|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 15, 2004
CONTACT: Eric Landau
(202) 204-3624
- The Commission reviewing
the structural and intelligence failures that led to the September
11, 2001 terrorist attacks has stimulated a constructive debate
on the steps needed to prevent future attacks, several National
Academy of Public Administration Fellows have found. But,
they warned that some of its structural recommendations are
not well supported by the problem assessment, conflict with
proven principles of sound management, and could produce intended
dysfunctions as serious-if not more so-than are found in existing
arrangements.
In a letter to congressional
committee leaders, the Fellows urged policymakers to:
- Understand whether the underlying problems
leading to the 9/11 attacks may have been managerial processes
as much as structural.
- Assure that the National Intelligence
Director position, if established, is structured and located
to minimize partisan political pressures and provide adequate
public accountability.
- Move quickly to enhance the government's
capacity to effectively plan and execute large-scale reorganizations
in ways that minimize disruption of operations.
- Restructure congressional committee oversight
for intelligence and homeland security areas.
In letters to leaders
of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees and the Senate
Governmental Affairs Committee, the Fellows wrote the disruption
major reorganizations generate always is underestimated as
are the time and talent for the new organization to function
smoothly. Better management systems and stronger leadership
could alleviate the core problems underlying the 9/11 attacks,
which would require different or less restructuring than what
the Commission recommended. The Fellows cautioned that these
organizational arrangements would take several years to operate
smoothly.
The Commission has
recommended locating the national intelligence director in
the Executive Office of the President (EOP), but the proposal
has described as locating it in the White House. Given its
operational role, the Fellows believed that intelligence leadership
should not be located in the EOP while the National Intelligence
Director, if one is created, should not be part of the president's
personal White House staff.
The Fellows endorsed
the Commission's recommendations to establish a National Counterterrorism
Center and a network-based information sharing system. They
also agreed that a restructuring of congressional committees
is badly overdue, no matter how difficult it may be to achieve.
They believed that a bipartisan joint committee with authorizing
and oversight jurisdiction would enhance House and Senate
cooperation and coordination.
The Fellows who offered
their expertise represent a working group of the Academy's
Standing Panel on Executive Organization. Their experience
includes a wide range of leadership posts, including senior
positions in the Office of Management and Budget, presidential
commissions, and major agencies where they dealt with complex
interagency and intergovernmental problems. The Academy is
a non-profit, non-partisan organization chartered by Congress
to provide advice to government leaders on management and
governance issues. The Academy's Fellows are elected from
the nation's top policymakers, outstanding public administrators,
and distinguished scholars of public policy or public administration.
|
