Protecting citizens, business, and property from the threat of terrorism and naturally manmade disasters is arguably a governor’s most salient responsibility. As the chief executive officer of the states, governors are accountable for overseeing states response to any disaster or emergency. In essence, they must be prepared for the every day events for instance, industrial fires, power outages, tornados, and catastrophes on a scale of the September 11 terrorist attacks. Hence, a new governor must be briefed on the homeland security and how it applies to the state. The paper will provide the new governor with the essential information about Homeland Security and the responsibilities and roles accrued to the organization. It will also offer assistance in dealing with issues such as mutual aid, military assistant requirement, protecting the infrastructure and sharing information. An insight of how other governors have dealt with emergency and disaster issues will be given including the lessons that each has learned at every stage of operation. The goal is to help the governor to manage the DHS effectively despite the type and size of their state. It is pertinent to note that homeland security can be divided into four major components: prevent, respond, and recover.
Governors and other chief executives within the states are supposed to ensure that their states are secure and safe for their citizens, and thus, they should adequately prepare for how they will manage emergencies at both the local and national levels. The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is the states Federal Government Cabinet Department that was founded in 2002 to respond to September 11 terrorist attacks and any other emergency issues such as the hurricanes (Homeland Security, 2016).
History and Concept of Homeland Security at Both National and State Level
Since its inception in 2002, the DHS ensures that it prepares, prevents, recovers, and responds to any terrorist attack, natural disasters, and other human accidents. Each year the state and national government allocate the department, some budget to ensure it protects the Americans citizens within and outside the borders. The governor with the help of DHS can adequately prepare their state against the natural disasters, terrorism, and criminal acts. The initial most critical duty of any governor is the selection of the Homeland Security Advisor (HSA) who helps the administrator through contacting all DHS services in times of crises. The governor must critically decide on the structure and operations governance of their State Homeland Security (Csi-Publications, 2009).
Each approach any governor selects has its trade-off; for instance, the State Administrative Agency (SAA) must control the funds of the Federal Homeland Security. The governor is expected to prevent the occurrence of any form of disaster within their state through the available means. For instance, they can maximize the utility of fusion centers and consider proper clearances of individuals with the security. The governor is expected to respond to any disaster immediately because they have the authorities to ask for any additional help from the other national security organizations. In essence, the governor is expected to lead the state in the recovery process after the occurrence of any disasters. According to Ramsay & Logan, the governor is supposed to coordinate the recovery efforts for the federal and local areas (2012). With this in mind, the governor is thus, expected to know the concept and history of the DHS so that they can be aware of which step to take when required.
DHS comprises of 22 different federal agencies and departments combined to form one cabinet agency that was started in 2002 Ramsay & Logan (2012). Since its integration, the unit has been and provide essential in providing security to the citizens of United States within their borders. It is pertinent to note that, Tom Ridge, Pennsylvania Governor was the first Homeland Security Director in the White House. Tom Ridge was mandated to oversee and coordinate exhaustive national plans that would safeguard America against future terrorist attacks. Ridge was appointed to office eleven days after the terrorist attack on the September 11, 2001. The DHS formally came into operation after the voting in of the Homeland Security Decree by Congress (Homeland Security, 2016). The department opened doors on 2003, to any organization, which wanted to be part of it. The proposal to create DHS was raised in the Congress in June 2002 and passed in the same year November 25 (Homeland Security, 2016).
The department has undergone various modifications since its foundation. For instance, on February 15, 2005, Secretary Michael Certify initiated and led the second stage (2SR) to analyze the operations, structures, and policies of the department (Homeland Security, 2016). The meeting comprised of 250 members and 18 action teams of the federal, state, private, public, and local partners at national and international levels. As a result, the Department Six-Point Agenda was announced on July 3, 2005, to reorganize the department. The district was modified when the Congress passed the SAFE Port Act on October 13, 2006(Homeland Security, 2016). This Act gave the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) permission, reorganized FEMA ultimately, and transferred the Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program and the Radiological Preparedness Program to (FEMA) (Homeland Security, 2016).
On August 7, 2007, the cabinet implemented the Recommendations of 9/11 Commission decree of 2007. The decree was a response to Post-Katrina Emergency Management and focused on reorganization of the FEMA grant process. The Recommendations of 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 comprises most of the features of the DHS in the present. On October 28, 2009, President Obama signed a bill to transfer the Federal Protective Service (FPS) to National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD), which was announced by Secretary Napolitano on October 29, 2009. In the same 2010, Secretary of state announced that the first Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR) was completed and would be used to start a unified long-term platform for the DHS objectives. The department carried out Bottom-Up Review (BUR) to ensure that the operations of QHSR aligned with the required activities. The QHSR is the very successful monitoring and evaluation program of DHS available (The New Digital Battlefield, 2015).
The Homeland Security Advisory System (HSAS) had undergone some changes since March 12, 2002, when it was introduced in the Whitehouse. President Bush endorsed the Homeland Security Presidential Directive 3, which in turn led to HSAS to enable the coordination and communication of the Americans and the government at all levels to fight against terrorism. The HSAS was the foundation of the general communication structures that allow the dissemination of information about any risk of terrorists between the government and the Americans. The system used yellow as the alert method. Over the years, the HSAS has undergone many changes to reach to where it is, each time using a different color. The colors alternated were yellow and orange. However, on August 10, 2006, the HSAS used red to show flights that came from the UK to the US. The most recent change was on April 20, 2011, when Secretary Janet announced the implementation DHS National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS) that fully focuses on terrorism by giving timely reports about likely terrorist threats to the public (Kahan, 2014).
The department is a composition of 22 different units, which include the US Customs Services (Treasury), The Immigration Naturalization Service (Justice), The US Coast Guard among others each representing every sector of the government economy and social structures. The DHS Department headquarters is located at Nebraska Avenue complex (NAC). However, there is a plan to move the headquarters to St. Elizabeth’s Campus. It is salient for a new governor to note that, each governor is expected to join the Governor’s Homeland Security Advisors Council (GHSAC) that provides them with a forum to discuss the best practices and ideas for each state and territory. A coordinated state DHS includes the governor’s office, state agencies in all sectors, local public safety agencies, fire services, state chief information officers, private-sector infrastructure owners, and the state fusion centers. The governor is thus, required by the DHS to share information with other states (National Strategy for Homeland Security Homeland Security Council, 2009).
There are various types of DHS organization based on the evolution since 2000(Cañas, 2016). The current three categories are a stand-alone department, an entity within the governor’s office or a division of the larger agency. About 13 states have established an independent Department, 33 states have established their DHS as the division under the jurisdiction of another department such as the emergency management agency, while nine states operate their DHS within the governor offices. The responsibilities of state DHS include preparing the state in response to any threats, managing the grant funding from Washington D.C., implementing, and tracking the federal grant guidance (Cañas, 2016).
The Dynamic Threat Environment within States Hazards
The governor is expected to utilize the more than 72 fusion centers available in the country to ensure the safety of the members of their state. The dynamic environment threats the country faces every day has evolved beyond terrorists who were the reason DHS was formed to a more complex issues, such as cyber crimes through information sharing since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack (Cañas, 2016). The country has been in threat of terrorism, and thus, the governor with the help of DHS is supposed to alert the public and inform them about any possible hazard occurrence. The office of DHS deals with other catastrophic events such as earthquakes, accidents among any trouble that might outbreak within the states. The governor continues to assure the people of United States that they understand any threat and looking forward to securing their lives. Despite the worldwide efforts to curb terrorism after September 11, there has been continued information about terrorists’ plots under an al-Qaida organization to Homeland, and thus, the US is still under an evolving terrorist threat (csi-publications, 2009).
The governor is expected to develop communication strategies with the fusion centers within their state and outside and nationally, law enforcement, and other public and private personnel who can help him establish an incident reporting system that avails the suspicious activity report whenever there is a threat. They should also follow the already National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan that enables them to avail the required information. The most serious threat currently is the plan by al-Qaida to attack the Homeland despite the earlier efforts to destroy this group’s haven in Afghanistan, which is increased through cyber attacks (Kahan, 2014). In addition to terrorists’ attacks, United States faces other groups and individuals that threaten the safety of the Americans. Examples are the Lebanese Hezbollah, which carried the anti-US attacks and killed many US citizens. Hezbollah is the principal sponsor of terrorist groups whenever the US poses a threat to the group or Iran. There is also homegrown radicalization and violent Islamic extremist group within the US.
On the other hand, due to the US diversity in population, geography, and landscape, it thus faces other forms of catastrophic natural hazards, for instance, infectious diseases. The diseases can be because of international travels; measles is an example of a disease mostly acquired through foreigners. Other natural disasters can be the meteorological ones such as hurricanes and earthquakes, which cause the country remarkable deaths and injuries. The other deadly accidents and hazards the department deals with include chemical spills, construction failures, fire outbreak, long lasting power outages among other serious issues (Cañas, 2016). It is pertinent to note that when the president declares a disaster, governors should have FEMA work with state officials to conduct a briefing for state local and eligible private nonprofit organizations.
Impact of threat analysis, indication systems, and workings warning of the intelligence and types of resources
The severity of terrorist attacks is felt when the people are not prepared for it, otherwise, if the government is aware they can arrest and curb it or vacate people from the target building, and thus, reduce severity. The governor and their staff is, therefore, are required to adopt the available information sharing, public safety, national guard networks, law enforcement and emergency technical standards to improve the quality of safety. The National Informational Exchange Model (NIEM) is the national technological regulation used by many organizations. The governor should understand that the state has a role in the information sharing and intelligence. For instance, the information fusion data sharing centers, which the authorized people access. There are a number of these systems such as the Regional Information Sharing Systems Networks (RISS), Homeland Security Information Network (HSIN), and Joint Regional Information Exchange System (JRIES) among others. The governor is expected to be aware of the available national strategies (National Strategy for Homeland Security Homeland Security Council. 2009).
In essence, the governor is expected to identify the detracting infrastructures in the state and the resources needed so that they can establish a comprehensive budget. They should conduct vulnerability and probability assessments on the demanding areas. The governor should develop state strategies in collaboration with the private quarter and recognize the available national government support. The governor is also expected to learn more about the threats such as cyber attacks and know how to approach them.
Enabling legislations, policies, and government requirements that guide the governor in emergency situations
In today’s world, disasters and emergencies take numerous forms, including infrastructure and technological failures, health emergencies such as pandemic outbreak and natural disasters. Each state has its unique method of declaring a state of urgency. The governor is required to search the necessary legislative approval to maintain one. Many set enabling policies, legislation, and government regulate declaration of the state emergency in the DHS. For instance, Homeland Presidential Directive 7 (HSPD-7) is a national policy that requires the federal systems to identify, prioritize, and protect the nation from critical infrastructures. Others include Homeland Security Act 2002, and the Buffer Zone Protection Programs (BZP). There are also several government acts such as Posse Cornitatus Act of 1878(Ramsay & Logan, 2012).
The components of homeland security structure such as NRF, NIMS, ICS, and UC among others
Homeland comprises 22 different operational and supports components. Among them are the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), National Incident Management system (NIMS), United States Immigration, Customs Enforcement, and NPPD. Others include United States Coast Guard (USCG), National Response Framework (NFR), Surge Capacity Force (SFC), and DHS National Cyber Security Division (NCSD) among authors each created to cater for individual issues. For instance, NCSD is the response system for ensuring cyber security in the US (Ramsay & Logan, 2012).DHS is an efficient national system which requires any governor to read and fully understand its operations so that they can work together to ensure state security.
In conclusion, Protecting citizens, business, and property from the threat of terrorism and naturally manmade disasters is arguably a governor’s most salient responsibility. To achieve this they must make critical decisions regarding the structure and governance of their homeland security functions. In essence, upon taking office governors should understand the powers at their disposal and ensure that their staff members recognize the roles they will be asked to served in case of any threat.
References
DHS expands US-VISIT. (2009). Biometric Technology Today, 17(1), 4. doi:10.1016/s0969-4765(09)70007-4
Cañas, D. (n.d.). HOMELAND SECURITY AT THE STATE LEVEL: A Primer on State Homeland Security Programs.
Homeland Security. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2016, from https://www.dhs.gov/
Improving Homeland Security at the State Level. (2009). Retrieved April 28, 2016, from https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol.-53-no.-3/improving-homeland-security-at-the-state-level.html
Kahan, J. (2014). “One DHS” Revisited: Can the Next Homeland Security Secretary Unite the Department? Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 11(1), 1-24. doi:10.1515/jhsem-2013-0088
National Strategy for Homeland Security Homeland Security Council. (2009). Morgan James Pub.
Ramsay, J. D., & Logan, K. G. (2012). Introduction to homeland security. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Effect of 9/11 and US Homeland Security (DHS). (2015). The New Digital Battlefield, Second Edition Global Information Warfare, 89-118. doi:10.1201/b19282-6
