Anybody watching the U.S. news has seen photos and videos of the destruction wrought by Hurricane Ian in Florida. Millions of people are without power. Gasoline stations have been depleted of gasoline supplies. Grocery stores have been emptied of basic necessities. Residents can’t get back to their homes because of flooded streets and damaged roads. It will take years for the residents of Florida to recover from this horrific storm. The storm is now headed north into South Carolina and North Carolina.
Please pray for the people of Florida and for all other people affected by Hurricane Ian.
God Bless You.
Dawn Pisturino
September 30, 2022
Copyright 2022 Dawn Pisturino. All Rights Reserved.
At 8:46 a.m. on September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City (911 Memorial, 2018).
John Murphy, CEO of Oppenheimer Funds, was jogging in Battery Park when he saw the smoke. He assumed that an airplane had inadvertently crashed into the World Trade Center (Argenti, 2002).
Mary Beth Bardin, executive vice-president of public affairs and communications at Verizon, was stuck in traffic when she noticed the smoke. She assumed that a building was on fire in downtown Manhattan. When the cab driver turned on the news, she learned that an airplane had crashed into the World Trade Center (Argenti, 2002).
Verizon suffered major communications damage. “The attack knocked out 300,000 voice access lines and 4.5 million data circuits and left ten cellular towers inactive, depriving 14,000 businesses and 20,000 residential customers of service” (Argenti, para. 9, 2002).
Communication breakdowns abounded during the emergency response to the attacks on the World Trade Center. 911 operators had no clue of what was actually happening. Orders to evacuate were misunderstood or not received. Telephone lines were jammed with callers. Signals to firefighter radios failed. Public address and intercom systems inside the World Trade Center went out (CBS News, 2004; Sharp, 2011).
Confusion and lack of situational awareness led to higher casualties. People in the South Tower were told not to evacuate and to wait for instructions and help from emergency personnel. Others evacuated up, toward the roof, not knowing that they needed a key to get onto the roof (CBS News, 2004).
A “long-standing rivalry between the NYPD and FDNY” (CBS News, para. 23, 2004) led to disputes over command authority. Fire and police personnel were using different radio channels and could not communicate with one another (CBS News, 2004; Sharp, 2011). A repeater system installed in the World Trade Center after the 1993 bombing was not completely functional (Sharp, 2011). All of these issues were addressed in the 9/11 Commission Report.
* * *
People in New YorkCity Knew Something was Happening, but They Didn’t Know What!
A lot of Changes have Happened Since 9/11:
Post-9/11, the Department of Homeland Security was created, and a National Incident Management System was established to designate clear lines of authority during disaster events.
The role of Communications has evolved.
Better technologies have been developed.
The rise of Facebook, Twitter, Google, and other social media networks has allowed two-way communication with the public.
Emergency managers now hire trained communication specialists to communicate accurate, timely information to the media, community and national leaders, and the public.(Haddow, 2017).
* * *
Whyare these Changes Important?
New York City now has a state-of-the-art fire department operations center. During a disaster, the FDOC contacts other agencies for help. Personnel report to FDOC senior staff. The department’s incident management teams can be activated. FDOC can access NYPD videos, the Department of Transportation digital photographs, and live videos from media helicopters and ground vehicles. FDOC can monitor, record, and replay radio transmissions from Fire, EMS, NYPD, OEM, and others. FDOC can act as a command center. (Sharp, 2011)
FDNY now uses multi-frequency radio systems to communicate with each other and NYPD (Sharp, 2011).
Training in National Incident Management System processes is now mandatory to ensure that agencies are working together, using the same language, and sharing information with each other (Sharp, 2011).
The changes made in New York City have been duplicated in communities all across the country.
Community first responders now have social media sites on Facebook, Twitter, and other social networks to educate the public about disaster preparedness; relay accurate, timely information to the public during a disaster event; and help members of the community to register for disaster aid and find relief shelters (Haddow, 2017).
* * *
Use the Internet for Disaster Information:
In 2001, YouTube, Google News, Facebook, and Twitter did not exist (Praetorius, 2012).
Today, the Internet allows free access to all kinds of information:
Social networks like Facebook
Blogs like Blogger and WordPress
Microblogs like Twitter
Crowdsourcing and Forums like LiveJournal
Digital Mapping like Google Maps
Websites
Podcasts and TV and Radio broadcasts
Video Sharing like YouTube
Photo Sharing like Instagram
Wiki sites like Wikipedia (Haddow, 2017).
* * *
Participate with Social Media:
“Social media is imperative to emergency management because the public uses these communication tools regularly” (Haddow, p. 171, 2017).
Submitting videos, photos, digital maps, and information
Receiving information about casualties, injuries, and damage
Communicating with friends, family, and co-workers
Raising money for disaster relief
Learning about preparedness and evacuation routes
Receiving guidance, information, and moral support
Learning how to find relief shelters and registering for aid
Access to FEMA information
Access to press conferences and local news(Haddow, 2017).
* * *
Summing it all Up:
“The mission of an effective disaster communication strategy is to provide timely and accurate information to the public in all four phases of emergency management” (Haddow, p. 162, 2017).
“Information sharing is the basis of effective disaster communications” (Haddow, p. 191, 2017).
(This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC By-NC-ND)
* * *
Honor the Heroes!
(This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC By-NC-ND)
What is “emergency management?” According to Haddow, Bullock, and Coppola (2017), “the definition of emergency management can be extremely broad and all-encompassing.” It is an evolving discipline whose priorities have changed in response to diverse events, political leadership, and scientific advances.
The nature of the events and the responses of political leaders have been the most influential in shaping emergency management priorities and organizational structure. Since emergency management “deals with risk and risk avoidance” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017), no single event will be handled in precisely the same way. A terrorist attack like 9/11, which was a major criminal event that involved foreigners and foreign countries, will have a much greater impact on the psyche of the American people and affect a broader range of government departments, than a natural event like a hurricane or earthquake.
The U.S. Constitution “gives the states the responsibility for public health and safety – hence the responsibility for public risks – with the federal government in a secondary role. The federal role is to help when the state, local or individual entity is overwhelmed” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
What kind of events can hit American communities? Natural events include floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, storm surges, tornadoes, wildfires, land movements such as avalanches and mudslides, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, severe winter storms, drought, extremes of heat and cold, coastal erosion, thunderstorms, lightning, and hail. Technological events can include building fires, dam failures, hazardous material incidents, nuclear and radiation accidents.
Criminal events include terrorism and the potential use of biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
On May 31, 1889, the South Fork dam in Johnstown, PA failed, and “unleashed 20,000,000 tons of water that devastated” the town and killed 2,209 residents (National Park Service,2017). The failure was caused by inadequate construction, maintenance, and repair. This event caught the attention of the entire world, and people banded together to help “the Johnstown sufferers” (National Park Service, 2017).
In 1803, Congress passed legislation authorizing federal funds to help a town in New Hampshire destroyed by fire. This set the precedence for federal involvement in local events. But it was under Franklin D. Roosevelt “that the federal government began to make significant investments in emergency management functions” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
The Reconstruction Finance Corporation and the Bureau of Public Roads were authorized “to make disaster loans available for repair and reconstruction of certain public facilities” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017) in the 1930s. The Tennessee Valley Authority – established to produce hydroelectric power – also sought to reduce flooding in the valley (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
The Flood Control Act of 1936 authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers “to design and build flood-control projects” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). Now, “humans could control nature” and promote growth and development in areas previously unavailable (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
The 1950s and the Cold War brought a whole new dynamic to the discipline of emergency management. Scientists had succeeded in creating a whole new arsenal of weapons with the capability of destroying the world. The potential for nuclear holocaust was so great, “civil defense programs proliferated across communities” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). People built bomb shelters to protect themselves, their families, and their communities. A feeling of paranoia gripped the entire nation as U.S. politicians engaged diplomatically with representatives from the Soviet Union.
The Federal Civil Defense Administration (FCDA) was a poorly-funded department “whose main role was to provide technical assistance” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017) in the event of nuclear attack. In reality, however, it was the civil defense directors at the local and state levels who shaped the policies and response to potential disaster.
The 1960s focused attention on natural disasters, and the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 was passed by Congress. The National Flood Insurance Program was subsequently created, which helped to ease the burden on homeowners located in flood areas and to act proactively before the floods began. This legislation emphasized “the concept of community-based mitigation” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). When communities joined the NFIP, they committed themselves to passing local ordinances which controlled development in floodplain areas. The federal government produced floodplain maps to support these ordinances.
George Bernstein, who became head of the Federal Insurance Administration under President Richard Nixon, strengthened the program by “linking the mandatory purchase of flood insurance to all homeowner loans that were backed by federal mortgages” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). This led to the Flood Insurance Act of 1972.
During the 1970s, “more than 100 federal agencies were involved in some aspect of risks and disasters” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). The fragmentation, conflicts, and confusion that resulted were no different on the state and local levels. When Three Mile Island occurred, these problems became all-too-apparent to the general public. As a result, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was created by Congress under President Jimmy Carter, with the director reporting directly to the president.
Reorganization Plan Number 3, which created FEMA, sought to establish the following guidelines: FEMA workers “were to anticipate, prepare for, and respond to major civil emergencies” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017); the agency would demand “the most efficient use of all available resources” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017); “emergency responsibilities should be extensions of federal agencies” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017); and “federal hazard mitigation activities should be closely linked with emergency preparedness and response functions” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
In the 1980s, civil defense became the priority under President Ronald Reagan. Director Louis Giuffrida reorganized FEMA, moved multiple departments into one building, and placed the agency’s priority “on government preparedness for a nuclear attack” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). Giuffrida resigned after a financial scandal, which undermined the credibility of the agency. The new director, Julius Becton, worked to restore “integrity to the operations and appropriations of the agency” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). Under Becton’s leadership, natural hazards like earthquakes, hurricanes, and floods were given a low priority, confirming that the agency “continued the pattern of isolating resources for national security priorities without recognizing the potential of a major natural disaster” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
Senator Al Gore, during Senate hearings, questioned FEMA’s priorities and its preparedness in the event of a major earthquake. FEMA was pressured to create an earthquake preparedness plan which “would later become the standard for all of the federal agencies’ response operations” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
Under George H.W. Bush, multiple natural disasters occurred – including Hurricane Andrew – which affected people’s perception of FEMA. “People wanted, and expected, their government to be there to help in their time of need” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). FEMA was perceived as weak and ineffective.
James Witt was appointed Director by President Bill Clinton. Witt had extensive experience in emergency management and reorganized FEMA to support community relations, the efficient use of new technology, and an emphasis on “mitigation and risk avoidance” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
The 1990s heralded a new wave of natural disasters. FEMA successfully handled the Midwest floods of 1993 and initiated “the largest voluntary buyout and relocation program to date in an effort to move people out of the floodplain . . .” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
Director Witt became a member of Clinton’s cabinet and persuaded state governors “to include their state emergency management directors in their cabinets” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). This is how important emergency management had become.
The bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 and the Oklahoma Bombing in 1995 reaffirmed the notion that terrorist events fall into the category of “risks and the consequences of those risks” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). Emergency management has been an important part of handling similar events.
FEMA’s Project impact: Building Disaster-Resistant Communities heralded “a new community-based approach” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017) that required communities “to identify risks and establish a plan to reduce those risks” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). The ultimate goal was for the community to “promote sustainable economic development, protect and enhance its natural resources, and ensure a better quality of life for its citizens” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
Project Impact was defunded under President George W. Bush. After the unexpected earthquake in Seattle, however, FEMA received a lot of praise from Seattle’s mayor, and the program was restored. Seattle, it turned out, had been “one of the most successful Project impact communities” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
The events of 9/11 proved the effectiveness of FEMA when “hundreds of response personnel initiated their operations within just minutes of the onset of events” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). FEMA was then incorporated into the newly-formed Department of Homeland Security and lost much of its effectiveness and power. The new National Incident Management System (NIMS) fell under the auspices of the Director of Operations Coordination (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017).
The threat of Hurricane Katrina off the Gulf Coast in 2005 prompted President Bush to declare “a disaster in advance of an emergency event for the states in the projected impact zone” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017) and caused DHS/FEMA to shoulder the responsibility. Their response was a failure.
Obama’s appointee, W. Craig Fugate, designated victims of disasters as “survivors” and developed the Whole Community concept which emphasized “preparedness partnerships that had been developed among federal, state, local, private sector, voluntary, and non-profit entities” (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). Involving people from all sectors of the community has increased the effectiveness of emergency management response to disasters.
The history and development of emergency management prove how events influence and shape government policies, departmental organization, leadership priorities, and government response to national emergencies. When all citizens get involved, emergency preparedness and response protect communities and mitigate the costs of recovery.
Dawn Pisturino
Thomas Edison State University
August 8, 2019
Copyright 2019-2021 Dawn Pisturino. All Rights Reserved.
Incident Command System and the National Incident Management System
[Twenty] years ago, America changed forever. Protecting our nation from terrorist attacks became the primary objective. The systems and operations developed to prepare, plan, mitigate, respond, and recover from terrorist attacks expanded to include ALL disasters. We now have a national disaster plan which is utilized at the local, tribal, state, and federal levels.
Brief Overview of the Events of 9/11
At 8:46 a.m. on September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City. Seventeen minutes later, United Airlines Flight 175 smashed into the South Tower. At 9:37 a.m., American Airlines Flight 77 nose-dived into the Pentagon building in Arlington, Virginia. All three airplanes had been hijacked by members of the radical Islamic terrorist organization, Al Qaeda (Haddow, 2017; 911 Memorial, 2018).
“The use of fuel-filled planes caused catastrophic fires in all three buildings impacted, and this led to collapse of both World Trade Center towers and the wing of the Pentagon directly affected” (Haddow, 2017, p. 393). The federal government has spent more than $20 billion on the response and recovery of the World Trade Center attacks alone. On the positive side, the events of 9/11 led to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the development and implementation of a more comprehensive and advanced national response to disasters, regardless of size and cause (Haddow, 2017).
The Core Components of the National Incident Management System (NIMS)
“NIMS was created to integrate effective practices in emergency preparedness and response into a comprehensive national framework for incident management” (Haddow, 2017, p.247). Its flexibility allows it to adapt to any kind of disaster, from routine incidents involving local communities to large-scale events, such as hurricanes or earthquakes (DHS, 2008). NIMS provides a template for “coordination and standardization among emergency management/response personnel and their affiliated organizations” (DHS, 2008, p.7).
The National Incident Management System is guided by five core components: preparedness; communications and information management; resource management; command and management; and ongoing management and maintenance. The National Integration Center is responsible for directing NIMS, using the latest technology and operational systems (DHS, 2008).
Preparedness is a multi-task discipline which uses assessment skills; advanced planning; appropriate procedures and protocols; up-to-date training and practice exercises; skilled personnel with the proper licensure and certification; the latest technology and equipment; and the ability to evaluate responses to events and revise protocols and procedures for improved responses to future events (DHS, 2008).
Communications and information management are crucial to emergency responders because all command and coordination stations must share a common goal and operating system in order to work effectively as a team (DHS, 2008).
Resource management demands that “the flow of resources [personnel, equipment, etc.] be fluid and adaptable to the requirements of the incident” (DHS, 2008, p. 8) Without a well-coordinated movement of resources to the disaster site, responders cannot do their job in a timely and efficient manner.
Command and management “enable effective and efficient incident management and coordination by providing a flexible, standardized incident management structure” (DHS, 2008, p. 8) which involves the Incident Command System, Multi-agency Coordination Systems, and public information. Jurisdiction, authority, and multi-agency involvement must be decided and coordinated before and during the disaster event for the response to be successful.
Ongoing management and maintenance by the National Integration Center ensures that the National Incident Management System will always perform at a top-notch level. Failures and successes must be evaluated and addressed and systems refined accordingly (DHS, 2008).
How the Components of NIMS Support and Complete the Incident Command System (ICS)
“NIMS was developed as an outgrowth of ICS that allows for increased interorganizational coordination that is not necessarily addressed under standard ICS structures. The system is designed to be a more comprehensive incident management system than ICS because it goes beyond the field-level incident command and control and addresses all phases of emergency management, as well as all stakeholders (including the NGO and private sectors). It does not, however, replace ICS” (Haddow, 2017, p. 248).
The National Incident Management System provides a template by which the ICS can operate more efficiently. It is an upper management organizational system that oversees the entire operation of a disaster event (Haddow, 2008).
The Incident Command System falls under the command and management component of the National Incident Management System. ICS addresses all hazards, regardless of cause, at the federal, state, tribal, and local levels. NGOs and the private sector are also included (DHS, 2008).
The ICS standardizes the use of common terminology for all agencies involved; inventories and describes resources used; and records incident fatalities (DHS, 2008).
A flexible organizational system adapts the ICS to the needs of a particular event. A small, community-based incident will require less manpower and fewer resources than an event on the scale of Hurricane Katrina (DHS, 2008).
ICS develops a set of objectives by which an event can be measured, studied, and evaluated. This is important for quality improvement. The Incident Commander or Unified Commander creates an Incident Action Plan which “should guide all response activities” (DHS, 2008, p. 47). There should be enough staff and supervisors involved to make the work flow go as planned (DHS, 2008).
The Incident Commander determines and oversees the locations of command facilities. Resources must be carefully managed to control costs and availability. Communication systems must be set up and maintained to provide optimal information sharing and communication (DHS, 2008).
How NIMS and ICS were Utilized in the Events of 9/11
The events of 9/11 resulted in a large number of fatalities among first responders. It became necessary to re-evaluate and re-write appropriate procedures and protocols. At that time, there were no procedures in place to deal with terrorist attacks. The Department of Homeland Security was created, which absorbed FEMA into its structure. The National Incident Management System gradually developed and was finally published in 2008 (Hadddow, 2017).
As soon as the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City was attacked on 9/11, New York City emergency dispatchers sent police, paramedics, and firefighters to the site. Battalion Chief Joseph Pfeifer of the New York City Fire Department dispatched additional fire personnel and equipment. The Port Authority Police Department, which was responsible for the security of the World Trade Center, went into action to help with evacuation and rescue (911 Memorial, 2018).
President Bush was notified at 8:50 a.m. At 8:55 a.m., the South Tower was declared secure, and no evacuation attempts were made. Four minutes later, it was decided to evacuate both towers. And, at 9:00 a.m., all civilians were ordered to evacuate the World Trade Center complex. At 9:02 a.m., evacuation efforts were underway, when the South Tower was attacked at 9:03 a.m. President Bush was further informed at 9:05 a.m., and Mayor Rudy Giuliani arrived at the New York City Police Department Command Post (911 Memorial, 2018).
At 9:30 a.m., the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management evacuated its office at the World Trade Center. Vice-President Dick Cheney was evacuated from the White House (911 Memorial, 2018).
The Pentagon attack occurred at 9:37 a.m. Emergency personnel immediately responded. At 9:45 a.m., the White House and the U.S. Capitol Building were evacuated (911 Memorial, 2018).
The South Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed at 9:59 a.m. At 10:15 a.m., the Pentagon E-ring collapsed. The North Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed at 10:28 a.m., and the evacuation of lower Manhattan began at 11:02 a.m. At 5:20 p.m., the entire World Trade Center collapsed. All efforts after that were dedicated to putting out the fires, securing the crime site, finding and rescuing survivors, recovering the dead, identifying victims, and removing and cleaning up debris and body parts (Haddow, 2017; 911 Memorial, 2018).
In 2002, two after-action reports were released: Improving NYPD Emergency Preparednessand Response and Arlington County After-Action Report on the Response to the 9/11 Terrorist Attack on the Pentagon. These reports helped to shape improvements in the emergency management discipline (Haddow, 2017).
The NYPD report identified twenty areas of improvement, with six warranting immediate action: “clearer delineation of roles and responsibilities of organizational leaders; better clarity in the chain of command; radio communications protocols and procedures that optimize information flow; more effective mobilization of response staff; more efficient provisioning and distribution of emergency and donated equipment; a comprehensive disaster response plan with a significant counterterrorism component” (Haddow, 2017).
It is easy to see here how the implementation of the National Incident Management System would have improved the response to the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks. The Command and Management Component would have helped to define the authority of the Incident Commander and to clarify the chain of command. The Communications and Information Management Component would have centralized communications and information sharing to present a clear picture of what was happening and what was needed. The Resource Management Component would have coordinated the flow of personnel and equipment to the site to more efficiently deal with the disaster. The Ongoing Management and Maintenance Component would have ensured that a comprehensive plan was in place to manage a major terrorist attack. The Preparedness Component would have ensured that New York City was ready to bring all agencies together to work as an expert team in responding to a major disaster (DHS, 2008).
The response to the Pentagon attack was deemed a success due to its quick, coordinated, well-prepared response based on the Incident Command System. Arlington County already had a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan in place. The Arlington County Fire Department had already considered the possibility of a weapons of mass destruction scenario and was well-prepared to respond (Haddow, 2017).
Conclusion
It is unfortunate that disasters have to occur in order to improve emergency management as a discipline and emergency response as a necessity of life. But complacency is not an option. Preparation is the key to effective response and recovery when disasters do occur. The Incident Command System, guided by the core components of the National Incident Management System, is an effective tool for coordinating and managing preparation, planning, mitigation, response, and recovery of major disasters on the local, tribal, state, and federal levels.
Dawn Pisturino
Thomas Edison State University
September 18, 2019
Copyright 2019-2021 Dawn Pisturino. All Rights Reserved.
References
911 Memorial. (2018 ). 9/11 Memorial Timeline. Retrieved from
After the end of the Cold War, America faced new challenges as the world’s leading military power. The failure of the old Soviet Union left a leadership vacuum which created new opportunities for terrorist organizations, petty dictators, and rogue countries to asset their influence and power. The end result was the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001 by an Islamic group known as Al Qaeda.
Amid all the post-attack horror and shock, two questions stood out: what did the U.S. government know — and why wasn’t the threat taken more seriously? Congress created the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States on November 27, 2002 to answer those questions and to address the need for a more comprehensive national preparedness system.
A Discussion of the Origins of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Al Qaeda was organized by Osama bin Laden in 1988 after the Soviet Union abandoned Afghanistan. After the World Trade Center bombing in 1993 and several attacks on foreign soil, the CIA concluded in 1995 that there would be increasing terrorist attacks against and in the United States but attributed these attacks to loosely-affiliated individuals with special training who could disappear underground. It wasn’t until 1996-1997 that the CIA became aware of Bin Laden’s terrorist organization. In spite of this knowledge, officials failed to share the complete information about Bid Laden and his activities in their updated reports.
Between 1998 and 2001, more information was compiled about Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, but the CIA failed to comprehend the importance or urgency of the information. Even when select individuals tried to point out the threat and devised plans of action, those plans were usually shot down by Washington, D.C. bureaucrats as too expensive, too unrealistic, or too inadequate.
Part of the problem was the expectation that a major terrorist attack would be achieved through chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons. And since Al Qaeda possessed none of these, the threat it posed was minimized. The few small-scale attacks the group had achieved overseas, such as the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in October 2000, were not considered important enough to beef up national security. And the idea of using airplanes for suicide bombings was not considered a credible scenario for most Washington bureaucrats — including Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
It’s no surprise, then, that the American people were horrified to learn that a small group of radical Islamic terrorists — armed only with simple box cutters — were able to hijack American commercial jets and slam into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The federal government was compelled to act.
The Department of Homeland Security was created by President George W. Bush with Executive Order 13228 on October 8, 2001 in response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The mission of the new department was “to develop and coordinate the implementation of a comprehensive national strategy to secure the United States from terrorist threats or attacks.” It was specifically mandated “to coordinate the executive branch’s efforts to detect, prepare for, prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks within the United States.”
President Bush’s order covers the five basic elements of emergency management: preparedness, prevention (mitigation), protection, response, and recovery in coordination with federal, state, and local agencies, private businesses, and non-profit organizations. But one of the most important features of the order is the gathering and dissemination of information relating to homeland security with “state and local governments and private entities.” The order establishes the Homeland Security Council, with members representing the most important departments in the federal government.
An Examination of the Relationship between the DHS and FEMA
With the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, President Bush focused the nation’s attention on terrorism and potential terrorist threats and attacks. Executive Order 13228 orders the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to “assist in the implementation of national security emergency preparedness policy by coordinating with the other federal departments and agencies and with state and local governments, and by providing periodic reports to the National Security Council and the Homeland Security Council on implementation of national security emergency preparedness policy.”
Section 503 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 transfers accountability and responsibility of the Federal Emergency Management Agency — including its Director — to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security as part of the department’s overall goal of building a comprehensive National Incident Management System (NIMS). “NIMS was [ultimately] created to integrate effective practices in emergency preparedness and response into a comprehensive national framework for incident management. NIMS enables responders at all levels to work together more effectively and efficiently to manage domestic incidents no matter what the cause, size, or complexity, including catastrophic acts of terrorism and disasters.” By making NIMS “a requirement for many federal grant programs,” the federal government has been able to promote a formalized, centralized, and coordinated national response plan which “provides a systematic, proactive approach to guide departments and agencies at all levels of government” in the event of disaster. “NIMS provides the template for the management of incidents, while the NRF [National Response Framework] provides the structure and mechanisms for national-level policy for incident management.”
Section 507 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 outlines the role and functions of FEMA and mandates that the agency follow a comprehensive emergency management program (NIMS) which includes mitigation, planning, preparedness, response, and recovery. The act designates FEMA as the leading agency for implementing the national emergency response plan.
FEMA successfully responded to the Midwest Floods of 1993, the Northridge, California earthquake, the Oklahoma City bombing, the Seattle earthquake, and the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. But, once FEMA was absorbed into the Department of Homeland Security, its effectiveness declined. The agency’s response to Hurricane Katrina under President George W. Bush, for example, was considered a failure.
FEMA’s failure has been attributed to loss of autonomy and access to the White House, loss of power and status, redistribution of funds and personnel to projects given higher priority (such as terrorism), excess bureaucracy in the upper levels of the Department of Homeland Security, and a lack of coordination with state and local governments. Congress passed several reform bills to help resolve these issues.
Discussion of HSPD-5 and HSPD-8
Although the Homeland Security Act of 2002 ordered the development and implementation of a comprehensive national response plan, it was Homeland Security Presidential Directive-5 (February 28, 2003) which formally called for the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to come up with a national incident management system and national response plan that would improve coordination between departments, states, and local governments in the event of a major incident.
Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8 (December 17, 2003) proposed policies that would strengthen domestic preparedness to deal with major disasters (including terrorist attacks). Once again, coordination responsibility fell onto the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security with the goal of keeping the country ready at all times. This directive was aimed particularly at first responders by providing training programs and offering incentive rewards to the states.
With the Department of Homeland Security in control of devising and implementing a well-coordinated national response plan, it is ironic that the department failed so miserably in the face of Hurricane Katrina.
Conclusion
With the continued threats facing America, it is more important then ever for the country to avoid complacency and stay alert in order to recognize, prevent, and respond effectively to potential and actual disasters. We must learn from both our successes and our failures as we move forward into the future.
Dawn Pisturino
Thomas Edison State University, 2019
Copyright 2019-2020 Dawn Pisturino. All Rights Reserved.
Cosmic Health Blog
Entertaining and informative articles about health and wellness, yoga, meditation, nutrition, stress management, exercise and more, written by a licensed Registered Nurse.
Summer Eden Poetry center
A site for sharing poetry, mine and others’. Come and browse the offerings!
Dawn Pisturino's Blog 