GovernmentExecutive.com

Former Homeland Security Department Secretary Tom Ridge told a roomful of lawyers on Friday that the terrorist threat to the United States is "real and multi-generational," but it also is "something we can deal with" through advances in intelligence-gathering and technology.

"People plus technology is what will get us where we need to be to be able to protect ourselves," he said during an American Bar Association conference keynote. Ridge left his Cabinet-level post for the private sector in 2005 and now has his own consulting firm.

Since the federal government does not have infinite resources, security officials must focus on "weapons of mass effect" and on "terrorist attacks we've seen elsewhere," he said. "We also have to harness the capabilities and commitment of people at the state and local level -- first responders in particular."

While Homeland Security's relationship with states has improved since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Ridge said he does not believe "we're getting information down to the local levels" efficiently enough. "You can't secure the country from inside the Beltway."

Ridge told Technology Daily after his speech that despite "all the rhetoric and speeches since 9/11, we still do not have a national public-safety network," which would provide teams that arrive first on the scene of a disaster with tools that deliver voice, video and data among personnel across jurisdictions.

The FCC is "finally getting around to it" by setting aside a chunk of spectrum in the 700-megahertz band for public-safety communications, he said. The spectrum, which has been used by broadcasters now transitioning to digital signals, will be auctioned starting in late January.

"At the end of the day, the only way we can substantially enhance our security posture is by embedding more and better technology," he said, pointing to the importance of cutting-edge cargo and aviation security equipment.

"We'll also have to wrestle with biometrics and how they can be used more effectively" to verify when foreigners enter and leave the country, he said. Privacy and civil-liberties watchdogs have slammed recent proposals for implementing such a system.

A separate ABA session dug deeper into the legal implications of a national ID system -- with at least one pointed question posed by Robert Divine, former chief counsel for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. He asked screening-coordination chief Kathy Kraninger whether Homeland Security is pursuing a database "about as many people as can possibly be collected with biometrics with as much information as you can accumulate."

Kraninger said her agency "has a very vast mission" but takes steps to collect data appropriately and carefully. "Identity management is a really challenging, fascinating area," she said. "It all comes back to 'is the person who they say they are?'"

COMMENTS

• It seems like all these programs being proposed are designed to implement a bigger government. We are are being coerced into believing that we are under dire threat and therefore we should give away our rights that we fought hard to acquire to allow the government to do as it pleases. Big government resembles more a totalitarian state, more of a fascist state than the land of the free. People are forced into sublmisson by this fear mongering media owned by the corrupt elite that only promote their interest and their agendas via news outlets such as Fox News and CNN. The people own the governement and government is supposed to worked in their favour. The government does not own the people, its supposed to be its representative. All this surveillance and monitoring of citizens is highly suspect as we do not know what this information is being used for. They claim is to thwart of terrorism but that's very suspicious coming from a government that said their we're weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Who's benefiting from all this ? Those who are already in power behind the scenes have money, make money from the wars that they promote at the expense of the average American citizen and their children's future. They own the Major Media Stations and can distort news daily to the masses through their pundits to the masses that are scared into submission. IF government is to monitor and spy on its citizens, then what guarantees the citizens that they can claim their government if ever it were high-jacked by corrupt individuals at the highest executive levels. Who are they accountable to, if the citizens who have the rights foolishly gives it away to them. What right will you call on, if ever your own government were to turn against you ? That's why we have rights, to protect our selves and country to always represent the peoples best interest. Fame Posted January 28, 2008 1:14 PM
• Mr. Ridge is right this country is looking at smoke a mirrors when it comes to a secure ID managment program, especially when we are looking at the states information tech. networking systems. Most of them are years behind any normal program for todays technology, especially in "national public-safety network system" and they want to blame the federal government for their own blind eye tech. program, if it is not needed today why get it.So when a DISASTER HITS THEM THEY CRY OUT IT WAS ALL THE FAULT OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Yet when the federal givernment wants to create a better safety network they start screaming, out to all the special interest groups, that BIG BROTHER IS TRYING TO TAKE OVER OUR STATE, WHAT A BUNCH OF BULL--- A National Biometric database system is the only answer, so lets stop all this politicial B----/ and do something about it. IT IS TIME THE PEOPLE THAT REALLY WANT A REAL NATIONAL SECURITY SYSTEM COME TOGETHER A STOP ALL THESE SO CALLED CIVIL-LIBERTIES WATCHDOGS GET SLAMMED FOR A CHANGE. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. DD HORTON Posted January 26, 2008 10:10 AM
• Ridge was impotent as head of DHS, and let the FBI run rings around him. He gave away terrorism funding investigations to them, and let the FBI veto a name change for ICE, from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, to Investigations and Criminal Enforcement. After that debacle, he came to our office to speak, and nobody asked a question. We all just stood there with our arms folded, and glared at him. He left without accomplishing anything of substance, other than leaving behind employees with destroyed morale. He then took a cushy private sector job, doing business with the very department he headed, and is now a pundit full of pithy comments. Good bye and good riddance! ICEd Posted January 22, 2008 5:02 PM