If you speak to any of the career staff serving at the DHS, particularly those who have been there from the department’s beginning, they’ll tell you that the feeling of just getting things started with all of its fumbling and confusion is back, but this time without the “espirit de corps” and camaraderie that it had at the beginning, in the immediate years post 9/11.  People are now understandably fatigued, and in some cases cynical. I can’t say I blame them. Add these conditions to a lack of any meaningful pay raises, sequestration, poor facilities and perpetual demonization of federal employees by politicians, and it’s accurate to say they’ve been treated like crap.

Of all the places in the federal government that cry out for leadership, nowhere but DHS is the need greater. For all of the confusion and Keystone Cops nature of the Obama Administration’s recent handling of Syria, the NSA leaks, Russia, and its health care efforts, it seems to be amazingly disengaged when it comes to DHS.

Companies that once had fairly significant business lines in homeland security have either shut them down or dramatically cut them back because the business was not there to justify them.

Since Janet Napolitano announced her resignation on July 12 and officially departed on September 13, the White House has had two-plus months to recruit someone to take her job. There has been lots of talk and whispering about prospective candidates, but if you can’t find anyone, and there is no announcement or dialogue that discusses the process to address the department’s lingering leadership vacancies, it’s not surprising if that “does anyone care anymore?” feeling sets in.

I’m going to point to three reasons why the White House does not seem to be in any rush to fill DHS positions and why they seem to indirectly foster this lingering feeling of not caring for the department:

1. Homeland security is not the issue it once was. For all intents and purposes, the issues (short of immigration reform) are hardly front burner news stories. While homeland security was an issue in the 2004 presidential race and was a bit in 2008, it did not register at all in the 2012 battle between the president and Mitt Romney. You can also see this in corporate interests as well. Companies that once had fairly significant business lines in homeland security have either shut them down or dramatically cut them back because the business was not there to justify them.
2. Stability at FEMA and TSA. While they are the easiest of red-headed stepchildren to pick on by late night comedians, the two most recognizable components of DHS have not been in the news as much as they once were. In fact, given the wonderfully quiet hurricane season we’ve had and the fact there haven’t been any “You Tube-ible,” “Don’t touch my junk episodes” to further fan the flames of aggravated travelers, the two components most often reviled by the public have been practically out of sight, out of mind. You can credit Mother Nature as well as better investments and training at both agencies, but credit is also due to stable leadership by Craig Fugate and John Pistole, respectively. The fact both of these guys are still at the helm of their respective jobs five years into the administration provides a sense of calm and leadership in a place where calm and leadership are an endangered species.
3. They’ll wait till there is a crisis to pay attention. Chicago Mayor and former Obama White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel is remembered for many things, but his quote, “Never let a good crisis go to waste” is probably an apt descriptor for our times. Rather than actually do the jobs were supposed to do, we wait until the last minute to do them. Instead of putting that ounce of prevention into place, we’d rather wait until the house is on fire before we see what might be burning on the stove that has set the house on fire. The same seems to be true of Washington. The operational culture has become more set on campaigning than governing. It’s having the issue to raise money for, rather than solve the issue in the first place as you were elected to do. As such, not until the house is truly on fire do we connect the hoses to the fire hydrants to put the blaze out. That is no way to protect anyone, or their property or way of life, but it is becoming a cultural and operational norm for the administration and certainly the U.S. Congress.

While I have absolute confidence in Rand Beers to do the job of acting secretary and keep the department on track until someone is named, my fear is that it will require an epic event – a Katrina, a BP oil spill or larger Fort Hood/Navy Yard tragedy to drive the administration to the point where they say, “You know we really ought to fill that job…”

Management by crisis is not any way to lead or manage anything, but if you continually operate that way, don’t be surprised at the end results.

For the life of me, I cannot begin to think the American public would find it acceptable in an ever more complex and risky world to have an Acting Secretary of State lead our foreign affairs in disintegrating diplomatic environments; an Acting Secretary of Defense leading our military forces during a time of war; or an Acting Secretary of the Treasury leading our economy in less than stable fiscal environments. Someone with the full faith and confidence of the president, fully vetted and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, needs to be in place for those jobs – why should it not be so at DHS?

Until they do that, you have to ask yourself: “Does anyone care anymore?”