New Homeland Defense Plans Emerge
Fearing Ridge Lacks Clout, Lawmakers Float Proposals for Super-Agency

By Eric Pianin and Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, September 26, 2001; Page A04

Proposals for creating a super-agency to oversee intelligence, law enforcement and domestic security activities are gaining support on Capitol Hill as an alternative to President Bush's plan for a White House homeland defense office headed by Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge (R).

Many Republican and Democratic lawmakers fear that without statutory authority over the budgets and operations of agencies related to anti-terrorism, Ridge will lack the clout essential to mount an effective nationwide effort to quash further terrorist threats and put in place improved security and emergency response measures.

Bush last week vowed to give Ridge a strong hand to coordinate the activities of more than 40 federal agencies and departments, including the CIA and the FBI, and to forge domestic policy to defend the public against terrorists much the way national security adviser Condoleezza Rice shapes U.S. foreign policy.

"Ridge is a great appointment . . . but he's got to have the authority to dictate the administration's policy, to make sure that everybody is falling in line with the administration's policy with respect to anti-terrorism," said Rep. C. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), chairman of the House Intelligence subcommittee on terrorism and homeland defense.

The White House said that Bush intends to create the new, Cabinet-level Office of Homeland Security by executive order, probably before Ridge is scheduled to take up his duties Oct. 8. While lawmakers agree there would be no attempt to force legislation on the president in the midst of the current crisis, some said they would push for legislation later this year if it becomes clear Ridge is unable to take control of anti-terrorism policy.

"My feeling is the best way we should assure the job gets done is to put him in a new Cabinet department, giving him both budget and direct-line authority," said Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), chairman of the Government Affairs Committee. "The president's announcement . . . was a significant step forward, but we need more to make sure the job of homeland defense gets done."

Ridge, a moderate Republican and close friend of the president's, met yesterday at the White House with Bush and key administration aides to begin working out the details of his new assignment, 14 days after attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon left more than 6,500 dead or missing. The talks covered "substantive policy issues and the structure and staffing and budget needs of the [new] office," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.

While the president intends to consult closely with Congress on the new anti-terrorism office, McClellan said, "The president is moving forward to create the Office of Homeland Security by presidential action."

At least three congressionally sponsored commissions in recent years have looked at how to improve coordination of the many government entities involved in protecting against terrorism. While all agreed on the need for some sort of new, high-level mechanism, they offered widely differing prescriptions for what that mechanism should be, ranging from a White House coordinator to a separate agency.

These conflicting prescriptions were reflected in several bills introduced in Congress before the Sept. 11 attacks. One measure sponsored by Rep. William M. "Mac" Thornberry (R-Tex.) would establish a national agency that would consolidate border security functions spread among the U.S. Coast Guard, Customs Service and Border Patrol and more generally oversee the government's homeland defense.

But fearing the creation of yet another large federal bureaucracy, Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) has pushed legislation calling for a single coordinator to manage domestic security programs. Still another alternative is contained in a bill by Rep. Wayne T. Gilchrest (R-Md.), which would elevate the Federal Emergency Management Agency, assigning it primary responsibility for responding to terrorist attacks.

In the Senate, intelligence committee Chairman Bob Graham (D-Fla.) has offered a bill that would make Ridge's position permanent and give the director substantial authority over the budgets of the FBI and other agencies responsible for anti-terrorism activities.

"I would describe it as an extension of what the president has proposed," Graham said. "I think this agency should also be developing a comprehensive plan for homeland defense and anti-terrorism protection, including whether there should be some statutory realignment of agencies."

Sen. Richard C. Shelby (Ala.), the ranking Republican on the intelligence committee, said that while Ridge was a good choice for the assignment, "He's got to have power to do things -- budgets, demand accountability [from agencies], everything." Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), another prominent conservative, said, "As we get more involved in it, you're going to see that the office is going to need more capability than I think has currently been allocated to it."

Senate and House leaders and aides said they are still awaiting more details of the president's plan and pledged close consultation with the White House before undertaking any legislative action. "We're still evaluating that," Senate Majority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) said yesterday.

The latest blue-ribbon panel to weigh into the debate -- a three-year, bipartisan effort led by former senators Warren B. Rudman (R-N.H.) and Gary Hart (D-Colo.) -- backed the idea of a separate agency in a report released last January. Unimpressed by experiences with White House czars -- whether in the areas of energy, education or drugs -- the commissioners concluded that it was not enough this time just to appoint a senior White House official, no matter what his relationship with the president was at the outset.

But critics of the consolidation approach say it would encounter too much bureaucratic resistance. James S. Gilmore III, the Virginia governor who chaired another federal commission that last year recommended setting up a national office for combating terrorism, said a new agency would simply end up competing with other agencies.