Get PDF 9-11-01 Broken Promises And Stolen Money

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online 9-11-01 Broken Promises And Stolen Money file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with 9-11-01 Broken Promises And Stolen Money book. Happy reading 9-11-01 Broken Promises And Stolen Money Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF 9-11-01 Broken Promises And Stolen Money at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF 9-11-01 Broken Promises And Stolen Money Pocket Guide.
Charles Perrow
Contents:
  1. Queens Man Sentenced to Prison; Claimed Fake Son Died on 9/11 - The New York Times
  2. Crisis Communication: Lessons from 9/11
  3. Get on the Scene
  4. Mystery of the lost art and records that vanished in 9/11 attacks

The Rev. He said he formed the charity to fulfill "our sacred oath" to build the garden. Harris said he sees his charity's work as a success even if there is no garden at the site. The flag, which contains the name of every person killed on Sept. The charities were identified using data maintained by Guidestar, a private database of nonprofits that the IRS recommends. The quilt that isn't Kevin Held was earning a living as a self-employed handyman in Peoria, Ariz. In a July interview, Held said he hoped to finish the quilt in a few months.

But he changed his mind a few weeks after the AP began asking questions, abruptly shutting the project because of "tough economic times.

Queens Man Sentenced to Prison; Claimed Fake Son Died on 9/11 - The New York Times

But he's spent a lot in doing so. He rarely traveled without his two Alaskan Malamute dogs, one at pounds and the other pounds. Held acknowledges he struggled managing the charity's finances, but he said he didn't live off the nonprofit. If I did, then crucify me. I never said I was a professional at this. Still, he's come a long way since serving a few days in a Tampa jail in for misdemeanor theft and battery. The charity's finances surprised the Rev. Jude Duffy, identified in the charity's tax filings as board chairman. Duffy, who lives in St. Lawrence Friary in Beacon, N.

Held responded that he was insulted by the suggestion and assured Duffy that he would finish the quilt project. I don't know what that is. But I would call it a scam or a clever scheme. For years, he claimed he had come up with the idea for a student-led national tribute after hearing that Dominique Deal, a family friend's high school daughter, crafted her own memorial on a bed sheet. He insists he has accounted for every dime spent by the charity, even if he can't justify all the expenses.

The AP review found other issues as well.

The charity's creator, the Rev. The New York Attorney General's office said it didn't receive the required filings from the charity after The IRS withdrew the charity's tax-exempt status in June for failing to file annual returns. Keyes, an Assemblies of God minister, acknowledged that the nonprofit did not file taxes for all years. Keyes has not responded to AP's requests to explain how the money raised was spent; some of the information he did provide conflicted with the return.

For example, Keyes said in the initial interview that he never received a salary from his charity. A large amount of the charity's money went to Keyes' church. Keyes said he set up a branch of his charity on the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina devastated the area in , putting his brother-in-law, Mark Jones, in charge. Ridge apparently agreed with Clarke that the last thing needed was the reorganization involved in creating a new department.

Executive order coordination was the option that President Bush maintained without much enthusiasm from October until July of This lack of enthusiasm was important; it opened the door to other interests. Laws are passed by Congress, so this gives Congress more power than under the first option, and thus reduces that of the president. This location gives the president considerable authority, but it is shared with Congress, which writes the laws governing it.

Crisis Communication: Lessons from 9/11

The reasoning of the Commission was that oversight responsibilities for combating terrorism presently lay in the hands of at least eleven full committees in the Senate, plus numerous subcommittees, and fourteen full committees in the House, with all their subcommittees, eighty-eight in all, each carefully guarding its turf. The homeland security effort had to be centralized, the committee and almost everyone else argued. This would mean new laws, and Congress would pass them, giving it influence. But its influence would not be scattered over eighty-eight committees and subcommittees.

The key to the Gilmore Commission plan was that it recommended a reorganization of Congress itself to centralize control over homeland security matters by having a powerful oversight committee in each congressional house. These could override the authority of the eighty-eight parochial and fragmented committees. This would mean that the committees controlling, say, the Coast Guard or border control, could see their authority reduced. This recommendation never succeeded. Individual committee and subcommittee chairs — which are where the power lies — were not likely to support this reduction in their power.

We have to be careful here. I will make much of congressional resistance to giving up committee and subcommittee power. But these committees are closest to the public, and are expected to be responsive to their constituencies. They are responsible for the fact that our federal system is very decentralized or fragmented, depending upon whose ox is being gored. The committees overseeing, say, border controls and immigration, or the Coast Guard, would be able to cry out that the agencies they oversee are underfunded, or the congressional committee could publicize the failures of the FBI or the CIA to coordinate with the agency the committee oversaw the agency itself could not , investigate charges of torture as members of a military affairs committee, or charges of waste in Pentagon contracts, and so on.

The agency being examined is not likely to bring such matters to the attention of the committee or the White House. There is a congressional watch-dog function, as well as funding pork-barrel projects. If a supercommittee was established, it is not clear that the charges of failures to coordinate, or torture charges, or underfunding charges, would surface; any actions a regular committee might want to take could easily be overridden by the supercommittee.

Get on the Scene

The committee or supercommittee members might fail in quite other ways. They easily put narrow local interests over those of the nation, or are so indebted to large campaign donors as to fail to represent all segments of their constituency. But this is quite another matter. These narrow interests would be present in the two large oversight committees the Gilmore Commission recommended, or, if there were no supercommittee, in the eighty-eight committees.

They reflect a problem with our form of government that goes beyond those of restructuring agencies. It was a third option that prevailed; congressional control of a new department with budgetary, personnel, and mission control by Congress. It was based upon the Hart-Rudman Commission findings of It preserved much of congressional committee power. Gary Hart had been a Colorado Senator, a democrat, and Warren Rudman had been a republican Senator from New Hampshire, so the interests of Congress were likely to be well considered. A new cabinet-level department would be created.

Choose your Channels Carefully

The power of the president would consist of recommending to the Senate a nominee to be the secretary of the department, and exercising the normal amount of control the president has over any cabinet head. While considerable, of course, presidential power would be less than in the first or the second option. Congress is the clear winner.

Political scientist Donald F. Kettl put it as follows, referring to Tom Ridge:. What the members of Congress left unsaid was that if Ridge remained a presidential appointee without congressional confirmation, they would have little control over his operations. Many members of Congress saw this as one of the biggest new initiatives in decades, and they wanted to ensure that they could control its direction.

Bush turned them down, saying through a spokesman that the president did not need congressional action to do what was required. Many agencies would be moved from their previous department locations to the new department, but the agencies would still be under the supervision of Congress. Thus, the secretary of DHS would not have the power to use presidential authority to establish new units e.

source site

Mystery of the lost art and records that vanished in 9/11 attacks

All the congressional committees and sub-committees would still have considerable say over agency budgets and line authority; no supercommittees would override them. Nevertheless, even under this option, a high degree of conflict within Congress was projected as the new department was considered.

If the president opposed the Lieberman bill, why did he give in after a few months and propose his own bill, very similar except that it included even more agencies than the Lieberman bill had? A colleague of mine at the Stanford Law School, Laura Donohue, points out that in many ways Congress did not achieved new control, but only maintained control over existing agency functions, and does not control many new initiatives. The executive office has substantial resources.