Homeland Security

The challenges to the American intelligence community have never been greater. Uprisings in the Middle East, the campaign to contain nuclear
proliferation, civil infighting in the developing world, terrorist attacks -- the issues the country's intelligence analysts must confront are immense and proliferating.

These efforts could be greatly aided by insights from an exciting field called cognitive science. Put simply, cognitive science investigates how we think. Recent findings from this field have fundamentally reshaped our understanding of human decision-making.

In this digital age we have the benefit of looking back at Mitt Romney’s previous statements so we know exactly what he has said before. Apparently, when she wrote her blog “A President Romney will fix our immigration policy” Rosario Marin forgot to take a look at what Romney has been saying about immigration and what he might do if elected president.

I am both blessed and grateful to be an immigrant to the greatest country in the world. As such, immigration is an issue close to my heart and it saddens me to know that for decades this country’s immigration system has been broken. And yet, the politicians in Washington have done little to fix it. Instead, immigration reform has become the quintessential political football, with both sides of the aisle using it as a bludgeon with which to attack the other. Too often, that has meant provoking fear among voters – and immigrants - in an effort to divide Americans.
 
We saw that again in these pages in an article entitled, “Romney must come clean on immigration policy” by Cesar Vargas. The article is brimming with mischaracterizations of Governor Romney’s positions on the issue of immigration, an approach that we see too often in this never-ending debate. But rather than focusing on what Mr. Vargas gets wrong, I would like to lay out Governor Romney’s real position on immigration.

The next administration will face substantial choices on nuclear security issues. Its decisions will have serious implications, not just for the future of the U.S. nuclear arsenal, but for U.S. national security.  

Clear thinking will be needed from whoever wins in November to confront four main nuclear security challenges.

While the issue of Immigration Policy was not addressed in the first Presidential debate, it is a topic that both progressives and conservatives know must soon be dealt with. Both campaigns are promising as much. Therefore, I would like to address some of the ideology that goes into conservative thought on this subject. Specifically, I would like to address the relationship between immigration policy and the concept of “personal responsibility.” The idea of accepting personal responsibility is central to the fundamental tenets of conservative political ideology. It is also fundamental to the tenets of immigration policy. More specifically, we have to look at the whole concept of comprehensive immigration reform through the “personal responsibility” lens. Please allow me to flesh out the specifics and reasoning behind this statement.

When we talk about comprehensive immigration reform, we are talking about border security, worksite security, visa security, visa allotment, and visa realignment. All of these issues are part and parcel of any discussion of reform. However, the most difficult aspect of reform, and the “elephant in the room,” in any reform discussion, centers on the question of the 11,000,000 undocumented immigrants, and how we should treat them through any reform.

A few days ago in Denver, Mitt Romney said he would honor Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) for undocumented youth, or DREAMers, who have already been accepted and use the 2-year window to work on immigration reform. DACA is the program, which allows undocumented youth who were brought to the United States to remain without worry about deportation and obtain work permits.

Although this sounds like good news for DREAMers, his campaign also made it clear that he would not continue the program. While Mitt Romney continues to be vague on other issues like tax and healthcare, he is no longer fuzzy on immigration.

Today, a major cybersecurity summit is occurring in nation's capital. The all-star list of attendees includes Gen. Keith Alexander, director of the National Security Agency, Retired Gen. Michael Hayden, former director of both the NSA and Central Intelligence Agency, and former Homeland Security Secretary Gov. Tom Ridge. The roster also includes a number of technology leaders from the business community.
 
This event couldn't come at a better time. In both the public and private sectors, cybersecurity is seriously underfunded. There needs to be renewed focus on evolving the country's defenses to ward off hackers, with particular emphasis put on improving cyberresiliency -- that is, the ability not only to prevent breaches, but to withstand and recover from them when they do inevitably occur.

The specter of sequestration looms heavily over U.S. defense strategy and politics. As the Pentagon contemplates a long, overdue pivot to Asia, the question of how to accomplish this new strategic direction in an environment of fiscal uncertainty places added pressure on all services of the U.S. military — no more so than on the U.S. Air Force.
 
At first glance, the USAF, along with the Navy, appears well-placed to capitalize on the Pentagon’s shifting strategic priorities at the expense of the Army and, to a lesser degree, the Marine Corps. However, numerous scandals, combined with a drawn-out fight with the Guard and Reserves over budgetary cuts, have left the USAF running on empty — politically speaking. Read more...

Two weeks ago Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz released his report detailing many of the failures within the department and its operations related to Operation Fast and Furious. Immediately after, this administration and numerous media outlets kicked their spin machines into high gear in defense of Attorney General Eric Holder. Their number one mission: convince the American public that the search for answers is over and celebrate the exoneration of Attorney General Holder.  

After 20 months, the inspector general concluded his investigation and published a report on the Department of Justice’s handling of “Operation Fast and Furious.” Inspector General Horowitz had a difficult job, and he did it well. While congressional oversight of “Fast and Furious” is by no means complete, the issuance of the inspector general’s report provides an appropriate opportunity for reflection. 

There are at least three major takeaways from the Inspector General’s report: