FEDERAL BUREAUCRACIES PROMOTE WELFARE AND SECURITY355Federal Agencies Provide for National SecurityOne of the remarkable features of American federalism is that the most vitalagencies for providing security for the American people (namely, the police) arelocated in state and local governments. But some agencies vital to maintainingnational security are located in the national government, and they can be groupedinto two categories: (1) agencies to confront threats to internal national securityand (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 SecurityThe task of maintaining domestic securitychanged dramatically after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Thecreation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2002 signaled thehigh priority that domestic security would now have. The orientation of domes-tic agencies also shifted as agencies geared up to prevent terrorism, a task thatdiffered greatly from their former charge of investigating crime. With this shift inresponsibility came broad new powers, many of them controversial—including thepower to detain terrorist suspects and to engage in extensive domestic intelligence-gathering about possible terrorists. Since its creation, the DHS has also assumed alarge role in domestic security, bringing under its umbrella such responsibilities asborder 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 bureaucraticcultures, now part of a single operation, quickly became embroiled in turfbattles with one another and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI, whichremained in the Justice Department) as the two departments attempted to sort outtheir respective responsibilities. These early problems signaled deeper challengesthat the DHS has continued to face. The DHS has struggled to establish itself as astrong, institutionally coherent presence capable of coordinating government ac-tion. Part of the problem is that the DHS portfolio of responsibilities is both largeand vague. In addition, the agency failed to establish strong links with state and