Firefighters Union Letter On Rudy Giuliani

Firefighters Union Letter On Rudy Giuliani
March 8, 2007



On March 14, 2007, the IAFF will host the first bi-partisan Presidential Forum of the 2008 election cycle. No other union and very few organizations has the credibility and respect to attract top-tier candidates from both political parties. The lineup of speakers who have agreed to participate in our Forum is truly a testament to our great union and the reputation we have built as a powerful political force and a coveted endorsement.
John Edwards, John McCain, Barack Obama, Chuck Hagel, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Duncan Hunter and seven other candidates will make their case before the 1,000 delegates who will be attending the Forum and to our entire membership via same-day broadcast on our web site.
Early on, the IAFF made a decision to invite all serious candidates from both political parties — except one: former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
We made this decision after considerable soul-searching and close consultation with our two New York City affiliates, the Uniformed Firefighters Association Local 94 and the Uniformed Fire Officers Association Local 854, as well as our former Local 94 President and current IAFF 1st District Vice President covering New York.
The IAFF recognizes that Mayor Giuliani generally enjoys a favorable reputation as a result of his actions immediately after the tragedy of 9/11. As such, we want our affiliates and every one of our members to clearly understand the reason and rationale behind this very serious and sober decision.
Many people consider Rudy Giuliani "America's Mayor," and many of our members who don't yet know the real story, may also have a positive view of him. This letter is intended to make all of our members aware of the egregious acts Mayor Giuliani committed against our members, our fallen on 9/11, and our New York City union officers following that horrific day.
Rest assured, our exclusion of Mayor Giuliani is not about any particular contractual or policy issue or disagreement, nor is it based on his unfriendly relationship with our New York City affiliates prior to 9/11 — which we will document and explain in additional correspondence later on during the campaign. In fact, we invited several candidates with whom we have had substantial disagreement on policy issues because we feel very strongly that our members have the right to hear from all candidates, not just those who tow the IAFF line.
Regrettably, the situation with former Mayor Giuliani is very different. His actions post 9/11 rise to such an offensive and personal attack on our brother and sisterhood — and directly on our union — that the IAFF does not feel Rudy Giuliani deserves an audience of IAFF leaders and members at our own Presidential Forum.
The disrespect that he exhibited to our 343 fallen FDNY brothers, their families and our New York City IAFF leadership in the wake of that tragic day has not been forgiven or forgotten.
In November 2001, our members were continuing the painful, but necessary, task of searching Ground Zero for the remains of our fallen brothers and the thousands of innocent citizens that were killed, because precious few of those who died in the terrorist attacks had been recovered at that point.
Prior to November 2001, 101 bodies or remains of fire fighters had been recovered. And those on the horrible pile at Ground Zero believed they had just found a spot in the rubble where they would find countless more that could be given proper burial.
Nevertheless, Giuliani, with the full support of his Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen, decided on November 2, 2001, to sharply reduce the number of those who could search for remains at any one time. There had been as many as 300 fire fighters at a time involved in search and recovery, but Giuliani cut that number to no more than 25 who could be there at once.
In conjunction with the cut in fire fighters allowed to search, Giuliani also made a conscious decision to institute a "scoop-and-dump" operation to expedite the clean-up of Ground Zero in lieu of the more time-consuming, but respectful, process of removing debris piece by piece in hope of uncovering more remains.
Mayor Giuliani's actions meant that fire fighters and citizens who perished would either remain buried at Ground Zero forever, with no closure for families, or be removed like garbage and deposited at the Fresh Kills Landfill.
Our Local presidents at the time attempted to meet with the Mayor to stop this despicable treatment of those who perished, but he refused to even see them face-to-face.
The scoop-and-dump continued. And when hundreds of family members of the fallen joined with our affiliate leadership and members to protest Giuliani's decision, he ordered senior officers of the New York Police Department to arrest 15 of our FDNY brothers, including a number of local elected IAFF leaders.
Giuliani modified his policy after the protest because public opinion was so strongly with our members. Ultimately, he was forced to put the fire fighters back on the pile. Our protests were later proven justified as more bodies were ultimately recovered and those families given a chance for some closure and a decent burial.
Giuliani argued that the change was for our own safety, but his argument was empty and without substance. Fire fighters had been on that pile since minutes after the twin towers fell — why all of a sudden, after nearly two months working on the pile, was Giuliani concerned about fire fighter safety?
In our view, he wasn't really concerned. The fact is that the Mayor's switch to a scoop-and-dump coincided with the final removal of tens of millions of dollars of gold, silver and other assets of the Bank of Nova Scotia that were buried beneath what was once the towers. Once the money was out, Giuliani sided with the developers that opposed a lengthy recovery effort, and ordered the scoop-and-dump operation so they could proceed with redevelopment.
In the first few days immediately after the disaster, Giuliani had said he was committed to the recovery of those lost "right down to the last brick." We believed him at the time. But, what he proved with his actions is that he really meant the "last gold brick."
Giuliani crucified fire fighters after our protest and publicly stated that our members were essentially acting like babies, that they didn't have the market cornered on grief. His insensitive statements demonstrated his inability to grasp what members of the FDNY were experiencing.
What Giuliani showed is a disgraceful lack of respect for the fallen and those brothers still searching for them. He exposed our members and leaders to arrest. He valued the money and gold and wanted the site cleared before he left office at the end of 2001 more than he valued the lives and memories of those lost.
Our members deserved the right to continue with a full search for their lost brothers and other innocent victims. Proudly, as you know, the fire service has a code similar to the military, where we leave no one behind. Recovering even a piece of a turnout coat or helmet gave our FDNY brothers and sisters and the families of the fallen some small semblance of peace, something to honor. But hundreds remained entombed in Ground Zero when Giuliani gave up on them.
The fundamental lack of respect that Giuliani showed our FDNY members is unforgivable - and that's why he was not invited. Our disdain for him is not about issues or a disputed contract, it is about a visceral, personal affront to the fallen, to our union and, indeed, to every one of us who has ever risked our lives by going into a burning building to save lives and property.
We have heard from some affiliates that Giuliani's campaign is beginning to reach out to our locals, looking to build support. If you are contacted by Giuliani, Von Essen, or a representative of the Giuliani campaign, we hope you will say not just, "No," but, "Hell no." And please let the IAFF Political Affairs Department know about it by calling (202) 824-1582.
Please share this correspondence with your membership.
Thank you.
Fraternally and Sincerely,
Harold A. Schaitberger, General President Vincent J. Bollon, General Secretary-Treasurer and Past President, UFOA of NYC, Local 854 Kevin Gallagher, IAFF 1st District Vice President and Past President, UFA of NYC, Local 94 Stephen Cassidy, President, UFA of NYC, Local 94 Peter Gorman, President, UFOA of NYC, Local 854
Written by IAFF

MATT CROWDER ANNOUNCES

April 24, 2007 p.m.




Crowder announces for County Tax Assessor-Collector race

Matthew J. “Matt” Crowder has announced he is a candidate for Galveston County Tax Assessor – Collector. Crowder said he is running because “I can make the tax assessor / collector’s office more efficient, productive and take the politics out of this very important department.”

Crowder is a resident of Dickinson where he lives with his wife Tarah and their son, Luke. He is employed by Crowder Funeral Homes and serves on the board of Crowder Investments, Inc. and as president of Crowder Holdings. The latter is an investment company with ownership and management of several warehouse facilities.

He is treasurer of the non-profit Hospice Care Team and was previously elected to office as a director of Galveston County Drainage District #2.

Crowder states that he’s had a vast outpouring of support since word has spread about his anticipation of running for the office.

“Encouragement has come from far and wide, and from the average person on the street to many of those already holding appointed or elective office,” said Crowder.

“I’ve been pleasantly surprised by the amount of folks who’ve supported me. It’s quite flattering and quite frankly, a little overwhelming.”

Running, as he described, as a “proud Democrat”, Crowder said the office is broader than party politics.
He adds that every taxpayer in Galveston County is served by the department, regardless of party politics, ethnicity, religion or economic standing.

“I wouldn’t run if I didn’t believe in my abilities and determination. I know I can make a difference. I hope the voters will agree.”

For Additional informationcontact Matt Crowder at 409.682.1381

MAY 2007 DEMOCRATIC CHAIRMAN'S REPORT

CHAIRMAN’S REPORT
MAY 2007
By Lloyd Criss


Vote in the may 12 elections

On May 12 Galveston County voters will decide on a Constitutional Amendment creating tax relief for seniors, College Board Trustees, various school board and city council elections and a bond issue for College of the Mainland. Raymond McNeel, Texas City Democratic Precinct Chair is a candidate for Trustee at Large for College of the Mainland. Early voting is April 30 – May 8. May 12 is Election Day.

JIM YARBROUGH APPRECIATION DINNER

If you have not already done so, get your reservations made for the Salute to our County Judge Jim Yarbrough. The Democratic Party sponsored dinner is on Thursday, May 10 at the Charles T. Doyle Convention Center in Texas City. The menu will feature rib eye steak and grilled shrimp. Individual tickets are at $30 and are going quickly. This is an event you do not want to miss.

EXCITING DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES

The 2008 Democratic Primary and General Elections will feature some exciting and well qualified candidates. Our candidates so far out shine the Republican in every election contest.
We have two of the best qualified candidates for the office of Sheriff that have ever filed for that position. They are Sheriff Chief Deputy Freddy Poor and Major Eric Nevilow. The leading contender for Sheriff on the GOP side supervises school guards for the Fort Bend ISD.
For County Tax Collector-Assessor, Matt Crowder has announced for the Democratic Party nomination. Matt will hold a campaign function on Sunday, June 30 at the K C Hall on Delaney Road in La Marque. Matt is a popular young man. Everyone who meets him, likes him.
For Judge, 56th District Court, Judge Susan Baker is scheduled to announce in June. Susan’s opponent will be incumbent Republican Lonnie Cox. Cox is a former democrat who was quick to embrace the party of Bush and DeLay when it suited his ambitions. His background was in the District Attorney’s office as an assistant D.A. where he spent most of his career prosecuting misdemeanors.

LAMPSON OPENS NEW CLEAR LAKE AREA OFFICE

To better serve local constituents in Harris and Galveston Counties, Congressman Nick Lampson recently opened a new office in Clear Lake. The office is located at 1020 Bay Area Boulevard, Suite 224, Houston, Texas. The office will be open Monday – Friday, 9:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. The telephone number is 281-461-6300.

CORNYN IS VULNERABLE IN 2008

A new poll conducted by the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee shows Republican Senator John Cornyn is very vulnerable as he completes his first term in office and runs for re-election in Texas. The poll shows President Bush has higher negatives than positives and that most Texans believe our country is heading in the wrong direction. The poll also shows only 43% believe their family would be better off if the U. S. Senate was controlled by Republicans.

DEMOCRATIC TOWN HALL MEETING MAY 19

Our Texas Democratic Party Chairman Boyd Richie will be coming to Houston on Saturday May 19 to conduct a Democratic Party Town Hall meeting. Richie has been touring the state bringing the state party to local Democrats. The meeting will begin at 11:00 p.m. at the University of Houston Main Campus, 4800 Calhoun Road University Center, Houston Room (2nd Floor), Houston, Texas.
All Democrats from Galveston, Harris and Fort Bend Counties are invited and urged to attend, provide their input and learn what the T.D.P. has planned for 2008.

NEW CONSTABLE

At the May 2 meeting of the Galveston County Commissioner’s Court, a new constable will be appointed to fill the unexpired term of former Constable Skip Gay. Gay died in early April after a long bout with cancer. Several well qualified prospects have submitted applications to a screening committee consisting of Commissioner Bryan Lamb, Judge Yarbrough and J. P. Mike Nelson.
I expect some good news from the Court on May 2.

INTERESTING QUOTE

“Ayatollahs of the GOP. What do radical Muslim clerics and the Texas Republican Party’s leaders have in common? Well, they both apparently believe that it is the proper role of government to enforce private morality as defined by them of course.” Dolph Tillotson, Publisher, The Galveston Daily News from his blog April 15, 2007.

BAR-B-Q FOR DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES AND ELECTED OFFICIALS

BAR-B-QUE
for
DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES
and
ELECTED OFFICIALS


DAVIED AND JEANIE BOND
INVITE YOU TO THEIR HOME TO VISIT WITH
CONGRESSMAN NICK LAMPSON & SHANE SKLAR AND
GALVESTON COUNTY ELECTED OFFICIALS & CANDIDATES

DATE: APRIL 28, 2007
TIME: 2 PM TILL 5 PM
PLACE: 11602 Strom Rd.
Texas City, Texas

Contact: Jeanie Bond
E-mail: jeanie_bond@yahoo.com
Phone: 281-339-3065


BAR-B-QUE BY DON CRISS
ENTERTAINMENT
Casual Dress (will be outside-dress comfortable)

TEXAS OBSERVIER REPORTS PERRY CONTROLLED DATABASE GATHERING MASSIVE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION ON TEXAS CITIZENS

LEGISLATORS REACT TO REVELATIONS OF TDEX DATABASE IN PRIVATE HANDS
State Affairs to hear HB13 tomorrow, Raymond will seek permission of the House to file legislation moving database from Governor's office to DPS
An expose published today by the Texas Observer on a massive information database on Texans kept by the Governor’s Department of Homeland Security has a pair of Democratic lawmakers calling for immediate action to move the database to the Department of Public Safety.
Rep. Rick Noriega (D-Houston) said the existence of the Texas Data Exchange (TDEx) is "fundamentally an abuse of power." Rep. Richard Raymond (D-Laredo) said he’s drafting legislation this evening that would transfer the database to DPS.
The project was designed to collect information and enhance law enforcement's ability to cooperate against threats like terrorism. However, it has so far collected tens of millions of records and is under control of Homeland Security, a division of the Governor's office, not Department of Public Safety.
Noriega, who was on active duty in Afghanistan and on the border, said his concerns boil down to command and control issues. Information like what is kept in the TDEx should stay with law enforcement agencies, "not in a political office. It poses a serious threat."
House State Affairs Chairman Rep. David Swinford (R-Dumas) said that representatives from the Governor’s Office and DPS will be at tomorrow’s hearing on his HB 13, which would appropriate $100 million for the Department of Homeland Security. He said that the committee will have questions for witnesses about the TDEx. "I imagine we’ll have a really good hearing and that we’ll have some serious questions," he said.
Raymond, meanwhile, said that he’s drafting legislation in reaction to the apparent sheer size of the database. He said many questions spring to mind immediately, such as who has access to the information and what is the criteria for being in the database.
"How many Texans are on there? How do they decide to put you on there?" he asked. Given the size of the database, Raymond suspected that some information has been misused in some way.
Raymond said he hopes to be recognized to suspend rules so the House can consider his legislation as soon as possible.
"The data base is not in the custody or under the control of any state or federal law enforcement agency. Rather, this information is under the control of Rick Perry and those he authorizes. It is imperative that this information be retrieved and be secured within the Dept. of Public Safety. It should not be used until guidelines are determined to protect the privacy rights if the Texans included in the Governors improper data file", Raymond said.
April 12, 2007 6:32 PM
TEXAS OBSERVER REPORTS PERRY CONTROLLED DATABASE GATHERING MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF INFO ON TEXAS CITIZENS
TO reports even law enforcement is nervous about uncontrolled access and possible abuse
The Texas Observer has just posted a must read expose on a database accumulating massive amounts of information on Texas citizens with no law enforcement oversight. In fact, the database is operated and managed outside the state -- in Kentucky.
According to the Observer, the data accumulation operation is not compliant with federal guidelines and has alarmed major urban police departments because of its lack of security.
From the story:
"Piece by piece, Gov. Rick Perry’s homeland security office is gathering massive amounts of information about Texas residents and merging it to create the most exhaustive centralized database in state history. Warehoused far from Texas on servers housed at a private company in Louisville, Kentucky, the Texas Data Exchange—TDEx to those in the loop—is designed to be an all-encompassing intelligence database. It is supposed to help catch criminals, ferret out terrorist cells, and allow disparate law enforcement agencies to share information. More than $3.6 million has been spent on the project so far, and it already has tens of millions of records. At least 7,000 users are presently allowed access to this information, and tens of thousands more are anticipated.
"What is most striking, and disturbing, about the database is that it is not being run by the state’s highest law enforcement agency—the Texas Department of Public Safety. Instead, control of TDEx, and the power to decide who can use it, resides in the governor’s office.
"..... If information is power, Perry and his successors are about to become powerful in ways that are scaring civil libertarians, and probably should alarm every Texan."
This is a well researched and documented story and can be found here.
April 20, 2007 — Features
The Governor's Database
Texas is amassing an unprecedented amount of information on its citizens
by Jake Bernstein
Piece by piece, Gov. Rick Perry’s homeland security office is gathering massive amounts of information about Texas residents and merging it to create the most exhaustive centralized database in state history. Warehoused far from Texas on servers housed at a private company in Louisville, Kentucky, the Texas Data Exchange—TDEx to those in the loop—is designed to be an all-encompassing intelligence database. It is supposed to help catch criminals, ferret out terrorist cells, and allow disparate law enforcement agencies to share information. More than $3.6 million has been spent on the project so far, and it already has tens of millions of records. At least 7,000 users are presently allowed access to this information, and tens of thousands more are anticipated.
What is most striking, and disturbing, about the database is that it is not being run by the state’s highest law enforcement agency—the Texas Department of Public Safety. Instead, control of TDEx, and the power to decide who can use it, resides in the governor’s office.
That gives Perry, his staff, future governors, and their staffs potential access to a trove of sensitive data on everything from ongoing criminal investigations to police incident reports and even traffic stops. In their zeal to assemble TDEx, Perry and his homeland security director, Steve McCraw, have plunged ahead with minimal oversight from law enforcement agencies, and even DPS is skittish about the direction the project has taken.
In researching TDEx, the Observer reviewed more than a thousand pages of documents from the Office of the Governor, DPS, and the Department of Information Management. We interviewed law enforcement officials as well as McCraw. The narrative that emerged from the records—disputed by McCraw—is a headlong pursuit of control through information hoarding for a project in search of a purpose. Along the way, money has been squandered, sensitive data potentially lost, and security warnings unheeded.
If information is power, Perry and his successors are about to become powerful in ways that are scaring civil libertarians, and probably should alarm every Texan.
Texas agencies already have plenty of information on all of us—driver’s licenses, fingerprints, and proofs of address, details we provide every time we renew our licenses, register a car, or vote. Then there’s every brush with the law, all the criminal convictions, prison records, and so forth. Much of that information is now scattered about in different agencies and locations. Never has it been pulled together for the ease of access that TDEx promises.
There’s also a less discernible realm of information that should perhaps concern the citizens of Texas more. In the course of doing their work, police agencies vacuum up enormous piles of tips, rumors, innuendo, guesses, false reports, and other useless material that they sift through to solve crimes and identify criminals.
Access to this massive trove of information—files on cases in progress, notes about “persons of interest” who may prove to be of no interest at all, details involving confidential informants—is closely guarded for good reason. Information worthless for solving a crime might be useful in other contexts. Like politics or personal revenge. The potential for abuse explains why access to existing federal and state crime databases is normally strictly controlled. Over the years—in the wake of scandals like J. Edgar Hoover’s secret FBI files and the increasing privatization of computer databases—federal regulations have evolved to ensure the safety of information and accountability for its use. Keeping a tight rein on who can access raw investigative data, and for what purposes, is supposed to prevent abuses large and small—from high officials who might misuse information for political purposes down to small town deputies who might be willing to sell information, or use it to track down an ex-wife’s new boyfriend.
The federal rules apply to states that accept federal money and ensure the integrity of law enforcement efforts. Under federal rules, a database like TDEx must be run by a criminal justice agency. According to the FBI and DPS, Texas Homeland Security is not a criminal justice agency.
McCraw, who has an extensive criminal justice background, including a stint as an assistant director of the FBI’s Office of Intelligence, has fought a pitched battle with DPS in his zeal to promote TDEx. Repeatedly DPS has raised concerns, chief among them whether the new database is even secure enough to keep unauthorized users from logging on because it lacks “advanced authentication” to ensure that people accessing the database are who they say they are. DPS is also worried that the same user could be logged on to the system multiple times concurrently.
Then there’s the problem of getting rid of bad data or faulty intelligence that finds its way into the system. Each agency that gives data to TDEx is responsible for the accuracy of its own information. But where once the mistake of a single police department was its own, TDEx offers the potential to amplify that error statewide.
To identify weaknesses within TDEx, a database manager with the DPS Criminal Law Enforcement Division, at the direction of his boss, easily defeated the security of the user registration process last summer. He did it by employing an accurate and relatively easily obtained agency identification number, and used one of his son’s e-mail accounts. In retaliation, Jack Colley, the governor’s director of emergency management, revoked the DPS staffer’s access to TDEx. After DPS complained, it was reinstated 11 days later.
McCraw says the audit and authentication issues raised by DPS have been resolved. He says that an on-again, off-again Texas Intelligence Council of law enforcement officials will eventually supervise TDEx. McCraw blames DPS reluctance to embrace TDEx on its fear of change. “You are going to see a strong resistance institutionally to move to new things,” he says.
Remarkably, in many ways TDEx seems to be an improvement over Texas Homeland Security’s first stab at a database run by a private contractor. On June 27, 2005, the Department of Information Resources, at McCraw’s behest, sent out a “request for offer” to vendors that could provide a “Solution for Local, Intra-State, and Inter-State Sharing of Offender and Other Investigative Data.” DPS was not consulted in the development of the offer request. The resulting contract given to Kentucky-based Appriss Inc. would initially be worth a little more than $759,000.
The information department, which handle’s the state’s computer needs, originally was supposed to monitor how well Appriss did the job, but that arrangement quickly ran into a problem. Under federal law—relevant because federal money was being used—the contract had to be overseen by a criminal justice agency. So McCraw simply designated the department as one. “I am writing to confirm the Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR) is an agency with law enforcement functions for the purpose of TDEx,” he wrote to Larry Olson, the department’s chief technology officer.
While TDEx was getting under way, on August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. As Texas cities filled with Louisiana refugees, panic over the possible arrival of a criminal element from New Orleans seems to have gripped some Texas authorities. McCraw proposed a separate database that would group traffic law enforcement information, DPS criminal law enforcement reporting, the Texas Rangers database, consumer records amassed by a scandal-ridden private data company called ChoicePoint Inc., prison records from Appriss, and criminal information from the Louisiana State Police. (There are differing accounts of whether polygraph information, the inclusion of which if not redacted could have violated state law, was also provided. McCraw says no.) A private vendor was to create a global search capability for all the unstructured data. This new database would then be made available to analysts at the Texas Fusion Center, a crisis management bunker operated by the governor’s Division of Emergency Management. McCraw rushed through a contract with Northrop Grumman Corp. for a database project to last until October 2006 at a cost of $1.4 million in federal homeland security funds.
“The Louisiana State Police has informed Texas officials that known criminals are among our evacuee population,” reads a statement of work for Northrop. “Moreover, we have been told that many of the individuals who were involved in heinous crimes at the Superdome are now a part of our evacuee population. There is a critical need to immediately collect and analyze criminal data related to evacuees and provide it to local law enforcement officials throughout Texas. This requires the rapid acquisition of information technology tools.”
McCraw says today that the purpose of the project was to help DPS coordinate its criminal justice information. According to several accounts, DPS officials resisted this “help,” and its Criminal Law Enforcement Division only handed over data—including open cases still under investigation—after being ordered to do so.
By the summer of 2006, it was clear that Northrop could not make the project function and that the threat from Katrina evacuees appeared to be overblown. In addition to the fact that it didn’t work, the project had multiple flaws. Chief among DPS’s concerns was that it was not clear who at Northrop had access to the data, or what had become of it.
In an e-mail on August 17, 2006, Kent Mawyer, chief of the enforcement division, wrote to McCraw: “... with the termination of the project, I will be notifying NG to confirm delete of all data from affected servers ... to include any backups and closure of the firewall.”
McCraw responded: “Please hold off on any deletions until I have an independent audit conducted to ensure there are no excuses for meeting operational requirements.”
Rather than go through the state auditor’s office, McCraw commissioned an audit of the project by a former colleague from his FBI days. She produced a five-page evaluation. Under a section on security, the audit read:
Operation of the system has been suspended by DPS primarily for security reasons. Other than a firewall, the system had no front-end security (no access control) and it also collected no audit data (nothing to record what users had done). During its brief operation, the data was available theoretically to anyone at the DPS IP address who typed in the web address for the system. NG asserts that security features were eliminated from the proposal to cut costs; this appears to have been an inappropriate solution in the absence of alternative security measures.
McCraw says some of the money for the Katrina project was spent on hardware and software that can still be utilized. He insists that the data DPS gave Northrop Grumman were eventually returned. Extensive public records requests have not revealed any documentation to that effect.
Control and security of data would be an issue with Appriss as well. Some of the difficulty stems from using private vendors to handle sensitive material. For McCraw, this is the future and the only way to operate. “What we are trying to build,” he says, “is an intelligence capability or intelligence-sharing capability. Not do it in the old ways, where it takes four years to roll out, and not do it where the government is going to do it, where it’s cost prohibitive, but to do it in a way that leverages the private sector’s capability and know-how.”
Fortunately, there are federal guidelines laid out by the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Advisory Policy Board. As part of the CJIS guidelines, before a private vendor can handle sensitive material, its staff must undergo background and fingerprint checks. CJIS also contains policies governing the operation of computers, access devices, circuits, hubs, routers, firewalls, and other components that comprise and support a network.
According to DPS, as of April 11, Appriss is still not CJIS compliant. McCraw disputes this. “DPS is wrong,” he says. “We’re more in compliance with CJIS security requirements than CJIS.”
McCraw knows from experience that larger Texas police departments will not give their files to a system that is not CJIS compliant for fear of compromising their data. DPS has heard from the McAllen and Plano police departments, which have voiced concern over TDEx for this very reason. And it’s not unfounded.
As late as October 2006, more than a year after Appriss signed its contract and after receiving sensitive data from the Texas Rangers and the state Highway Patrol, Appriss had not given Texas authorities fingerprints or background checks of all its employees handling the data, according to e-mails obtained by the Observer. There were also questions about the security of the company hired to shred documents for Appriss. (McCraw says all background checks have since been completed.)
In hope of providing some form of monitoring over the Appriss facilities, Texas DPS authorities began discussions with the Kentucky State Police to make them a “supervisory” criminal justice agency for site security. No agreement was formalized. In a recent interview, McCraw insists that there are sufficient safeguards and it’s no longer necessary. “In today’s world, where the warehouse is doesn’t matter, as long as it’s in complete compliance with all the security protocol and ... you have the ability to audit at any time,” he says.
Others disagree. “Once that data leaves, you’ve lost control,” says one law enforcement official knowledgeable about TDEx who requested anonymity.
One sticking point for DPS was how Appriss would provide a statewide network to deliver the information that would be sufficiently secure. There was one available: the FBI’s Law Enforcement Online network. DPS urged Appriss to use it. McCraw nixed the idea. “... my concerns with LEO is simply this: If it is not funded or there are other FBI priorities as in the past we lose,” McCraw e-mailed a DPS supervisor from his Blackberry.
Because of these and other issues, the DPS’s Criminal Law Enforcement Division decided that despite McCraw’s objections, it would only provide TDEx with information on closed cases.
In some ways, TDEx’s goals are not necessarily bad. The need for law enforcement agencies to better communicate and share information with each other has been widely recognized by the 9/11 Commission, among others. But even if the TDEx system could solve its significant security hurdles and manage to function as intended, there would still be the issue of its control by the governor’s office.
Asked about the dangers involved in allowing a political office to control such a database, McCraw replies, “I’m the only one [from the governor’s office] that has access to TDEx, and the reason I have access to it now is not because I need it, but because I’m just testing its capability.”
When it was pointed out that Jack Colley, director of the governor’s emergency management division, also had access, McCraw backtracked and took refuge in the idea that no matter who the user, there would be an audit trail of their searches.
Civil libertarians are not assuaged by this kind of answer. “Criminal intelligence data should be in the hands of a professional law enforcement agency that has distance from the political pressures on elected officials,” says Rebecca Bernhardt, immigration, border and national security policy director for the Texas ACLU. “How can we be sure that we will never have a governor who will misuse this power?”
Rather than take a serious look at these issues, the Texas Legislature seems intent on giving Perry even more power. The governor is pushing an appropriation of $100 million for border and homeland security. Presumably, some of that money would be used for TDEx. House State Affairs Chairman David Swinford, a Dumas Republican, is offering House Bill 13, “relating to homeland security issues.” The bill is scheduled for hearing on Friday, April 13. Leading up to the hearing, the bill’s content was a bit of a moving target. Two days before the hearing, there already had been two committee substitutes, with the possibility of a third on the way. The most recent version had a provision that reads: “The Department of Public Safety of the State of Texas shall provide to the State Office of Homeland Security any criminal intelligence information that the director of the State Office of Homeland Security determines is relevant to Homeland Security operations.”
Asked about this provision, McCraw vowed that it would not be in the final version. “I’m sure there are some that think I was conspiring to take over criminal intelligence,” he says. “I got enough problems tying my shoelaces; it’s not about one agency, it’s about multiple agencies working as a team.”
Meanwhile, the Perry Alliance Network paid for by Texans for Rick Perry has been sending out e-mails in support of Swinford’s bill.

Why Change the Way Elections are Handled?

After being reelected in November, Galveston County Clerk Mary Ann Daigle surprised many in February by announcing she needed help to continue to run elections in the County. The commissioners court held a meeting on that problem, and one of the proposals being considered is the creation of a new department with a county elections administrator.

Why the first reaction to a problem is the creation of a new bureaucracy is something Republicans do not understand. Rather than grow government, we believe elected officials have a duty to do the jobs to which they were elected, and a duty to spend taxpayers’ money in a wise and efficient manner.

Since elections are a relatively small part of the County Clerk’s office, it seems to be an example of overkill to create a whole new department. Why not simply hire a new person or two, who could be cross-trained on elections and perform other clerk related duties during the remainder of the year? Or even better, show some management and get the job done with the staff already available?

The expense of a new department does not seem to be warranted on the facts. This is especially true when the sections of the Texas Election Code which deal with the creation of an elections administrator are viewed. Those sections refer to such things as “…the number of deputies and other persons…” which the administrator could employ. They also refer to “automobile expenses” which may be allowed, and the requirement the commissioners court “shall” provide the administrator “…with suitable office space and with the equipment and operating expenses needed…”

Does any one really believe the new department will not cost us more money than the present situation? The administrator will need a deputy, and support staff, and membership in election organizations, and seminars on elections, and trips to Austin to meet with the Secretary of State, etc.

The Galveston County Republican Party wants elections to be run in a fair and efficient manner. No one wants to have to wait many hours for election results, or see the wrong ballots passed out at polls, or any of the other documented problems we have seen in recent years. But the elected officials of Galveston County already have the duty to see that elections are run properly. We urge the commissioners court to look long and hard at all options before creating a new county department.

Kerry Neves