Securing the homeland requires a new initiative

Recent revelations have made it clear that changes had to be made to centralize authority for homeland security if the United States is to win what President Bush called a Titanic struggle with terrorism.
When Tom Ridge, then governor of Pennsylvania, was tapped as Bush's Homeland Security chief, it was almost assumed that his would be a cabinet-level position. But the president resisted that move because he wanted to avoid making Ridge subject to Senate confirmation or to questioning by Congress.
The penchant for secrecy often exhibited by the White House delayed by months the initiation of a process that is going to necessarily take months to accomplish. Even now, the methodology of the White House -- congressional leaders in his own party weren't told the president's plan until the day before the announcement -- is bound to slowdown confirmation of an ambitious reorganization of the government.
The new Department of Homeland Security would inherit 169,000 employees and $37.4 billion in budgets from about 100 entities in the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, State, Transportation and Treasury. The highest profile entities include the Secret Service, the Coast Guard, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Customs Service and the new airport security operations.
Four areas of responsibility
As outlined by the president, the new department would have four divisions responsible for:
UControlling borders and keeping out terrorists and explosives.
UWorking with state and local authorities to prepare for emergencies.
UDeveloping technologies to detect chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, and to treat those who are exposed.
UAnalyzing intelligence and law enforcement information.
That last division would presumably be what the White House has described as a "customer" of the FBI and CIA, which don't have a history of sharing their information with anyone. Recent revelations might cause the president to add the National Security Agency to the list of independent agencies that will have to share some of what they know.
All of this is going to raise a lot of questions in Congress. Some of those questions will have to do with congressional committees attempting to protect their turf and should be quickly dispatched.
But many legitimate questions will arise about whether this is the best way to respond to an enemy that we don't truly know, don't really understand, and can't begin to anticipate. Eight months ago, only a handful of people could imagine the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Divining what those enemies are planning next and taking pre-emptive action will be an almost overwhelming task.