FIGURE 11.3
Iron Triangles
SOURCE: Reprinted from Theodore J. Lowi,
Incomplete Conquest: Governing America
, 2nd ed. (New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, 1981), 139.
American Legion;
Veterans of Foreign Wars
National Rivers & Harbors Congress;
Mississippi Valley Association
National Cotton Council;
National Association of Wheat Growers
Department
of Veterans
Affairs
House
Veterans’
Affairs
Committee
Senate Environment
and Public Works
Committee
Army Corps
of Engineers
Farm
Service
Agency
House
Agriculture
Committee
Program or
Agency
Special
Congressional
Access Point
Group
Support
FEDERAL BUREAUCRACIES PROMOTE WELFARE AND SECURITY
355
Federal Agencies Provide for National Security
One of the remarkable features of American federalism is that the most vital
agencies for providing security for the American people (namely, the police) are
located in state and local governments. But some agencies vital to maintaining
national security are located in the national government, and they can be grouped
into two categories: (1) agencies to confront threats to internal national security
and (2) agencies to defend American security from external threats. The depart-
ments of greatest influence in these two areas are Homeland Security, Justice,
Defense, and State.
Agencies for Internal Security
The task of maintaining domestic security
changed dramatically after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The
creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2002 signaled the
high priority that domestic security would now have. The orientation of domes-
tic agencies also shifted as agencies geared up to prevent terrorism, a task that
differed greatly from their former charge of investigating crime. With this shift in
responsibility came broad new powers, many of them controversial—including the
power to detain terrorist suspects and to engage in extensive domestic intelligence-
gathering about possible terrorists. Since its creation, the DHS has also assumed a
large role in domestic security, bringing under its umbrella such responsibilities as
border safety and security (including immigration and customs); emergency pre-
paredness; science-related concerns pertaining in particular to chemical, biological,
and nuclear threats; and information and intelligence analysis and assessment.
Growing pains were evident in the DHS’s first years. Different bureaucratic
cultures, now part of a single operation, quickly became embroiled in turf
battles with one another and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI, which
remained in the Justice Department) as the two departments attempted to sort out
their respective responsibilities. These early problems signaled deeper challenges
that the DHS has continued to face. The DHS has struggled to establish itself as a
strong, institutionally coherent presence capable of coordinating government ac-
tion. Part of the problem is that the DHS portfolio of responsibilities is both large
and vague. In addition, the agency failed to establish strong links with state and
local agencies whose activities remain critical to its on-the-ground capabilities.
