The inability to flow information from federal agencies down to local law enforcement
could hamper the government’s ability to root out terrorists, according
to a General Accounting Office survey released in August.
Of the 40 states that responded to the agency’s survey, only 35 percent
reported that “sharing with the federal government was effective or very
effective.”
No level of government was satisfied that it received enough information, according
to GAO. For example, 98 percent of the large cities that responded said they
need information on the location of known terrorists. But only 15 percent of
the respondents said they actually receive this information, said GAO.
In addition, no level of government was satisfied with the timeliness, accuracy
or relevance of the information it received. Information passed on to states
and cities about threats often is untimely, inaccurate or irrelevant, the GAO
found.
The federal government continues to perceive the fight against terrorism as
its responsibility, the report said. “That belief potentially undermines
the unity of effort between federal, state and city governments needed to effectively
secure the homeland,” said GAO. “Consequently, the federal government
still has not established comprehensive policies or procedures to effectively
integrate state and city governments into the information sharing process or
even routinely recognize their role [in] the process.”
A majority of states and cities surveyed said they did not have the opportunity
to be involved in national policy making on information sharing, said GAO.
“As a result, opportunities are routinely missed to engage state and
city law enforcement officers in obtaining and providing the federal government
with information that could be vital in the war against terrorism,” said
GAO.
Securing classified information was one example cited by federal agencies in
preventing them from sharing threat information with states and cities. However,
perceived barriers can be overcome, said GAO. For example, local law enforcement
routinely handles sensitive information in criminal cases.
Another issue limiting the sharing of information is the problem of acquiring
new technologies. “All categories of survey respondents identified the
lack of integrated information systems as the single most common barrier to
information sharing across all levels of government,” said GAO.
In a report by the Markle Foundation, a New York organization promoting information
and communication technologies, federal agencies view the information and homeland
security problem as one of obtaining new technology. For example, “for
fiscal year 2003, the FBI budgeted $300 million for new technology, the Transportation
Security Administration has budgeted $1 billion over several years, and the
former Immigration and Naturalization Service (whose function is now within
the Department of Homeland Security) has a 5-year plan for $550 million,”
said GAO.
However, the foundation reports that almost none of this money is being spent
to solve the problem of how to share this information between federal agencies
and with the states and cities, according to GAO. “The foundation’s
report states that when it comes to homeland security and using integrated information
systems, adequate efforts and investments are not yet in sight,” said
the report. DHS should create a clearing house to coordinate various information-sharing
initiatives to eliminate confusion and duplication; integrate cities and states
in the national policy making process for information sharing, and identify
perceived barriers to federal information sharing, said GAO.
DHS and the Defense Department concurred with the GAO report, but the Department
of Justice disputed the findings. According to written comments, DOJ believes
the study reaches sweeping and negative conclusions about the adequacy of information
sharing to prevent terrorism. DOJ said “the conclusions were incorrect
and unsupportable; the GAO study was beyond its purview, and that an evaluation
of information sharing requires a review of intelligence sharing, which by long
standing practice the executive branch provides to Congress, but not to GAO.”
However, according to GAO, it has broad statutory authority to evaluate agency
programs and activities, and investigate matters related to the receipt, disbursement
and use of public money.