E-MAIL THIS LINK
To: 

3 Reasons to Kill the Dept. of Homeland Security
[Reason] 1. It’s unnecessary. In the months immediately following September 11 attacks in 2001, President George W. Bush initially resisted calls to create a new high-level bureaucracy that would be laid on top of current activities. He was right to recognize that coordinating existing agencies would have been smarter and better. Unfortunately, he caved in to pressure to create a massive new department.
To quote Heinlein: "There's nothing more permanent than a temporary emergency." Parkinson: "Bureaucracies grow, they don't shrink."
2. It’s ineffective. To read the titles of Government Accountability Office (GAO) analyses of Homeland Security is to be reminded constantly that DHS is never quite on top of its game. Recent reports include “DHS Requires More Disciplined Investment Management to Help Meet Mission Needs,” “DHS Needs Better Project Information and Coordination Among Four Overlapping Grant Programs,” and “Agriculture Inspection Program Has Made Some Improvements, But Management Challenges Persist.”
I can remember the days when flying was an enjoyable experience. You showed up, checked your bags, got on board, and took off. Once aloft you could smoke and the stewardesses would give you dinner and sell you beer. There were no cattle pens involved in the boarding process, and honest citizens weren't frisked like criminals.
3. It’s expensive. Last year, Homeland Security spent a whopping $60 billion, a figure that will doubtlessly increase in coming years. The construction of its new headquarters – the single-largest project ever undertaken by The General Services Administration – will cost at least $4 billion and is already years behind schedule since breaking ground in 2009.
Bureaucracies, by their nature, consume resources. They go beyond Potemkin's dictum ("That which ceases to grow begins to rot") and manage to continue growing while rotting -- becoming less efficient (if possible) and more corrupt -- almost from day one. The very first TSA arguments were over whether to use government employees (unionized, naturally) or existing civilian security screeners. Naturally they went with the less efficient of the two options. Big Sis has become a national joke at the same time her screeners are universally hated.
Posted by: Fred 2012-11-25
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=356762