NEW CASTLE —
Whenever government operates in a crisis, several things are sure to happen.
And one of those involves government officials throwing money at the problem — whether it accomplishes anything or not. It’s only later, sometimes much later, that a serious examination of what’s being done exposes the waste.
Although terrorism has been a problem for generations, if not centuries, the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, galvanized America’s response to the danger. Like never before, government resources of all types were devoted to the struggle against international terrorism, typically with the full support of Congress and the American people.
Along with the visible beef-up of security at airports and other facilities, changes after Sept. 11 included assorted covert means of identifying and targeted suspected terrorists. Many of these efforts were — and remain — classified, as the nation’s security experts don’t want to tip off terrorists about ways they are being monitored.
But one area that’s generally known to have attracted the interest of investigators is the subject of data mining. Although it takes different forms and uses a variety of techniques, data mining basically involves combing websites, cell phone calls and assorted means of communication.
The goal is to identify patterns of activity that could signal terrorist activity.
However, what a security agency gets out of a data mining effort depends on how information is collected and analyzed. And a new report coming out of Congress suggests considerable money and resources have been expended on these efforts with little in the way of useful results. To the contrary, the Senate report indicates the main consequence is a threat to civil liberties by government entities with powerful means of monitoring the activities of citizens.
A subcommittee of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee reviewed documents produced by the Homeland Security Department’s Intelligence and Analysis Division. Specifically, it examined work produced by what are called fusion centers. These are set up in every state to examine data trends that could provide early warnings for terrorist attacks.
The centers are federally funded, but they operate at the state level. Without federal support, states would be forced to pick up the tab, or let the centers fade away.
The Senate committee report criticized a lack of oversight on how funds were being spent on the program in terms of results produced. Those results are minimal, at best. Instead, the centers were seen as gathering data on legitimate activities, particularly those involving Muslims and Islamic organizations that had no links to terrorism.
Not surprisingly, the committee report has been rejected by the Obama administration, state governments and even Senate leaders. Its findings run afoul of the notion that money spent on anti-terrorist activities is well spent.
But this report says otherwise. And a nation interested in security — physical and financial — ought to demand better.
Editorials
Our Opinion: Senate panel finds little use in anti-terrorism program
- Editorials
-
-
Our Opinion: Pennsylvania’s primary system is controlled by parties
Should Pennsylvania’s primaries be open to independent voters? That’s an interesting question and one we have explored in the past on this page.
-
Our Opinion: State audit says city school district failed to collect from non-residents
Audit information about non-resident students who didn’t pay tuition at New Castle raises more questions than it answers. At least so far. We expect more details when the Pennsylvania auditor general’s office completes its report and the New Castle school district provides its response.
-
Our Opinion: Make the most of your power to vote by casting ballot tomorrow
So what kind of turnout will there be for tomorrow’s primary? Recent history suggests somewhere between low and lousy. This year’s elections are devoted to local races, and there are few major ones being contested in the primary.
-
Our Opinion: Privatization of county jail is worthy of examination
Generally speaking, we support government efforts to seek more efficient ways to provide essential services. So we have no problem with the decision by the Lawrence County commissioners to solicit proposals for the private operation of the county jail.
-
Our Opinion: We endorse candidates for New Castle board
The New Castle school district is often a study in contrasts. There are complaints about the district on everything from taxes to nepotism, from test scores to ethical slights. Yet at the same time, plenty of students within the district excel. It’s a tribute to the hard work of those students, their families and the educators who support them.
-
Our Opinion: You should be frightened, outraged by IRS abuse of power
When people talk about government posing a threat to citizens, a common topic these days is unmanned drones. But a more credible threat may be the Internal Revenue Service. This agency, responsible for collecting taxes and enforcing related rules, has the ability to make life miserable for the average individual.
-
Our Opinion: Our endorsements for City Council race
The city of New Castle needs help. Financially distressed and operating under Pennsylvania’s Act 47, New Castle must find ways to reverse its population loss and fiscal challenges.
-
Our Opinion: Court frowns on gerrymandering, but only slightly
Pennsylvania legislators have received the green light to put their own political interests ahead of yours. That’s a key point in the latest Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling on legislative apportionment in the commonwealth.
-
Our Opinion: Study says distracted driving deaths are under reported
Suppose you operated a piece of heavy machinery at your job. And suppose it’s machinery that moves quickly with little effort. What would happen if you decided to take one hand off that equipment — while it was still in motion — and instead focused your attention on a telephone call?
-
Our Opinion: Senate seeks to give states more taxing power
Congress is taking a stab at tax fairness. At least, where states are concerned. If you’re looking for meaningful reform of the federal tax code, that’s going to have to wait.
- More Editorials Headlines
-
Our Opinion: Pennsylvania’s primary system is controlled by parties
