1 vote

50% of Homeland Security Funds NOT used for DHS missions or activities.

What a perfectly designed government program by the criminals in DC who steal HALF of the est. 70 billion dollars allocated to the DHS each year. Below are some highlights...errr lowlights that I picked out from a January 8, 2013 DHS Analysis paper created by Shawn Reese.

A link to the downloadable .pdf is below. Its 18 pages but you REALLY need to check it out and the charts included. Amazing that our so called leaders just can't find ANYWHERE to cut spending but I come across billions of waste and fraud damn near every day.

According to this paper...they don't even know what the hell they are funding!

Remember, this report is after the DHS has been given nearly 1 trillion dollars and been in existence for over a decade.

Congress and policymakers are responsible for funding homeland security priorities. These priorities need to exist, to be clear and cogent, in order for funding to be most effective.

Presently, homeland security is not funded on clearly defined priorities. In an ideal scenario, there would be a clear definition of homeland security, and a consensus about it; as well as prioritized missions, goals, and activities.

If homeland security policy priorities are unclear, Congress’ ability to provide effective authorization, appropriation, and oversight may be hampered.

This allocation of federal homeland security funding reveals that approximately 50% is not appropriated for DHS missions or activities.

The competing and varied definitions in these documents may indicate that there is no succinct homeland security concept. Without a succinct homeland security concept, policymakers and entities with homeland security responsibilities may not successfully coordinate or focus on the highest prioritized or most necessary activities.

DHS Deputy Secretary Jane Lute recently stated that homeland security “... is operation, it’s transactional, it’s decentralized, it’s bottom-driven,” and influenced by law enforcement,emergency management, and the political environment. Conversely, DHS Deputy Secretary Lute stated that national security “... is strategic, it’s centralized, it’s top-driven,” and influenced by the military and the intelligence community. Some see in these comments as a reflection of a DHS attempt to establish a homeland security definition that is more operational than strategic and an illustration of the complexity of a common understanding of homeland security and its associated missions.

At the national level, there does not appear to be an attempt to align definitions and missions among disparate federal entities. DHS is, however, attempting to align its definition and missions, but does not prioritize its missions; there is no clarity in the national strategies of federal, state, and local roles and responsibilities; and, potentially, funding is driving priorities rather than priorities driving the funding.

There is still no single national homeland security definition, nor is there a prioritization of national homeland security or DHS missions.

(Defining Homeland Security 08-JAN-13)