National Performance Review

When President George W Bush came into office in January 2001, he arrived from a campaign in which he had emphasised efficiency in government, particularly through the use of information technology, but had not revealed any plans for reorganising the executive branch. Then in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the organisation of the federal government for maintaining homeland security and combating terrorism became an important consideration for both the President and the 107th Congress. Establishment of the Office of Homeland Security in October 2001 as a co-ordinating entity as an important first step, followed by the President's June 6, 2002 call for the creation of a Department of Homeland Security. This book regards reorganisation and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy and direction.

This book reviews the evolution of the modern vice presidency -- the historical events and developments that have contributed to the expansion of the office beyond its largely legislative branch character to include diverse and important executive branch duties. Each Vice President is briefly discussed along with interesting facts about them.

The President of the United States has available certain powers that may be exercised in the event that the nation is threatened by crisis, exigency, or emergency circumstances (other than natural disasters, war, or near-war situations). Such powers may be stated explicitly or implied by the Constitution, assumed by the Chief Executive to be permissible constitutionally, or inferred from or specified by statute. Through legislation, Congress has made a great many delegations of authority in this regard over the past 200 years.

When the Special Committee began its work in January 1973, there was no basic study outlining the use of emergency powers in the United States from the time of the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention to the present. To fill this scholarly gap, we asked Dr. Harold Relyea of the Library of Congress to write a chronological history of the American government in times of emergency. This is a valuable study. The great crises of American history are highlighted; so are the mechanisms of administration by which the Federal Government--all three branches--met particular emergency situations. Especially significant are the experiences and legacies of Shay's Rebellion, the Civil War, labor strikes of the late 19th century, and both World Wars. The contemporary situation is more complicated. The United States has been in a state of national emergency since March 9, 1933. In fact, there are now in effect four Presidentially proclaimed states of national emergency. In addition to the banking emergency declared by President Roosevelt, there is also the national emergency proclaimed by President Truman on December 16, 1950, during the Korean conflict, plus the states of national emergency declared by President Nixon on March 23, 1970, and August 15, 1971. Concomitantly, especially since the days of the 1933 economic emergency, it has been Congress' habit to delegate extensive emergency authority--which continues even when the emergency has passed--and not to set a terminating date. The United States thus has on the books at least 470 significant emergency powers statutes without time limitations delegating to the Executive extensive discretionary powers, ordinarily exercised by the Legislature, which affect the lives of American citizens in a host of all-encompassing ways. This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule this country without reference to normal constitutional processes. These laws make no provision for congressional oversight nor do they reserve to Congress a means for terminating the "temporary" emergencies which trigger them into use. No wonder the distinguished political scientist, the late Clinton Rossiter, entitled his post-World War II study on modern democratic states, "Constitutional Dictatorship." Emergency government has become the norm. The Special Committee has undertaken a study of the states of national emergency in which we now find ourselves, and the plethora of emergency powers, including Executive Orders and other presidential directives, classified and unclassified, that Congress and the Executive have brought into being over the years. The Special Committee has also been examining the consequences of terminating the declared states of national emergency that now prevail; to recommend what steps Congress should take to insure that the termination can be accomplished without adverse effect upon the necessary tasks of governing; and, also, to recommend ways in which the United States can meet future emergency situations with speed and effectiveness but without relinquishment of congressional oversight and control. Dr. Relyea's study provides the Special Committee and the public an informative and useful background to the present quandry in which we now find ourselves. Frank Church Charles McC. Mathias, Jr. Co-Chairmen

Under the Constitution of the United States, the President is responsible for prosecuting war and directing the armed military conflicts, including attacks upon the nation. Congress is constitutionally empowered to declare war, may otherwise authorise the involvement of American armed forces in military conflict, appropriate funds for government activities and operations, including military actions, and engages in oversight to assess the extent to which government operations have been efficiently, economically and effectively conducted using appropriated funds. Congress also has a role in prescribing intelligence and foreign policy. In order to meet these responsibilities, Congress needs to be kept aware by the executive branch leaders of all the latest developments and actions that are taking place. Consequently, when on 5 October 2001, George W Bush sent a memorandum to top diplomatic, intelligence and law enforcement officials that emphasised the restriction of information disclosures to Congress, this instalment drew fire from various quarters of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Despite the speedy removal of the restrictive policy by the President, questions surfaced pertaining to the executive branches role in times of war and military conflict in informing Congress regarding American involvement in such events. This book, which is intended to provide background information, also sheds light with a brief review explaining the executive-congressional relations in this regard for 1941-2001.

Government experts provide the first reference history of the Executive Office of the President from its establishment in 1939 through the Bush Administration. Eleven chapters analyze the concept behind the office, its organization and reorganization, and how it developed over the last 55 years in terms of the broad functions that it serves. Chapters offer a careful, dispassionate survey of the office in terms of budget, management, and personnel; economics; national security; science and technology; exigency and emergency; resources development; domestic policy planning; the office of the Vice-President; and reorganizations, presidential style, and staffing matters. This reference is enriched also by biographical profiles of important staff members in the office during the last half-century, descriptions of different agencies, a chronology, and a bibliography. Designed for political scientists, public administrators, and historians, this study is invaluable for students and scholars, policymakers and public administrators, governmental and non-governmental professionals. Government experts provide a thorough and detailed overview of the development of the Executive Office and its components, with related research references. Part I consists of nine authored chapters which explore the creation of the Executive Office, its organization and reorganization, and, within broad functional areas-including budgeting, management and personnel, economics, national security, science and technology, exigency and emergency, resources development, and domestic policy and planning-its primary agencies. Two additional chapters are devoted respectively to the White House Office and the Office of the Vice-President. Throughout these accounts, ample references provide guidance to relevant source materials and authorities. Part II includes profiles of the principal units of the Executive Office and biographical sketches of a large representative sample of the leaders of those units as well as the senior staff of the White House Office. A chronology of Executive Office organizational developments and statistical data, together with a comprehensive bibliography, further enrich this sourcebook, designed to assist the conduct of studies and research by interested readers in the fields of government and history.

The security classification regime in use within the federal executive branch traces its origins to armed forces information protection practices of the World War I era. The classification system -- designating information, according to prescribed criteria and procedures, protected in accordance with one of three levels of sensitivity, based on the amount of harm to the national security that would result from its disclosure -- attained a presidential character in 1940 when President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued the initial executive order prescribing these information security arrangements. Refinements in the creation, management, and declassification of national security information followed over the succeeding decades, and continue today. In many regards, these developments represent attempts to narrow the bases and discretion for assigning official secrecy to executive branch documents and materials. Limiting the quantity of security classified information has been thought to be desirable for a variety of important reasons: (1) promoting an informed citizenry, (2) effectuating accountability for government policies and practices, (3) realising oversight of government operations, and (4) achieving efficiency and economy in government management. Because security classification, however, was not possible for some kinds of information deemed in some quarters to be "sensitive", other kinds of designations or markings came to be applied to alert federal employees regarding its privileged or potentially harmful character. Sometimes these markings derived from statutory provisions requiring the protection of a type of information; others were administratively authorised with little detail about their use. In the current environment, still affected by the long shadow of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, several issues have arisen regarding security classified and controlled information. Volume is a concern: 8 million new classification actions in 2001 jumped to 14 million new actions in 2005, while the quantity of declassified pages dropped from 100 million in 2001 to 29 million in 2005. Expense is vexing: $4.5 billion spent on classification in 2001 increased to $7.1 billion in 2004, while declassification costs fell from $232 million in 2001 to $48.3 million in 2004, according to annual reports by the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Some agencies were recently discovered to be withdrawing archived records from public access and reclassifying them. Critically evaluating this activity, ISOO has indicated that the federal government needs to apply a more integrated approach among the classifying agencies. The force of, and authority for, information control markings, other than security classification labels, have come under congressional scrutiny, prompting concerns about their number, variety, lack of underlying managerial regimes, and effects. Among those effects, contend the Government Accountability Office and the manager of the Information Sharing Environment for the intelligence community, is the obstruction of information sharing across the federal government and with state and local governments.

In the 1990s, many governments began to use information and communications technologies, especially Internet applications, to improve the efficiency and economy of government operations and to provide their citizens, the business community, and government officials with information and services. The goal of e-government is to become entrenched in the everyday lives of these people so that they become reliant on Internet access to government. Comparative Perspectives on E-government draws upon the expertise of its contributors, who have conducted research and policy analyses related to government information policy and e-government, and who have published previously in these areas. The focus of coverage is on five countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and topical issues such as the digital divide, the balance between access and security in the aftermath of 9-11, trust in government, the citizen's perspective on e-government, and the evaluation of government Web sites. The book addresses the need to understand the phenomenon of e-government better_its development, mission and goals, success in achieving those goals, and future plans_extending an inquiry to both developed and developing countries. An additional need for detailed cross-country analyses and comparisons, introduced here, is also addressed.

. . . the editors prevail upon students, scholars, information professionals and policy makers to study the issues further in order to deepen the understanding of government information and positively affect policy decisions. - "Journal of Government Information"

. . . Relyea's book provides good source material and discussion for an important juncture in American and world history, and also a point of departure for future studies of scientific communication in relation to national security concerns in the so-called Post-Cold War Setting. -Journal of Information Ethics

. . . Relyea's book provides good source material and discussion for an important juncture in American and world history, and also a point of departure for future studies of scientific communication in relation to national security concerns in the so-called Post-Cold War Setting. -Journal of Information Ethics