Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 1/2! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, which is half the size of the Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• Apparatus of Lies: Saddam's Disinformation and Propaganda 1990-2003

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  In December 1998, when U.N weapons inspector Dr. Richard Spertzel became exasperated by Iraqi evasions and misrepresentations, he confronted Dr. Rihab Taha, the woman the Iraqis identified as the head of their biological weapons program and asked her directly, "You know that we know you are lying. So why do you do it?" She straightened herself up and replied, "Dr. Spertzel, it's not a lie when you are ordered to lie." Dr. Taha's brief reply is one symbol of a highly developed, well disciplined, and expertly organized program designed to win support for the Iraqi regime through outright deceit. Apparatus of Lies discusses the lies that Iraq has used to promote its propaganda and disinformation in four broad categories: crafting tragedy, exploiting suffering, exploiting Islam, and corrupting the public record. An important priority of Saddam's deception apparatus is to manipulate the televised images the world sees. The regime's most cynical strategy is to actually cause severe civilian hardship or even deaths and then exploit the Iraqi people's suffering by placing the blame on UN-imposed sanctions or other nations. Recent U.S. government reports, including A Decade of Defiance and Deception, have documented Saddam's deceit regarding UN resolutions and weapons inspections. In order to raise awareness of many of the regime's other forms of deception, particularly those likely to be repeated, Apparatus of Lies examines the facts behind Iraqi disinformation and propaganda since 1990. Given the nature and history of the regime, evidence of further deception is almost certain to come to light.

  United States. White House Office

  2003-01
• Defending America's Cyberspace: National Plan for Information: Systems Protection, Version 1.0: An Invitation to a Dialogue [Executive Summary]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The first version of the Plan largely focuses on the domestic efforts being undertaken by the Federal Government to protect the Nation's critical cyber-based infrastructures. Subsequent versions of the Plan will incorporate a broader range of concerns contemplated under PDD-63, including the specific role industry and state and local governments will play--on their own and in partnership with the Government--in protecting privately owned infrastructures; the need to protect physical, as well as cyber-based, infrastructures from deliberate attack; and the examination of the international aspects of critical infrastructure protection. Comments by industry, Congress, state and local governments, and the general public are sought for improvements that could be included in these subsequent versions.

  United States. White House Office

  2000
• What Does Disarmament Look Like?

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  On September 12, 2002, President Bush called on the United Nations to live up to its founding purpose and enforce the determination of the international community--expressed in 16 UN Security Council resolutions--that the outlaw Iraqi regime be disarmed of its weapons of mass destruction. On November 8, the Security Council unanimously passed UNSCR 1441, which gave the Iraqi regime "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations." Thus, recognizing that genuine disarmament can only be accomplished through the willing cooperation of the Iraqi regime, the resolution called for the reintroduction of weapons inspectors into Iraq, to test whether or not the regime had made a strategic decision to give up its mass destruction weapons. Examples of cooperative disarmament include South Africa, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan.

  United States. White House Office

  2003-01
• Defending America's Cyberspace: National Plan for Information: Systems Protection, Version 1.0: An Invitation to a Dialogue

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The Federal Government and private sector cooperated during the millennial rollover event to provide a smooth transition into the Year 2000. The extensive preparations undertaken to avoid glitches and service disruptions to information systems paid off, and critical systems continued to operate without any major interruptions. That said, we must remember that we are in a very dynamic environment. The nature of cyberattacks and the needed preparations to protect information systems from future attacks are in constant flux. As new protective measures are developed and put into place, those who threaten us become more innovative. The Federal Government is currently assessing the Year 2000 experience to determine what aspects may have relevance for the future and for the continued protection against cyberattacks. This document is the first attempt by any nation to develop a plan to defend its cyberspace. The President in Presidential Decision Directive 63 (PDD-63) directed its development. Designating it as "Version 1.0" acknowledges that the Plan is in the early stages of development and remains a work in progress.

  United States. White House Office

  2000
• Securing the Homeland, Strengthening the Nation

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This document outlines the White House's FY 2003 budget priorities for homeland security. "Our Nation learned a painful lesson on September 11. American soil is not immune to evil or cold-blooded enemies capable of unprecedented acts of mass murder and terror. The worst of these enemies - and target number one in our war on terrorism - is the terrorist network Al Qaeda. Yet the threat to America is not limited to Al Qaeda - or to suicide hijackings of commercial aircraft. As we learned on October 4, 2001, a Florida man named Robert Stevens became the first known victim of an unprecedented act of biological terrorism. A new wave of terrorism, involving new weapons, looms in America's future. It is a challenge unlike any ever faced by our Nation. But we are not daunted. We possess the resources and the determination to defeat our enemies and work to secure our homeland against the threats they pose."

  United States. White House Office

  2002
• Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This document outlines the re-structuring of government agencies to create a central agency for domestic defense as a result of the Homeland Security Act of 2002.

  United States. White House Office

  2002-11-25
• Supporting Our Troops Abroad and Increasing Safety at Home: Today's Presidential Action

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is a press release from the White House regarding President George W. Bush's submittal of a wartime budget to Congress. Supplies background on the proposal and justifies allocation of funds.

  United States. White House Office

  2003-03-25
• National Drug Control Strategy: FY 2001 Budget Summary (February 2000)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The FY 2001 National Drug Control Budget supports the five goals and thirty-one objectives of the National Drug Control Strategy and is structured to make progress toward the targets outlined in the Performance Measures of Effectiveness (PME) system. In total, funding recommended for FY 2001 is $19.2 billion, an increase of $760 million over the FY 2000 level of $18.5 billion, which includes proposed supplemental funding of $954 million to support Plan Colombia and drug control activities in the Andean region. A summary of drug-control spending for FY 1998 through FY 2001 is presented in Figure 1.

  United States. White House Office

  2000-02
• Design for a HIDTA/OCDETF Performance Monitoring and Management System

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The HIDTA/OCDETF Performance Monitoring and Management System project represents the shared commitment of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to develop a method to examine the accomplishments of two major drug enforcement programs: the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) and the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) programs. The mission of the HIDTA program is to eliminate or reduce drug trafficking and its harmful consequences in critical regions of the United States. The mission of the OCDETF program is to disrupt and dismantle major drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) and related criminal enterprises. The OCDETF program provides a platform for Federal, state, and local LEAs to work together to target well-established and complex organizations that direct, finance, or engage in illegal narcotics trafficking and related crimes.

  United States. White House Office

  2003-01
• National Drug Control Strategy: FY 2004 Budget Summary (February 2003)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The President's FY 2004 Budget provides the necessary resources to reduce drug use in enforcement activities. The budget includes funding for each of the Strategy's principal priorities. Critical support continues for Priority I of the Strategy - Stopping Drug Use Before it starts. Resources are provided to help teach young people how to avoid drug use. In addition, significant new funding also is provided for Priority II of the Strategy - Healing America's Drug Users. This priority emphasizes the crucial need for family, friends, and people with shared experiences to interceded with and support those fighting to overcome substance abuse. Drug users also need the support of institutions and the people who run them - employers, law enforcement agencies, faith communities, and health care providers - to help identify them as drug users and direct those who need it into drug treatment. The budget strongly reinforces these efforts. Further, Priority III of the Strategy, Disrupting the Market, addresses the drug trade as a business. Every action that makes this business more costly and less profitable is a step toward "breaking" the market. The budget emphasizes this approach through key enhancements to federal law

  United States. White House Office

  2003-02
• National Drug Control Strategy: Counterdrug Research and Development Blueprint Update (February 2001)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center (CTAC), established within the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) in 1990, is the central counterdrug technology research and development (R&D) organization of the U.S. Government. The counterdrug R&D program supports the five goals of the National Drug Control Strategy (NDCS) to: educate and enable America's youth to reject illegal drugs as well as alcohol and tobacco, increase the safety of America's citizens by substantially reducing drug-related crime and violence, reduce health and social costs to the public of illegal drug use, shield America's air, land and sea frontiers from the drug threat, and break foreign and domestic drug sources of supply.

  United States. White House Office

  2001
• National Drug Control Strategy: Counterdrug Research and Development Blueprint Update (February 2000)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  CTAC's mission is to serve as the central counterdrug enforcement research and development organization of the U.S. Government. Since 1992, Congress has appropriated funding to sponsor a counterdrug R&D program to advance the technological capabilities of Federal drug control agencies responsible for both supply and demand reduction activities. In 1998,CTAC's role was expanded to support a program to transfer successful counterdrug technologies developed with federal funding directly to State and local law enforcement agencies. The Technology Transfer Program (TTP) concentrates on providing state-of-the-art, affordable, easily integrated and maintainable tools to enhance the capabilities of State and local law enforcement agencies (LEAs) for counterdrug missions. Special emphasis was placed on providing technology to LEAs within High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA).

  United States. White House Office

  2000
• National Drug Control Strategy: Counterdrug Research and Development Blueprint Update (February 2002)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This Counterdrug Research and Development Blueprint Update provides a periodic report on the counterdrug research and development (R&D) program. The report concentrates on those accomplishments made with CTAC-sponsored R&D projects and the Technology Transfer Program (TTP). The six appendices to this update provide information mandated by CTAC's role as the central counterdrug technology research and development organization of the U.S. Government. CTAC, in collaboration with the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), has sponsored the installation of advanced neuroimaging centers across the U.S. In Fiscal Year 2001, two advanced neuroimaging centers became operational at Emory University's 3 Tesla functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) system and at Massachusetts General Hospital (bringing the number of neuroimaging centers to ten). This expansion of the national infrastructure of advanced neuroimaging systems is enabling research into the underlying causes of substance abuse.

  United States. White House Office

  2002-02
• National Drug Control Strategy: Counterdrug Research and Development Blueprint Update (February 2003)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This Counterdrug Research and Development Blueprint Update provides the annual periodic report on the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center's (CTAC) counterdrug research and development (R&D) program and Technology Transfer Program (TTP). Appendices to this report provide information mandated by CTAC's role as the central counterdrug technology research and development organization of the U.S. Government. CTAC's efforts support the National Drug Control Strategy goals of achieving a 10 percent reduction in current use of illegal drugs in two years, and a 25 percent reduction in current use of illegal drugs in five years.

  United States. White House Office

  2003-02
• Securing New York: A Blueprint for Meeting New York City's Homeland Security Requirements

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  As the horrific events of September 11th demonstrated, New York City is a leading target for terrorist attack. Its population density, with over eight million people living in just over 300 square miles, means that any attack will affect a large number of Americans. New York is a center of national and international commerce through which millions of tourists, millions more businesspeople, and billions of dollars of goods pass through each year. The City's airports, train stations, and ports are critical to continued regional, national, and international commerce, so any disruption of its transportation infrastructure will have a ripple effect throughout the country and beyond. Finally, New York is a symbol of the United States' wealth, prosperity, and values, making an attack on Gotham a symbolic assault meant to undermine the strength of our nation as a whole. New York's emergency services personnel - its police officers, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel - have trained for large-scale disasters, including terrorist attacks, for many years, yet nothing prepared them for the horrors and chaos of September 11th. The attacks of that day taught the City, State, and federal governments many lessons about how we might better organize, train, and prepare so we can deter and respond to future attacks on the homeland.

  United States. White House Office

  2002-06
• President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat: Remarks by the President on Iraq

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  President Bush outlines Iraqi threat at the Cincinnati Museum Center in Cincinnati, Ohio in October 2002. He emphasizes the threat in terms of "terrible weapons" that Iraq has upon America's peace and ties it into the Iraqi regime: "tonight I want to take a few minutes to discuss a grave threat to peace, and America's determination to lead the world in confronting that threat..." The President's speech includes a reminder of what had occurred on September 11. Moreover, President Bush addresses the concerns questioning the urgency and nature of the threat. In doing so, he describes how Iraq itself "stands alone:" "Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people...this same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning, and holds an unrelenting hostility toward the United States." He lists the activities and weapons such as ballistic missiles that Iraq possesses and links terrorist activity to Iraq: "We know that Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy -- the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks." Lastly, he mentions that Congress will vote on the Iraqi situation and that he asked Congress to authorize the use of America's military. "To secure peace and to lead the world to a better day are his last remarks."

  United States. White House Office

  2002-10-07
• President Pleased with U.N. Vote: Remarks by the President on the United Nations Security Council Resolution, the Rose Garden'

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  In his speech in the Rose Garden in November 8, 2002, President Bush addresses the United Nations Security Council's resolution regarding Iraq. The resolution states that Iraq is already in material breach of past U.N. demands by aggressively pursuing weapons of mass destruction and undermining the effectiveness of weapons inspectors with ploys, delays, and threats. The President states: "the resolution approved today presents the Iraqi regime with a test -- a final test. Iraq must now, without delay or negotiations, fully disarm; welcome full inspections, welcome full inspections, and fundamentally change the approach it has taken for more than a decade." The President's remarks can be heard via the main link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/11/20021108-1.html.

  United States. White House Office

  2002-11-08
• National Drug Control Strategy: 2000 Annual Report

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This report provides information on progress over the past year in implementing the National Drug Control Strategy. It details trends in drug use and availability; assesses the costs of drug abuse to our society; and outlines accomplishments of federal prevention, treatment, law enforcement, interdiction, and international programs. We remain committed to the Strategy that focuses on shrinking America's demand for drugs, through prevention and treatment, and attacking the supply of drugs through law enforcement and international cooperation. Drug use is preventable. If children reach adulthood without using illegal drugs, alcohol, or tobacco, they are unlikely to develop a chemical-dependency problem later in life. To this end, the Strategy seeks to involve parents, coaches, mentors, teachers, clergy, and other role models in a broad prevention campaign. Drug dependence is a chronic, relapsing disorder that exacts an enormous cost on individuals, families, businesses, communities, and nations. Addicted individuals frequently engage in self-destructive and criminal behavior. Treatment can help them end dependence on addictive drugs. Treatment programs also reduce the consequences of addiction on the rest of society. Providing treatment for America's chronic drug users is both compassionate public policy and a sound investment. Along with prevention and treatment, law enforcement is essential for reducing drug use in the United States. Illegal drug trafficking inflicts violence and corruption on our communities. Law enforcement is the first line of defense against such unacceptable activity

  United States. White House Office

  2000
• National Drug Control Strategy: FY 2003 Budget Summary (February 2002)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  Funding by department for FY 2001 to FY 2003 is displayed in Table 1. Demand reduction efforts by the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education, and ONDCP will fund new and innovative approaches for drug treatment, provide basic research on drug use, and continue prevention efforts aimed at children and adolescents. Resources for supply-reduction programs in the Departments of Justice, Treasury, Transportation, State, and Defense will continue enforcement operations targeting domestic sources of illegal drugs; enhance interdiction efforts along trafficking routes to the United States, support security along the Southwest Border, and aid efforts in Colombia and the Andean region.

  United States. White House Office

  2003
• Drug Availability Estimates in the United States

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  Drug availability estimates for 2001 were developed for the four major drugs: cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and marijuana. This effort responded to a request from the U.S. Attorney General for measurement of the quantity of illicit substances available to drug users in the United States. There is significant uncertainty in these estimates due to the illicit and clandestine nature of the various drugs, and the limited data currently collected to aid in these analyses. Therefore, caution is urged in the application of these estimates. Six interagency working groups (one for each of the drug-types, a consumption working group and a seizure working group) were formed and staffed by members of the following federal agencies: Crime and Narcotics Center, U.S. Customs, Drug Enforcement Administration, Defense Intelligence Agency, Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, El Paso Intelligence Center, Joint Interagency Task Force West, National Drug Intelligence Center, Office of National Drug Control Policy, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Department of Treasury, U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Interdiction Coordinator. This document is the compendium of the reports from each of the six working groups.

  United States. White House Office

  2002-12
• United States-Mexico Bi-National Cooperation Against Illicit Drugs: Main Results and Performance Measures of Effectiveness 1995-2000

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  Bilateral and multilateral cooperation is indispensable to combat drug abuse and trafficking effectively. The U.S. and Mexico are working cooperatively to reduce the demand for illegal drugs through prevention, education and public awareness, treatment, training and research. In addition the two countries are cooperating to stop drug trafficking, money laundering, diversion of essential and precursor chemicals, and firearms trafficking. Since the inception of the High Level Contact Group (HLCG), the U.S. and Mexico have accepted that both countries are drug producers, drug consumers, and drug transit countries. Based on this understanding, Mexico and the United States have proceeded with technical exchanges and cooperative projects in the areas of, control of illicit cultivation, drug treatment, and demand reduction. In the area of law enforcement, we have seen the arrest of some major traffickers and collaborated on important cases. We have improved interdiction. In demand reduction, we cooperated in reducing demand for illegal drugs in both countries through science-based prevention, treatment, communications, research, and linking the public health and public safety systems. Combating both sides of the illegal drug phenomenon, drug supply and demand, has been a concern and a goal in Mexico and in the United States for decades. Consequently, each country has created its own anti-drug policies and programs, incorporating support for international cooperation to combat these illicit activities as one of its main elements. In the mid-90s, this shared concern translated into a broad and comprehensive bilateral cooperation effort framework, not limited to isolated programs of technical cooperation, personnel training or mutual legal assistance. The creation of a broad and balanced binational cooperation plan, that would respond to the complexity of the problem in the United States and in Mexico, was necessary in order for the efforts from both countries to have greater effectiveness.

  United States. White House Office

  2001
• Estimation of Cocaine Availability: 1996-2000

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The 1998 National Drug Control Strategy specified five goals and thirty-two supporting objectives that will guide the government's anti-drug program over the next decade. The Strategy's five goals amount to reducing the supply of and the demand for illicit drugs by 50 percent by year 2007. The nation's ability to meet these goals depends on its efficacy at reducing drug availability through source country programs, transit zone interdiction, and domestic law enforcement. Having adopted this assessment for monitoring the success of the nation's anti-drug programs, one critical input -- the topic of this paper -- is a reliable estimate of cocaine availability at various points in cocaine's flow from source to the United States. This report updates the Sequential Transition and Reduction (STAR) model through 2000, providing the best current basis for measuring the flow of cocaine from producer nations, through the transit zones, across the nation's borders, and throughout the U.S.

  United States. White House Office

  2002-03
• National Drug Control Strategy: 2001 Annual Report

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  Prior to 1999, Congress required the Administration to submit a National Drug Control Strategy each year. The most recent Strategy was submitted in February 1999. Public Law 105-277 now requires the president to submit an Annual Report to Congress on the progress made in implementing the Strategy.* An initial Annual Report was submitted in February 2000. General reporting requirements of the Annual Report include: 1. Assessment of federal success in achieving National Drug Control Strategy goals and objectives (using the Strategy's Performance Measures of Effectiveness system). This analysis includes an assessment of drug abuse and availability in the United States as well as prevention, treatment, law enforcement, interdiction, and international programs. 2. Modifications during the preceding year of the National Drug Control Strategy or national drug control performance measurement system. 3. Explanation of how the Administration's budget proposal is intended to implement the National Drug Control Strategy. 4. Measurable data from the annual performance measures. 5. An assessment of private-sector initiatives and cooperative efforts dealing with drug control among federal, state, and local governments.

  United States. White House Office

  2001
• National Drug Control Strategy (February 2002)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  In December 2001, the University of Michigan released its annual survey, Monitoring the Future, which measures drug use among American youth. Very little had changed from the previous year's report; most indicators were flat. The report generated little in the way of public comment. Yet what Monitoring the Future had to say was deeply disturbing. Though drug use among our Nation's 8th, 10th, and 12th graders remains stable, it nevertheless is at levels that are close to record highs. More than 50 percent of our high school seniors experimented with illegal drugs at least once prior to graduation. And, during the month prior to the survey, 25 percent of seniors used illegal drugs, and 32 percent reported being drunk at least once. This situation is not new. Indeed, drug use among our young people has hovered at unacceptably high levels for most of the past decade. As in the 1960s and 1970s, drug use has once again become all too accepted by our youth. As self-styled drug policy "reformers" never tire of pointing out, people who use marijuana or cocaine once or twice do not invariably graduate to a life of drug addiction--just as not every teenager who drives drunk ends up in the emergency room. Yet a large percentage do in fact remain drug users. Recent data from Columbia University's National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse show that roughly 60 percent of children who try cocaine and LSD during high school are still using drugs at graduation.

  United States. White House Office

  2002-02
• National Drug Control Strategy (February 2003)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The 2003 strategy reports progress toward meeting the President's goals of reducing drug use by 10 percent over two years, and 25 percent over five years, highlighted by reductions in drug use among young people for the first time in nearly a decade. The 2003 strategy also highlights a new treatment initiative funded with $600 million over three years to help addicted Americans find needed treatment and support services from the most effective programs, including faith-based and community-based organizations."

  United States. White House Office

  2003-02
• Reporting Instructions for the Government Information Security Reform Act and Updated Guidance on Security Plans of Action and Milestones

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The President has given a high priority to the security of the Federal government's operations and assets. Protecting the information and information systems on which the Federal government depends, requires agencies to identify and resolve current security weaknesses and risks, as well as protect against future vulnerabilities and threats. Fulfilling the requirements of the Government Information Security Reform Act of 2000 (Security Act) is the key method for meeting this priority. Last year OMB issued memorandum 01-24, guidance on reporting the results of agencies' annual security reviews and evaluations. OMB also issued memorandum 02-01, guidance for security plans of action and milestones to assist agencies in closing security performance gaps identified in their reviews. Based on lessons learned from last year's reporting, along with input from agency officials, Inspectors General (IGs), and the General Accounting Office, this memorandum provides updated guidance. This guidance has a three part focus on: 1) agency progress in remediating the security weaknesses identified in FY01; 2) the results of FY02 agency reviews and IG evaluations; and 3) specific performance measures for agency officials accountable for information and IT security. OMB's FY02 report to Congress will be based largely on the information agencies report according to these three areas. It will also measure progress against the performance baseline established in last year's security report.

  United States. White House Office

  2002-07-02
• Additional Information on Requirements for Overseas Combating Terrorism and Homeland Security for the FY 2004 Budget

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  Activities to combat terrorism overseas and secure the homeland are among the Administration's highest priorities. In the past, these programs have been detailed in OMB's Annual Report to Congress on Combating Terrorism. We intend to institutionalize these two categories - overseas combating terrorism and homeland security - as part of the budget process, so that we have clear, detailed, and replicable budgetary and programmatic information on Federal efforts in these areas. To do so, we are asking that agencies: 1) review and validate the universe of programs that have been reported as overseas combating terrorism and homeland security in the past and, 2) provide detailed budgetary and programmatic information on these programs in separate exhibits that will be submitted concurrent with your budget request to OMB. When reviewing proposals for these programs in the FY 2004 budget process, EXOP staff will consider these programs on a crosscutting basis, ensuring their consistency with the National Strategy for Homeland Security, and identifying areas where duplication and overlap may hinder efficient resource allocation. The National Strategy for Homeland Security aligns and focuses homeland security functions into six critical mission areas, and also identifies specific high priority programs. These programs should be highlighted in the exhibits that you submit. We are requesting comparable data for overseas combating terrorism to ensure the same level of transparency into these programs. This reporting will also provide the basis for performance measurement in these programs.

  United States. White House Office

  2002-08-08
• Guidance for Preparing and Submitting Security Plans of Action and Milestones

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  On June 22, 2001, a memorandum was issued on "Reporting Instructions for the Government Information Security Reform Act" (OMB M-01-24). In the memorandum, OMB asked each agency to submit, with its September budget request, a set of program reviews and evaluations of both unclassified and classified systems, along with an executive summary. In addition, OMB asked each agency to submit to OMB by October 31, 2001, (with brief quarterly updates thereafter) "a plan of action with milestones" to address all weaknesses identified by program reviews and evaluations. In response to the June 22nd memorandum, several agencies have asked OMB to issue more detailed guidance that further describes, and provides a standard format for, the information those agencies should include in their plans of action and milestones (POA&M). Working with representatives of agency program offices and Inspector General Offices, OMB has developed the attached POA&M guidance, which provides specific instructions and examples for the POA&Ms.

  United States. White House Office

  2001-10-17
• Reducing Redundant IT Infrastructure Related to Homeland Security

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  In announcing his proposal for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the President stated that the Federal government's first priority was the protection and defense of the American people. Achieving true homeland security requires technology that guarantees real-time information sharing and improves decision-making. For example, a border patrol agent in Tijuana must be able to communicate with the Customs station in the port of New York and the Coast Guard base in Miami on a real-time basis. A world-class, unified IT infrastructure linking component agencies to the new Department is essential to accomplish these goals. In view of these security challenges, the purpose of this memorandum is to advise selected heads of DHS component agencies that redundant homeland security IT infrastructure systems will be considered for consolidation or integration. Spending by DHS component agencies' on IT infrastructure will total at least $360M in FY02 and is projected to grow to at least $780M in FY03. Consolidating and integrating infrastructure presents significant opportunities for savings while providing the best investments for our homeland security mission. Therefore, agencies affected by the proposed DHS must: Cease temporarily all IT infrastructure system development and planned modernization efforts above $500,000 pending an expedited review of all DHS component agencies' investments, Identify any current or planned spending on IT infrastructure not included in Attachment A to the memo, Participate in the Homeland Security IT Investment Review Group led by the Office of Homeland Security (OHS) and OMB.

  United States. White House Office

  2002-07-19
• Determination Orders Organizing the Department of Homeland Security

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  On November 25, 2002, the President signed HR 5005 establishing the Department of Homeland Security (Public Law 107-296). The new department represents both a substantial improvement to our domestic security and a momentous change in the organization of the federal government. This reorganization will meld twenty-two Federal agencies and programs into the new department. Given the incoming entities' widely disparate policies, procedures, and information systems, the change will be difficult and require a high level of cooperation and coordination, both among those bound for the new department and from the agencies that are contributing these resources to homeland security. An important step in the establishment of the new department is the determination order process. Through the determination order, agencies will document key financial, logistical, and human resources to be transferred to the Department of Homeland Security. The President's November 25th Reorganization Plan for the department calls for the transfer of most component agencies and programs to the new department by March 1, 2003.

  United States. White House Office

  2003-01-07