community, it was perceived that from an information-sharing perspective, more could be done [by Congress] to enhance vertical and horizontal information sharing.[The Senate bill is S.4; the House bill is H.R.1]”A summary of the common and unique subtitles follows:
- Fusion and Law Enforcement Education and Teaming (FLEET) Grant Program (Unique to H.R. 1).
- Border Intelligence Fusion Center Program (Unique to H.R. 1).
- land Security Information Sharing Enhancement.
- land Security Information Sharing Partnerships.
- land Security Intelligence Offices Reorganization (Unique to H.R. 1).
- Interagency Threat Assessment Coordination Group (Unique to S. 4).
Fusion and Law Enforcement Education and Teaming (FLEET) Grant Program“H.R. 1 would establish a grant program ‘…under which the Secretary of land Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall make grants to local and tribal law enforcement agencies….'”There is no comparable FLEET provision in S. 4.Fusion Centers“According to H.R. 1:the terms State, local, or regional fusion center mean a State intelligence center, or a regional intelligence center that is the product of a collaborative effort of at least two qualifying agencies that provide resources, expertise, or information…with the goals of maximizing the ability of such intelligence centers…“There are approximately more than 40 such fusion centers in operation around the country.Border Intelligence Fusion Center Program“H.R. 1 would establish a Border Intelligence Fusion Center Program ‘… for the purpose of stationing Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers or intelligence analysts in the fusion centers of participating border States.’land Security Information-Sharing Enhancement“Both bills include a subtitle on the homeland security information-sharing enhancement, although the provisions are not identical. Much of the responsibility for the initiatives under the bills would be implemented either by the Secretary of land Security or by the DHS Chief Intelligence Officer…land Security Information-Sharing Partnerships“Each of the bills would require the Secretary (in consultation with the ISE Program Manager, the Attorney General, and others according to S. 4 provisions) to establish a State, Local, and Regional Information Fusion Center Initiative to ‘…establish partnerships with State, local and regional fusion centers.’land Security Intelligence Offices Reorganization“H.R. 1 would amend the land Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121) by replacing the ‘Directorate of Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection’ with a proposed ‘Office of Intelligence and Analysis.'”Moreover, the ‘Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection’ would be replaced with an ‘Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis.’Interagency Threat Assessment Coordination Group“S. 4 would codify the existence of an Interagency Threat Assessment Coordination Group, which would ‘… facilitate the production of federally coordinated products derived from information within the scope of the information sharing environment…and intended for distribution to State, local and tribal government officials and the private sector.'”Like what you’re reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of thee-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!
