Markle Task Force on National Security in the Information Age

Markle Task Force on National Security in the Information Age (report)
Type	file of unspecified type
Publication date	October 2002
Author(s)	• Markle Foundation • Zoë Baird • Jim Barksdale • Robert D. Atkinson • Eric Benhamou • Jerry Berman • Robert M. Bryant • Ashton B. Carter • Wesley Clark • William P. Crowell • Bryan Cunningham • Jim Dempsey • Mary DeRosa • Sidney D. Drell • Esther Dyson • Amitai Etzioni • Richard Falkenrath • David J. Farber • John Gage • John Gordon • Slade Gorton • Morton H. Halperin • Margaret A. Hamburg • John J. Hamre • Eric H. Holder • Jeff Jonas • Arnold Kanter • Tara Lemmey • Gilman Louie • John O. Marsh Jr • Judith A. Miller • James H. Morris • Craig Mundie • Jeffrey H. Smith • Abraham D. Sofaer • James B. Steinberg • Kim Taipale • Rick White • Richard Wilhelm • Fred Cate • Indiana University School of Law • Scott Charney • Microsoft Corporation • Bob Clerman • Noblis • David Gunter • Ernst & Young LLP • Drew Ladner • Pascal Metrics Inc • Bill Neugent • MITRE • Daniel B. Prieto • IBM • Clay Shirky • Peter Swire • Mel Taub
Actively and enthusiastically lobbying for more government spending on information technology...the increased expenditures and bureaucratic 'reforms' advocated are extremely beneficial to private contractors, which happen to be the people who wrote the reports.

The Markle Foundation Task Force on National Security in the Information Age was formed in 2002 by the Markle Foundation "to determine how best to make information discoverable and accessible to the right officials at the right time to enable improved decision making with regard to major security threats against our nation."

"Can you name any other private report that has been translated directly as legislation?" asked Paul Rosenzweig, senior legal research fellow at the Heritage Foundation. "It is almost impossible to think of a private organization that has had as much influence on a substantive policy as the Markle Foundation has had on the information-sharing network in the legislation."

Criticism

As a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, the Markle Foundation is supposedly prohibited from lobbying government officials. Nonetheless, it has been accussed of "actively and enthusiastically lobbying for more government spending on information technology. . . the increased expenditures and bureaucratic "reforms" advocated by the Markle Task Force are extremely beneficial to private contractors, which happen to be the very corporations and private interests represented in various official capacities by Task Force members and the Markle board of directors."

Markle Foundation Co-Chair Zoe Baird has also been accused of having a conflict of interest by sitting on the board of Convergys Corporation, which has a General Services Administration (GSA) contract for homeland security. . A 2002 New York Times article also criticized Baird.

Official narrative

According to the Markle Foundation website, the task force's guiding principles include the following:

• To enhance and augment our nation's security while protecting the established civil liberties of all citizens.
• To create a trusted information sharing environment that fosters sharing and collaboration among those with information pertaining to potential national security threats, where policies and technologies are developed in tandem, and where security is enhanced and civil liberties are preserved.
• To transform the business processes within government by applying the strengths of networked technologies while mitigating their potential harmful applications.

The Task Force has published a number of reports, which are, in reverse chronological order:

• Nation At Risk: Policy Makers Need Better Information to Protect the Country (Mar. 1, 2009)
• Mobilizing Information to Prevent Terrorism: Accelerating Development of a Trusted Information Sharing Environment (July 2006)
• Implementing a Trusted Information Sharing Environment Implementing an Information Sharing Environment (Feb. 1, 2006)
• Creating a Trusted Network for Homeland Security (Dec. 1, 2003)
• Protecting America's Freedom in the Information Age (Oct. 1, 2002)

Conclusions

From the Markle Foundation Task Force Report, October 7, 2002:[1]
"Protecting America's Freedom in the Information Age"

"The geographical boundaries of national security have changed. America has become a potential battlefield for major assaults. Yet, though our military has deeply integrated intelligence and information technology into war fighting, we have not developed a similarly sophisticated use of information and information technology to protect Americans from attacks at home.

"Information analysis is the brain of homeland security. Used well, it can guide strategic, timely moves throughout our country and around the world. Done poorly, even armies of guards and analysts will be useless. The Task Force that we had the privilege of chairing has reached some important conclusions to assist our nation in developing its information collection and analysis capabilities.

"The federal government is preparing to spend nearly $40 billion a year to protect the homeland. While this report takes no position on any pending legislation, the White House has developed the important concept of homeland security, the centerpiece of which is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). But almost no dollars have been directed to creating the capacity for the sharing of information and integrating the way it is analyzed, so that out of information collection comes enhanced knowledge. Neither the White House nor the current appropriations pipeline for the new Department of Homeland Security have yet identified the money to turn information collection into knowledge.

"With even relatively small sums of money, however, tremendous gains can be made. The new Department of Homeland Security can be the central hub for decisions about what information needs to be collected and stored-- in the government or in the private sector-- and about where the information should be analyzed and how. The DHS can help develop rules for protecting the well-established liberties of our citizens when information is collected and used. And it can support meaningful research and development efforts. This report describes how. To protect our freedoms, our task-- as in previous generations-- is to craft the national framework that will draw on this generation's and this society's greatest strengths.

"To protect freedom, America's physical safety is essential. Protecting freedom also requires securing the values that define America, including the civil liberties and rights to privacy that make our country special. Rights go together with responsibilities in preserving the public order in which our values can flourish. When Americans feel they must start trading fundamental rights in return for more security, we will know our national security policies are failing. The rule of law is our strength.

"Fortunately, to paraphrase John Paul Jones, we have not yet begun to fight. We have not taken adequate and thoughtful advantage of the laws and resources that are already available. We have barely begun to create a serious domestic intelligence capability, one that learns from the abuses of the past and uses the powers that can already be brought to hand."

Many thanks to our Patrons who cover ~2/3 of our hosting bill. Please join them if you can.

References

This page imported content from Sourcewatch on 10.10.2024.
Sourcewatch is not affiliated with Wikispooks.   Original page source here