Homeland Security and Other Boondoggles

The unintended consequences of the Bush administration’s signature reforms.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


“Government likes to begin things—to declare grand new programs and causes,” President Bush said in 2001 at the unveiling of his “Management Agenda,” a program aimed at improving the performance of federal agencies. “But good beginnings are not the measure of success. What matters in the end is completion. Performance. Results.” In subsequent years, the Bush administration gave birth to numerous new executive departments, offices, and programs of its own—and the results are in. A stroll through the graveyard of best intentions…

Department of Homeland Security
Promise: To develop a more effective domestic response to terrorism and natural disasters by bringing 22 federal agencies and more than 200,000 employees under the management of a single Cabinet-level agency.
Performance: DHS has yet to make even “moderate” progress toward improving emergency preparedness and eliminating the kinds of bureaucratic and technological ineptitude that contributed to the 9/11 attacks, according to the Government Accountability Office.

Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Promise: First proposed by the 9/11 Commission, it was created to place the sprawling, and frequently squabbling, intelligence community under a single authority.
Performance: Added yet another layer of bureaucracy. Like the CIA before it, ODNI is held responsible for overseeing America’s intelligence community (civilian and military), though lacks control over some 80 percent of the nation’s intelligence budget, which remains the purview of the Pentagon.

Military Transformation
Promise: Based on a belief in the transformative power of technology, the so-called Revolution in Military Affairs emphasized using fewer troops, reliance on sophisticated weapons systems, and air strikes.
Performance: Iraq.

No Child Left Behind
Promise: Aimed to improve K-12 education by imposing a series of national achievement standards in math and reading, measured primarily through standardized testing.
Performance: Teachers were tacitly encouraged to “teach to the test,” often at the expense of untested subjects like social studies, foreign languages, the arts, and physical education. Some schools have gamed the system, either by lowering standards or by turning away students who may skew test results.

Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives
Promise: A hallmark of “compassionate conservatism,” which funneled billions of dollars in federal funding to faith-based and community organizations on the belief that such groups are better positioned to cater to local needs.
Performance: By focusing almost exclusively on Christian charities, the office violated the separation of church and state, quickly becoming the target of legal challenges. Its first director, John DiIulio, resigned in disgust, characterizing the Bush administration as “the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis” and alleging that aides were more interested in promoting a partisan agenda than advancing good policy.

Community-Based Abstinence Education
Promise: Pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into local groups that worked to reduce teen pregnancies by preaching abstinence—sometimes literally, through means of Bible readings and exhortations to accept Jesus.
Performance: Last year, instances of teen pregnancy increased for the first time in 15 years, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

FutureGen
Promise: Established a public-private partnership to build a near-zero-emissions coal-fueled power plant to be located in Mattoon, Illinois—a pilot facility that, if successful, would form the basis for the expansion of clean coal plants.
Performance: In January 2008, the Energy Department withdrew funding, citing cost overruns. Illinois politicians complained that the program was killed after their state edged out Texas as the test site.

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate