Federal Agencies Seek to Overhaul Background Checks Policies Amidst Outbreak of Security Lapse Scandals

Federal Agencies Seek to Overhaul Background Checks Policies Amidst Outbreak of Security Lapse Scandals

"Federal background checks, one year after the Navy Yard shooting" by Josh Hicks
URL: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2014/09/17/federal-background-checks-one-year-after-the-navy-yard-shooting/

Following the tragic deaths of twelve at the hands of Navy / Marine Corp Subcontractor Aaron Alexis, legislators and federal agencies alike have increasingly recognized the need for change in how the U.S. government screens its employees and contractors. According to recent article "Federal background checks, one year after the Navy Yard shooting" published in the Washington Post, earlier this month, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) made the ground breaking decision to not renew its contact with USIS for background checks. As noted by the Post, USIS was formerly integrated within OPM and has handled as much as forty percent of federal background checks over the past several years - notably including Snowden and Alexis.

In addition to this critical change in how background checks are to be processed in the future, a special council appointed by President Obama made two significant recommendations: the need for more easily accessible files from state and local agencies and the need for a reduction in individuals granted security clearance. The latter seems rather non-contentious, given the extent of information the government possesses. The former is more interesting as Hicks notes in particular the problems associated with outdated data storage systems in use at the state and local levels. Although it is no revelation that state and local government often operate on outdated systems, it is interesting to see itaddressed as a potential contributing factor to issues such as murder.

Detroit's Vulnerable Financial Position forces Shutdown of Water for Overdue Residents
URL: http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21615614-what-shutting-running-water-detroiters-reveals-about-city-finances-owe-town

Detroit residents have lost access to running water. This is the case for a significant number of Detroit citizens as the financially vulnerable City of Detroit is desperate to emerge from its recent bankruptcy and rebuild. As a result of its debt restructuring, the local government is being forced to abandon its formerly lenient utilities collections policies and crackdown on residents whom have failed to sufficiently service their utilities bills. The article "Owe Town" published in the Economist this past Saturday discusses the dilemma facing the government and citizens of Detroit as bankruptcy has sapped vital resources from destitute citizens, exacerbating already tense conditions of civil unrest.

The extreme nature of cutting off vital resources to citizens without readily accessible alternatives demonstrates the extreme financial position the City of Detroit is in. The act of withholding water from citizens is not one that any individual would take lightly and was without certainty the result of much deliberation on the part of local officials. Their decision to pursue this particular policy measure in an attempt to rectify this division of the city's financials does however raise some important questions.

While it is clear that such a policy 'pay or be cut off' embodies a dramatically better incentive system than the former 'pay or don't, we will provide you with service', it is uncertain whether it was implemented in a manner that is appropriate to the current circumstances of residents. The short term effects of this policy are dramatic given the fact that these sweeping new measures have been implemented in a manner that is relatively unprecedented. In economics, two critical components to understanding what effect an action will have relate to understanding expectations and time. The less time individuals have to react to a change in an incentives the more dramatic the reaction. Combine this phenomenon with a significant reduction in income and a good/service that is vital, meaning demand is highly inelastic and you are laying the foundation for significant civil unrest.

It is uncertain whether the policy decisions pursued were without alternative. While the state of financial distress is more than clear for the City of Detroit, I am curious whether local officials might have found a better way to implement these policies and rectify its financials. Could other less essential goods or services been reduced first? How much advanced notice did the City of Detroit provide to local residents and could have it provided more? Could the measures implemented been integrated in a less extreme fashion (over time)? Can the City of Detroit provide exceptions to individuals who may be considered to be significantly at risk (families, low-income individuals)?

Refocusing Political Priorities - Roles of the West in the 21st Century

Written in response to "Mr Putin’s wake-up call" - The Economist

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21614140-western-alliance-responding-better-russian-aggression-ukraine-there-more

With the crisis in Ukraine continuing to escalate and in the midst of the upcoming NATO summit, leaders within the West and Central Europe are under intense pressure to reevaluate their stances towards Russia and towards military spending in particular. The recent article entitled “Mr Putin’s wake-up call” published within ‘the Economist’ presents an interesting perspective on the predicament the West now faces, particularly how recent events may instigate adaptations to formerly conservative foreign policy stances, especially amongst nations in Europe. The author discusses their viewpoint on current events, their significance given the historical context, and how they signal the need for changes in the long term approach of Westward aligned states towards Russia.

The author begins by updating readers on NATO's latest reactions towards Russia’s recent interventions within Ukraine. The author regularly notes the West’s emphasis on “deterrence” and “appeasement” emphasizing what they perceive to be a hesitant and complacent stance taken by the West. In particular, the article implies how NATO has shirked some of its previous statements noting “Article 5: an attack on one is an attack on all”. The author emphasizes the hypocrisy of choosing to not comply with Poland’s request for 10,000 troops, despite escalating provocations on the part of Russia.

I enjoyed the author’s perspective on the West’s approach to foreign policy, particularly how Europe’s national interest / political focus has centered on domestic issues to a greater extent while downsizing its emphasis on military expenditures. The case the author makes within the article is quite compelling as the article frames their statements in a manner that is reminiscent of the familiar critiques of European appeasement preceding World War II.