Seek more information sharing on security between feds and localities
"Will fight for greater information-sharing between national intelligence agents and local officials and provide local law enforcement agencies with the everyday tools they need to protect their transportation systems."
"Fusion centers" widespread, but questions about their effectiveness persist
Updated: Monday, December 17th, 2012 | By Louis Jacobson
The Obama administration has pursued a program started under President George W. Bush that aims to share intelligence between federal, state and local law enforcement -- but critics have questioned its effectiveness.
Since 2003, more than 70 "fusion centers,” as they are known, have been established. These centers are intended to detect, disrupt, and respond to domestic terrorist activities.
According to DHS, fusion centers "serve as focal points within the state and local environment for the receipt, analysis, gathering, and sharing of threat-related information between the federal government and state, local, tribal, territorial and private-sector partners.” They are operated by state and local governments but supported in part by hundreds of millions of federal dollars and are overseen by the Department of Homeland Security.
"I believe that Fusion Centers will be the centerpiece of state, local, federal intelligence-sharing for the future and that the Department of Homeland Security will be working and aiming its programs to underlie Fusion Centers,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said in an address to the National Fusion Center Conference on March 11, 2009.
However, a bipartisan investigation by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations concluded that the DHS's work with fusion centers "has not produced useful intelligence to support federal counterterrorism efforts.”
"The subcommittee investigation found that DHS-assigned detailees to the fusion centers forwarded ‘intelligence" of uneven quality – oftentimes shoddy, rarely timely, sometimes endangering citizens" civil liberties and Privacy Act protections, occasionally taken from already-published public sources, and more often than not unrelated to terrorism,” the Senate panel concluded in a strongly worded and widely publicized report.
During the two-year probe -- overseen by subcommittee chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., and ranking Republican Tom Coburn of Oklahoma -- investigators learned that a 2010 study that had been requested by DHS, but not released publicly and initially kept from the Senate subcommittee, "found widespread deficiencies in the centers" basic counterterrorism information-sharing capabilities.” The subcommittee said that a 2011 internal review by DHS was "more positive” but even this report "indicated ongoing weaknesses at the fusion centers.”
DHS objected to the subcommittee report, telling the Washington Post that it was based on out-of-date data and saying that Senate investigators misunderstood the role of fusion centers, "which is to provide state and local law enforcement analytic support in furtherance of their day-to-day efforts to protect local communities from violence, including that associated with terrorism.”
The National Fusion Center Association also strongly objected to the subcommittee's report, saying it ignored the centers" benefits. "Simply put, the report displays a fundamental disconnect and severe misunderstanding of the federal government's role in supporting state and locally owned and operated fusion centers and the critical role that fusion centers play in the national counterterrorism effort,” the group said in a statement.
Adding to the conflicting claims, the Democratic chairman and ranking Republican of the full Senate committee -- Sens. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, all but disowned the report produced by one of their subordinate committees, and the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Peter King, R-N.Y., also spoke out forcefully against its conclusions.
"I strongly disagree with the report's core assertion that ‘fusion centers have been unable to meaningfully contribute to federal counterterrorism efforts," Lieberman said in a statement. "This statement is not supported by the examples presented in the report and is contrary to the public record, which shows fusion centers have played a significant role in many recent terrorism cases and have helped generate hundreds of tips and leads that have led to current FBI investigations.”
As we evaluate this promise, we give some weight to the Senate subcommittee's criticisms, since they were based on a lengthy, independent and bipartisan probe. However, we acknowledge that the strong objections by the department, other lawmakers and outside advocates make sweeping generalizations difficult. We conclude that the federal government has carried through on its promise to increase intelligence-sharing, but not without serious questions about its effectiveness. On balance, we rate this a Compromise.
Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, "Federal Support for and Involvement in State and Local Fusion Centers: Majority and Minority Staff Report," Oct. 3, 2012
Government Accountability Office, "DHS Could Better Define How It Plans to Meet Its State and Local Mission and Improve Performance Accountability," December 2010
National Fusion Center Association, "Response to the Senate PSI Report: Joint Statement,” accessed Dec. 17, 2012
American Civil Liberties Union, "Senate Homeland Security Committee Misses the Mark with Statement on DHS 'Fusion Center' Program,”Oct. 10, 2012
Washington Post, "DHS 'fusion centers' portrayed as pools of ineptitude, civil liberties intrusions,” Oct. 2, 2012
Politico, "Lawmakers split over fusion center report," Oct. 3, 2012
Fusion center support on its way
Updated: Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009 | By Robert Farley
Essentially, they are centers designed to ferret out terrorism threats by sharing intelligence information between federal agencies such as the CIA, FBI, Department of Justice, the U.S. military and state and local governments. And since 9/11, 72 fusion centers have sprung up across the nation, mostly in state and local police departments.
In testimony before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on Sept. 30, 2009, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced the creation of the Joint Fusion Center Program Management Office. It will coordinate support for fusion centers around the country.
The office will lead a survey to identify the types of homeland security-related information local and state governments need. The office also will develop ways to assess regional and national threats by gathering, analyzing and sharing locally generated as well as national information and intelligence through fusion centers. It also will offer training such as terrorism analysis to local officials. And, addressing one of the main concerns about fusion centers, there will be an effort to develop rigorous legal, privacy, civil rights and civil liberties-related training and support to law enforcement partners and Department of Homeland Security personnel.
The center is expected to be operational by March 2010.
In addition, the Department of Homeland Security plans to deploy personnel to all 72 fusion centers, and give them access to the department's Homeland Security Data Network that carries classified information up to the Secret level.
This promise looks well on its way, but we'll leave it at In the Works until the Joint Fusion Center opens.
Homeland Security Web site, Testimony of Secretary Napolitano before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs , Sept. 30, 2009
Security Management, "DHS to Create New Office to Support Intelligence Fusion Centers," by Matthew Harwood, Oct. 1, 2009
Council on Foreign Relations, "Backgrounder: Fusion Centers," by Eben Kaplan, Feb. 22, 2007
We want to hear your suggestions and comments.
For tips or comments on our Obameter and our GOP-Pledge-O-Meter promise databases, please e-mail the Obameter. If you are commenting on a specific promise, please include the wording of the promise.For comments about our Truth-O-Meter or Flip-O-Meter items, please e-mail the Truth-O-Meter. We’re especially interested in seeing any chain e-mails you receive that you would like us to check out. If you send us a comment, we'll assume you don't mind us publishing it unless you tell us otherwise.
Keep up to date with Politifact:
- Sign up for our e-mail (about once a week)
- Put a free PolitiFact widget on your blog or Web page
- Subscribe to our RSS feeds on Truth-O-Meter items
- Subscribe to our RSS feeds on GOP Pledge-O-Meter items
- Subscribe to our RSS feeds on Obameter items
- Advertise on PolitiFact
- Shop the PolitiFact store for T-shirts, hats and other PolitiFact swag