Lathaniel Wilcoxmany Intelligence Members Feel That The Us Intellige ✓ Solved

Lathaniel wilcox Many Intelligence Members feel that the U.S. intelligence oversight has been intrusive, meddling, short-sighted, and counterproductive; has involved an abundance of micromanagement; and has served to pull the Intelligence Community (IC) into the political battleground of partisan politics from which it had previously been immune (Van Wagenen, 2007). Others are inclined to view Congressional oversight as being, on balance and after a somewhat rocky start in the late 1970s, a decided plus for the Community by providing loci for Congressional advocacy, support for intelligence, providing a rigorous review and questioning of intelligence activities and budgets (Van Wagenen, 2007).

Regardless of which side one may favor, congressional oversight was put in place to manage the IC by “Controlling Resources, Passage of new legislation and the Release of information to the public†(Week 7, 2016). The issues facing Congress when providing U.S. intelligence oversight of many IC programs while at the same time being a consumer/user and controlling the budget for strategic intelligence analysis and production, is no different than the democratic or Republican Party controlling the house or senate. In most cases the final decisions/laws passed will be in the best interest of that party and in this case congress. Of the three mechanisms used by congress to manage the IC, only one does not provide sufficient oversight which benefits congress and the IC or the U.S. government.

The release of information to the public has many negative factors that hinder the overall process. 1.) Most information may spook the public 2.) By the time the information gets released, it has been altered or misconstrued 3.) There are terrorist living among the public. These examples are some of the reasons that make congressional oversight hard for some members of the IC to support. There must be a strategic and precise way in-which the information shared with the public gets released. Lathaniel Van Wagenen, James S.

A Review of Congressional Oversight, Critics and Defenders. April 14, 2007. WEEK 7: INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT AND ETHICS, Intelligence and Homeland Security; HLSS320 D003 Sum 16: Lessons. October 18, 2016. Case Study 2 Florida Department of Management Services Part One By the early 1990s, the Florida Department of Management Service (DMS) had built up a large information systems network that served state government agencies in 10 regional sites and connected these to the data center in Tallahassee.

The network was based on the use of the proprietary Systems Network Architecture (SNA) from IBM and a mainframe at the data center that housed most of the applications. Although relatively happy with the SNA operation, DMS saw a need to expand applications and services by providing TCP/IP capability and Internet access. The goal was met in a remarkably short time. Over the course of 30 months, DMS built a statewide TCP/IP network, began offering Internet services to local and state agencies, and created a suite of Internet applications that will ultimately move personnel, accounting, and billing systems online [ JOHN96 ]. To complete the success story, DMS managed to accomplish all that while saving the state of Floridamore than million.

The breakdown is shown in Table II.1 . The aim of this upgrade was to exploit the Internet. Internet connectivity, together with key Internet applications such as the Web, could make it easier for agencies across the state to communicate with each other, with suppliers, and with users, thereby improving employee productivity. The IP Infrastructure The first step was to build an IP infrastructure. The then-current configuration, based on SNA, made heavy use oftelephone company (telco)–supplied equipment and services.

DMS considered the possibility of outsourcing the IP capability but rejected this for the following reasons: 1. None of the telcos had a router-based service at that time, which meant DMS would have to wait for the carrier to build its own network. 2. DMS wanted to select the routers. The telcos wouldn’t purchase the products picked by DMS because they did not fit in with their plans.

Finally, a regulatory prohibition against colocation meant that user-owned equipment couldn’t be installed at telco central offices. 3. The existing SNA network could easily be adapted to TCP/IP. Table II.1 DMS Cost Breakdown What Was Spent Personnel 0,000 Application development 0,000 Software (including Web software, databases, and development tools) 0,000 Hardware (servers, routers, telco services) ,525,000 Maintenance 0,000 TOTAL