Under top security, Gov. Jeb Bush spent Easter in Iraq with troops from Florida, reuniting with 338 Florida National Guard soldiers serving in Iraq. Bush’s surprise visit comes at a time of mounting discontent about the handling of the war effort by
his brother, George W. Bush. Jeb Bush said: “In a mission this ambitious, and this extensive, is it possible that mistakes were made? Of course it is. After the fact, it’s easy to harp and to criticize, and, frankly, people have the right to do it.”
Source: Steve Bousquet in St. Petersburg Times, “Visit Troops”
Apr 15, 2006
Deal with terrorism as a joint federal-state responsibility.
Bush adopted the National Governors Association policy:
Handling Information Needs. Many of the operational, programmatic, and funding activities associated with terrorism consequence management preparedness are classified because of national security. Thus, the sharing of critical information is hampered. State governments must be viewed as strong partners in the US’ national security efforts, particularly as related to terrorism.
Managing Consequences. Managing the short- and long-term consequences of terrorism is among the responsibilities of state and local government supplemented by the resources of the federal government, coordinated by FEMA.
Supporting Public-Private Cooperation. Terrorism preparedness efforts should be inclusive of key private sector entities such as defining the appropriate roles and responsibilities for public and private health and medical communities.
Clarifying the Role of the National Guard. The role of the National Guard in terrorism
response activities is to support federal, state, and local response agencies with equipment, facilities, and personnel. Any assignment of responsibility should enhance the nation’s terrorism consequence management capability and provide for the contingency of the National Guard being called to assist active and reserve components in dealing with a major military conflict.
Federal Responsibility Governors recognize the need to coordinate programs among federal agencies to address domestic terrorism and appreciate the efforts of the National Domestic Preparedness Office. However, they encourage greater clarification of the currently fragmented structure of federal responsibilities and support increased cooperation among federal agencies to better enable states to plan for domestic terrorism responses. Governors urge appropriate funding, maximum coordination of program components, and coordinated service delivery within states and localities.
Source: NGA policy HR-10: Domestic Terrorism 01-NGA5 on Feb 15, 2001
Include states in anti-terrorism planning.
Bush adopted the National Governors Association position paper:
The Issue
The issue of terrorism will be of major focus for the 107th Congress. Governors have a critical interest in controlling domestic terrorism because they are responsible for ensuring that state and local authorities have the ability to deal with natural disasters and other types of major emergencies, including terrorist incidents.
NGA’s Position
NGA believes that any national strategy for dealing with terrorist incidents should include planning and training by state and local forces. The unique nature of terrorism coupled with national security implications requires the support and expertise of the federal government in working with state and local government in developing capabilities. A clear national strategy developed through a partnership among federal agencies and key state, local, and private sector stakeholders is essential to drive operational and programmatic planning, training, and service delivery in combating terrorism.
Source: National Governors Association "Issues / Positions" 01-NGA7 on Sep 14, 2001
