Skip to main content

And what about the fusion center in Delaware?

Unlike the Missouri Information Anaylysis Center, the Delaware fusion center (Delaware Information Analysis Center) flies mostly below the public radar. Since opening in late 2005, news stories about DIAC have been sparse, partly because investigative reporting in the First State is a non sequiteur, and partly because Captain William Harris (who oversees the center) is a bright guy who understands that it is in his best interest to operate quietly.

Harris did make one interesting comment in the only News Journal story to appear on DIAC, back in May 2007:

The facility, known as the DIAC, opened in December 2005 with help from a $925,000 grant from the federal Department of Homeland Security to buy high-powered computers, software and other equipment. It is overseen by Delaware State Police Capt. Bill Harris, who asked that its exact location, somewhere between Dover and Smyrna, not be disclosed....

"The fusion process is to take law enforcement information and other information -- it could be from the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Transportation, the private sector -- and fuse it together to look for anomalies and push information out to our stakeholders in Delaware who have both a right and a need to know," Harris said....

Access to those other data sources is limited only by cost and privacy laws, Harris said.

"I don't want to say it's unlimited, but the ceiling is very high," he said. "When we have the money, we'll start going to those other agencies and say, 'Are you willing to share that database and what would it cost?' "


An ACLU study picked up this comment, noting that

Rather than being constrained by the law regarding what they can collect, Capt. Harris appeared to feel constrained only by resources.


While the idea that fusion centers are, in effect, purchasing databases from other agencies is disquieting, I have to say in all honesty that I think the ACLU here reads more into Harris's comment than is there. I've met Captain Harris, sat in several meetings with him, and heard him present to his peers. He is a very intense guy, very focused on his mission, but in virtually every conversation I've heard him express the idea that whatever his center does has to be done within the law.

OK that--but there's still a problem.

I may trust Bill Harris, but I shouldn't have to. By that I mean that civil liberties protections restricting what fusion centers can do need to be thoroughly spelled out by law and enforced by independent oversight, rather than dependent on the quality of the individual who runs them.

As there is in some states, Delaware needs laws that allow me to find out what information the fusion center has developed on me, and to challenge the accuracy or the need for that information.

We also need accoutability regarding the agencies with whom the DIAC shares its information.

As I noted in a previous post, the Missouri Information Analysis Center has the Missouri Department of Revenue as one of it major clients. Does Delaware also hand over its info to tax collectors? Good question--no answer available.

We know from the Delaware State Police website that DIAC provides information to private sector entities:

In 2007, the Delaware Information and Analysis Center (DIAC) matured greatly as Delaware's State Fusion Center. In only its second full year as Delaware's fusion center, DIAC has become an integral part of Delaware's criminal intelligence, criminal investigation and information sharing mission. The DIAC has enhanced its main focus on terrorism prevention and moved towards an "all crimes, all hazards" concept. The DIAC gathers information from law enforcement, other public and governmental entities, and the private sector, fuses the information together and puts it back out for use by the various decision makers and leaders in Delaware who have the need and right to know. Armed with credible intelligence and information provided by the DIAC, Delaware's leaders in government, law enforcement, emergency services and the private sector are better able coordinate and protect the citizens, property, and business interests of all Delawareans.


What private sector entities, what kind of information, at what cost, and with what restrictions on that information's use?

There's also the question of DIAC's location. The Missouri center may produce controversial reports, but at least it has its own website that includes full contact information--including telephone numbers and a street address. Captain Harris's intent to avoid revealing the location of DIAC is understandable but unacceptable in a free society.

Likewise, DIAC needs something else it is lacking: a clearly identifiable line in the State budget, so that we can see exactly what we're spending.

In short, after being given a free pass for the first three years of its operation, DIAC needs a little public attention.

Comments

It won't truly have success, I suppose this way.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...