While well-intentioned, legislation to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission -- to be considered by the House of Representatives on Tuesday -- could actually undercut the legislation's objectives, says a Duke University expert on homeland security.
Hasty passage of the 278-page bill -- - introduced by House Democrats late last week and containing brand-new provisions that have not been subjected to public scrutiny or congressional hearings -- - would be a mistake, says David H. Schanzer, director of the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security at Duke University and the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
"Homeland security and counterterrorism policy is simply too important to be rushed through the process," says Schanzer, who served as the Democratic Staff Director and Chief Counsel of the House Homeland Security Committee from 2003-2005.
Despite Speaker Nancy Pelosi's campaign promise to implement all of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations in the first 100 hours of Congress, only those sections of the bill that have been previously considered and have strong bipartisan support should be passed this week, Schanzer says.
"Some of the provisions of the bill, such as the proposal to allocate homeland security grants based on risk, represent well-crafted legislation that was considered extensively in previous Congresses. These proposals should be approved and sent to the Senate immediately," he says.
But other sections would cause more problems than they would solve, he says.
"The proposal to prohibit cargo containers that have not been screened for radiation from entering the United States, while a worthy goal, may not be possible and could have tremendous economic implications," he says.
Schanzer also pointed out that there are a number of potentially explosive proposals in the bill, such as cutting off foreign assistance to Pakistan unless it takes steps to prevent the Taliban from operating in Quetta and tribal areas in northwest Pakistan.
"Legislation that affects foreign relations, an area the Constitution assigns primarily to the executive branch, ought to be considered with great care after consultation with the president and State Department," Schanzer says. "Passage of this portion tomorrow could have unforeseen repercussions for our foreign policy that may complicate our relations with Pakistan and make for more difficult prosecution of our counterterrorism policies."