Why can’t DHS do more than one thing at a time? The arguments from Republican lawmakers seem ridiculous to me!
Republicans assail DHS officials for focusing on climate change
House Republicans lambasted the Obama administration Wednesday for making climate change a high priority at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Some excerpts:
The GOP argued at a hearing that the emphasis comes at the expense of other, more important, activities at DHS, and puts the country at greater risk from terrorists, including the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
The hearing of the Homeland Security Committee’s oversight subcommittee focused mostly on last year’s Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, which said climate change and its effects “present major areas of homeland security risk.”
“I am shocked that the department continues to make climate change a top, top priority,” said subcommittee Chairman Scott Perry (R-Pa.), citing the risks from terrorist groups, cyberattacks, incompetent airport screeners and other threats.
Recovery Diva 
Claire:-
I have to agree with Chairman Perry’s sentiments, but with a caveat. “Climate change” is not the business of the Department – the closest thing to that within the Department is FEMA’s role as the federal government’s first responder. However, the recent requirement re climate change that FEMA has put in place has one positive attribute – it forces communities to look beyond today at what their futures might be. Had the requirement been worded in terms of looking out to 2030 or beyond (a la DHS’s Strategic Foresight Initiative) I would have been ecstatic (one important result of this might have been consideration of the changing demographics of our communities – which I believe much more important than climate change.). Worded in terms of looking at the impacts of climate change – with no guidance how to do that (and probably not a clue!) – FEMA and the Department invited Congressional scorn.
FEMA’s ill-considered action highlights for me a major problem within the federal government: sloppy scope. Too many agencies and Congressional committees trying to lay claim to pieces of the same turf in a way that is sure to cause confusion and a waste of scant resources. Let me use a personal experience as an example. STEM education was of the major issues 5-10 years ago (still ought to be, but let’s not go there.). I developed an innovative curriculum that would have “emergency management” writ large as the focal point for a year’s instruction. I had math, social studies, English and science all in an integrated package. Then I made the mistake of going to the federal government to get ideas and funding to flesh out the approach. I got lots of enthusiastic “support” and the ever popular bureaucratic shuffle. At the time, there were almost 50 different STEM education programs spread out over 30 or so federal agencies. There was no communication among them, no coordination, and no coherent action to actually improve STEM education. In too many cases the bureaucrats did more infighting than outreach to those who could actually do something.
Now we have the EPA pushing to regulate electricity generation, slopping into FERC’s scope. FEMA requires communities to consider climate change impinging on EPA’s (and USDA’s and DOE’s) turf. And we have something like 19 Congressional committees supposedly overseeing DHS but really only hogging headlines and bogging down the Department.
Always good to have other points of view.
As I recall, the DoD issued a report indicating that sea level rise and global warming were likely to create national security issues.
And I think the no. of Congressional committees that review DHS is much higher than 19, I am sorry to note.