PostLeft.com

Wednesday, May 28th, 2008 at 09:56pm EDT

GAO on Port Security: Part II

As discussed in my previous post, “on Tuesday, May 27, 2008, the General Accounting Office released a new report on Supply Chain Security in the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) program.” In case you’re interested in the the broader issues in the GAO report and the reactions to date…

According to the AP, who received a copy of the document in advance of GAO’s release yesterday, New York’s senior senator, Charles Schumer, declared,

The bottom line is DHS has basically passed the buck on port security by allowing shipping companies to police themselves with almost no oversight. By not lifting a finger to ensure these companies are doing what they say they are doing, DHS is yet again shirking its primary responsibility. So many years later, it is shocking that DHS still cannot get its act together.

Read the rest of this entry »

Wednesday, May 28th, 2008 at 09:36pm EDT

GAO on Port Security: Why can’t government get the little stuff right?

On Tuesday, May 27, 2008, the General Accounting Office released a new report on Supply Chain Security in the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) program. This program is one part of the SAFE Port Act, approved by the House on a 421-2 vote, by the Senate 98-0, and signed into law by President Bush in October of 2006 just before the mid-term elections. In the report, requested by Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine), one of the 80 co-sponsors of the bill, the GAO identifies significant problems with the current implementation of this program. The US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) division of the Department of Homeland Security is responsible for overseeing this program, and has “concurred with each of the recommendations.”

The issue I would like to raise has nothing to do with port security or terrorism, per se. Instead, it is: Why is it that bureaucracies botch critical things which are nevertheless considered basic by those with moderate expertise in the pertinent, science, technology or policy issue?

Read the rest of this entry »

|