Cabinet Level Departments

[Justin Thyme]

Rick Perry admitted to "stepping in it" last night when he said he would eliminate three cabinet level departments and then could only name two that he would eliminate. He's not a candidate I could endorse but he did bring up something I'd like to discuss.

President Washington had four cabinet level departments in his administration, state, justice, treasury and war. There are now fifteen:

1. State
2. Treasury
3. Defense
4. Justice
5. Interior
6. Agriculture
7. Commerce
8. Labor
9. Health and Human Services
10. Housing and Urban Development
11. Transportation
12. Energy
13. Education
14. Veterans Affairs
15. Homeland Security

I think this is too many and that many of those functions need to be combined. Some of you may think that may be too few. I'll give my list and how I would combine some of them but I'd like to see yours.

Here's mine:

1. State
2. Treasury
3. Defense
4. Justice
5. Interior

a. Energy
b. Agriculture
c. Transportation
d. Environmental Protection Agency

6. Commerce and Labor
7. Health, Education and Welfare

a. Veterans Affairs

I've actually only eliminated Homeland Security, combining several of them in the name or just moving the department out of the cabinet and under another department. Maybe DHS needs to be kept but I really don't think the terrorist threat to this country is so great that a cabinet level department needs to exist for the problem.

I think that by moving certain departments into subdepartments of another you take much of the political competition out of the management of those functions. For instance, commerce and labor places both on an even keel where decisions between the two can be worked out without the politics of being competing departments in the cabinet.

The Presidents cabinet would be streamlined and look like this:

1. Vice President
2. Sec. of State
3. Sec. of Treasury
4. Sec. of Defense
5. Attorney General
6. Sec. of Interior
7. Sec. of Commerce and Labor
8. Sec. of Health Education and Welfare

How would you do this? Would you leave things as they are, make similar cuts or would you expand the cabinet and if so, how?

[professorx]

Nov 10, 2011 9:45:50 GMT -5 Justin Thyme said:

Rick Perry admitted to "stepping in it" last night when he said he would eliminate three cabinet level departments and then could only name two that he would eliminate. He's not a candidate I could endorse but he did bring up something I'd like to discuss.

I've actually only eliminated Homeland Security, combining several of them in the name or just moving the department out of the cabinet and under another department. Maybe DHS needs to be kept but I really don't think the terrorist threat to this country is so great that a cabinet level department needs to exist for the problem.

I think that by moving certain departments into subdepartments of another you take much of the political competition out of the management of those functions. For instance, commerce and labor places both on an even keel where decisions between the two can be worked out without the politics of being competing departments in the cabinet.

How would you do this? Would you leave things as they are, make similar cuts or would you expand the cabinet and if so, how?

DHS is diverse from Border Patrol to the Secret Service to Customs (ICE). There is no real overlap or competition. The agencies in my opinion are so specialized there couldn't be overlap. If you took a Border Patrol agent and tried to teach him money laundering detection skills, it would fail. If you took a Secret Service agent and tried to teach him to interrogate a human trafficker for two hours in spanish, it would fail. If the agencies people are specialized, the their management also needs to be specialized.

As more sub-agencies grow, they will split off. As agencies are no longer needed they will go away (rare, I know).

The need is there for all these groups and sub-groups. There is more need for human resources (officers and agents) because there is more bureacratic and legal red-tape.

[Tsavodiner]

I've actually only eliminated Homeland Security, combining several of them in the name or just moving the department out of the cabinet and under another department. Maybe DHS needs to be kept but I really don't think the terrorist threat to this country is so great that a cabinet level department needs to exist for the problem.

Fair enough. So, do you advocate returning to the days of Oklahoma City, the Centennial Park and Birmingham bombings, the WTC truck bombings, and the Christian Identity movement?
DHS monitors not only the world scene, but a plethora of domestic threats, which for my money are more dire than the foreign ones.

How many successfully delivered attacks are acceptable?

[professorx]

Nov 14, 2011 22:22:33 GMT -5 Tsavodiner said:

I've actually only eliminated Homeland Security, combining several of them in the name or just moving the department out of the cabinet and under another department. Maybe DHS needs to be kept but I really don't think the terrorist threat to this country is so great that a cabinet level department needs to exist for the problem.

Fair enough. So, do you advocate returning to the days of Oklahoma City, the Centennial Park and Birmingham bombings, the WTC truck bombings, and the Christian Identity movement?
DHS monitors not only the world scene, but a plethora of domestic threats, which for my money are more dire than the foreign ones.

How many successfully delivered attacks are acceptable?

I think for major events like these the local and state police are far more effective for intel and arrests than larger police organizations.

The guy who arrested Eric Robert Rudolph was a rookie with one week's experience for pete's sake. Nothing beats or replaces police work.

With that said, when the arrest of Eric Robert Rudolph was made, then what? Does east-bumble fuck North Carolina have the resources to detain and prosecute someone like Rudolph?

Does Pinal/Yuma County Arizona have the resources to police millions of acres of international border?

Should every police department be expected to have a state-of-the art forensics, drug, explosive, fingerprint (etc.) lab?

[Justin Thyme]

Nov 14, 2011 22:22:33 GMT -5 Tsavodiner said:

I've actually only eliminated Homeland Security, combining several of them in the name or just moving the department out of the cabinet and under another department. Maybe DHS needs to be kept but I really don't think the terrorist threat to this country is so great that a cabinet level department needs to exist for the problem.

Fair enough. So, do you advocate returning to the days of Oklahoma City, the Centennial Park and Birmingham bombings, the WTC truck bombings, and the Christian Identity movement?
DHS monitors not only the world scene, but a plethora of domestic threats, which for my money are more dire than the foreign ones.

How many successfully delivered attacks are acceptable?

All of those incidents you mentioned, and the international ones you didn't were anomalies. I think we should learn from them but they in no way rise to level of importance that reducing gang activity. As Professorx has pointed out, rather than a cabinet level department taking charge of all the diverse law enforcement and intelligent gathering agencies of the federal government how about we turn those resources over, instead, to local law enforcement with a much smaller agency coordinating efforts? Those resources could then be used to gain control of the real problems communities face rather than the anomalies.

[Tsavodiner]

JiT, I WISH the ones not mentioned WERE anomalies.
So far, DHS has intervened in far more domestic plots than foreign ones, the latest being a plot by a group of Georgia seniors to produce and disperse ricin, a pathogen, in several urban centers, one close to your home.

People accuse the government of "entrapment", but the planning/materials gathering phase is when you WANT to interdict the plotters; if the plan advances to the delivery/execution phase, there is a virtual probability of close to 100 percent of success. Some time when I have the material close at hand, I'll share with you the methodology for detecting and interdicting terrorist plots; it's not classified, but is grounded in science and field-proven to be effective.

Local governments, even at the State level, simply don't have the resources and focus required to effectively function against our enemies, foreign or domestic.

[Justin Thyme]

Nov 15, 2011 17:39:04 GMT -5 Tsavodiner said:

JiT, I WISH the ones not mentioned WERE anomalies.
So far, DHS has intervened in far more domestic plots than foreign ones, the latest being a plot by a group of Georgia seniors to produce and disperse ricin, a pathogen, in several urban centers, one close to your home.

I'm sure that with your job you are made aware of a lot of these investigations that are never reported on the news. However the one's I've heard about have all been uncovered by single agencies. We were tracking down these terror plots before DHS was formed. The one you specifically mentioned was uncovered solely by the FBI.

Local governments, even at the State level, simply don't have the resources and focus required to effectively function against our enemies, foreign or domestic.

Well, maybe they could have the resources if the Feds didn't gobble up so much of the available resources. I'm not saying we stop looking for terrorist, I'm just saying that there doesn't need to be a cabinet level department of government devoted to that job. It could be handled just as well in a sub-department.

[professorx]

Well, maybe they could have the resources if the Feds didn't gobble up so much of the available resources. I'm not saying we stop looking for terrorist, I'm just saying that there doesn't need to be a cabinet level department of government devoted to that job. It could be handled just as well in a sub-department.

Again, the efforts need to combat national threats require a lot of people. A lot of people leads to a lot of management. This management requires the same level of specialized expertise.

The reasons the feds have to step in is because the locals do not have the resources to prosecute an individual. If there is a person like Eric Robert Rudolph in local custody, then a small jail cannot hold him, a local municpality does not have the expertise to collect examine evidence, or the money to prosecute the case.

Every town cannot have a super computer and a team of scientists to look at evidence. Every jail is not secure enough to hold super-villians, not every town has the case to put a major case though court.

[Conservator]

"Every town"... no, but every state... I don't think the FBI is making us broke, but the states could do more...

[Justin Thyme]

Every town cannot have a super computer and a team of scientists to look at evidence. Every jail is not secure enough to hold super-villians, not every town has the case to put a major case though court.

Yeah, and every problem cannot have a cabinet level department set up to resolve it.

[Tsavodiner]

I agree with you on this:

The days just before the 9/11 attacks, when these guys went to a strip club, there should and WOULD have been a cop or six in there wondering who the hell they WERE, and prepared to do something about them, and it.

There is a strong argument for the local component, properly unleashed.

[professorx]

Nov 16, 2011 21:26:36 GMT -5 Justin Thyme said:

Every town cannot have a super computer and a team of scientists to look at evidence. Every jail is not secure enough to hold super-villians, not every town has the case to put a major case though court.

Yeah, and every problem cannot have a cabinet level department set up to resolve it.

Homeland Security is very diverse... I read an article yesterday where McGovern said "Do away with it all" because he had big problems with TSA. TSA is only one aspect of DHS.

Should all of DHS be dissolved or just TSA? Which elements are duplicated efforts or should be handled by local law enforcement?

Wikipedia says "In the United States, the concept of "Homeland Security" extends and recombines responsibilities of government agencies and entities. According to Homeland security research, the U.S. federal Homeland Security and Homeland Defense includes 187 federal agencies and departments,[2] including the United States National Guard, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the United States Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the United States Secret Service, the Transportation Security Administration, the 14 agencies that constitute the U.S. intelligence community and Civil Air Patrol."

What local agency could replace the Coast Guard, Customs, Border Patrol, ICE, Secret Service?

How about USCIS? Who would hand out the work permts, and green cards?

Even the controversial TSA, I am not sure the local airports could duplicate their efforts.

[Justin Thyme]

Nov 19, 2011 15:08:30 GMT -5 professorx said:

Nov 16, 2011 21:26:36 GMT -5 Justin Thyme said:

Yeah, and every problem cannot have a cabinet level department set up to resolve it.

Homeland Security is very diverse... I read an article yesterday where McGovern said "Do away with it all" because he had big problems with TSA. TSA is only one aspect of DHS.

Should all of DHS be dissolved or just TSA? Which elements are duplicated efforts or should be handled by local law enforcement?

The DHS can remain, just under a department like Justice or maybe even Defense. Or it can be eliminated placing its various agencies under the departments they were under before DHS was formed. DHS just doesn't need to be a cabinet level department of the federal government.

[Tsavodiner]

"SEND THE HELICOPTERS!"