This week Rudy Giuliani rolled out another of his 12 Commitments
— this one to ensure preparedness for terrorist attacks and
natural disasters. Giuliani is promising not to repeat the errors
of Katrina and to develop a better funded and coordinated and more
decentralized Department of Homeland Security. His chief advisor on
this issue is Louis Freeh, who served under Giuliani as an
Assistant U.S. Attorney and then later as FBI Director. He talked
about disaster preparedness as well as the Justice Department and
his past experience with Giuliani.
How is Giuliani’s approach to disaster preparedness better
than the current one?
Freeh says that “from an operational point of view” the biggest
change may to be create “accountability centers” in different
regions of the country where state and local authorities who
ultimately will deal with a crisis will be responsible for disaster
planning. He notes that when the Department of Homeland Security
was founded “many people resisted as did the President” because of
the logistical challenges of combining 22 agencies into one
operation. He remarks that if such a plan were proposed in the
private sector a Board of Directors would likely reject is as
“dysfunctional.” According to Freeh, devolving responsibility to
regional centers and “integrating” planning with first responders
are keys to ensuring improved responses to the next disaster.
How would Giuliani prevent boondoggle spending under the
guise of disaster relief?
Freeh contends that by setting up regional centers with “plans
to be carried out by not just one constituency,” local earmarking
by particular representatives can be reduced. He notes that you
will always “get requests” from localities but the idea is to set
up a rational “funding mechanism.”
What about critics of Giuliani’s handling of
9/11?
Freeh says that it is such an emotional issue and that if a
father lost a son he has every right to be heard, for example,
about radios that didn’t work. Nevertheless, Freeh says that
Giuliani, though he was “not head of NORAD, or President or head of
the CIA,” should nonetheless get full credit because New York City
was “as prepared as any city for the disaster of uncontemplated
horror.” He notes that when he was at the FBI a conscious effort
was made to steer high security events like the 60th Anniversary of
the UN to New York because of “their overall all preparedness and
how they executed it.”
Why is disaster preparedness an important consideration for
voters?
Freeh argues that disaster preparedness need to be “kept high on
the list” of policy issues. Pointing to the 9/11 attacks, Katrina,
and the recent arrest of suspected terrorists in Germany, he
contends that it is important to have “an ongoing mindset of
preparedness” and not simply to react to each episode.
What assurance would we have that disaster preparedness
would be more competently managed in a Giuliani
administration?
Freeh says Giuliani is well known for his “very hands on
management.” The country, he says, “wouldn’t see part-time
leadership” and the deputies whom he’d task “would be superb,
accountable and competent.” He pointedly notes that Giuliani
“wouldn’t be praising the head of FEMA when he did a very bad job.”
He says that Giuliani would not be offering “just symbolic
leadership — which is needed — but would be holding Compstat type
meetings.”
Why haven’t we secured our borders?
Freeh begins by saying that we cannot be taken “credibly” on
disaster prevention and preparedness if we cannot secure the
borders. He notes that agencies in the past rightfully complained
about a lack of resources. He also says that with adequate funding
for a “physical and technology” fence and a process to definitively
define “who is here,” we can in fact secure the borders. He also
identifies “will” and “accountability” as previously missing but
which, he contends, Giuliani will bring to immigration reform. Not
surprisingly, he analogizes to Giuliani’s success in fighting crime
in New York. Freeh recalls that in New York “there was a problem
for every solution” — meaning judges, prosecutors, police and
politicians pointed fingers at one another rather than solve the
crime problem. Giuliani “had a great idea. He said, ‘You’re the
captain of this precinct. You are responsible and come up with a
plan. You are accountable. If you don’t do your job you are a fine
public servant but we’ll replace you.’”
As a prosecutor for Giuliani in the Southern District of
New York, what did Freeh learn about Giuliani?
Freeh says ruefully that the prosecutors in that office were
“fairly confident” and “didn’t appreciate” someone who would come
in and “tell them how to do their jobs and micromanage them,” but
that Giuliani was “someone to set priorities and represent us in
the community.” He jokes that Giuliani was accused of “taking a
demotion” when he left the number three job in the Justice
Department, but that the prosecutors didn’t view it that way. He
says simply that Giuliani was a “very, very good lawyer” and
credits him with providing “good ideas and good counsel” on the
famous Mafia Pizza Connection case which Freeh tried for 19 months.
Freeh says, “I was just very impressed with his leadership.”
What about accusations that Giuliani grandstanded with the
press?
Freeh says firmly that Giuliani is “not someone who took credit
for what others did.” He says that at press conferences Giuliani
would have all the affected agencies represented “even if they
didn’t really contribute” and was effective in getting the office’s
message out to the public.
What type of Attorney General would Giuliani
appoint?
Pointing to Griffin Bell, Jimmy Carter’s Attorney General, Freeh
argues there is nothing wrong with appointing a friend but what is
important is finding “”an independent, smart, competent lawyer
who’s not afraid to tell the President he’s wrong and when
appropriate say, ‘I can’t serve any longer.’”
