cannabisnews.com: Overhaul Likely To Shrink FBI Drug War Role





Overhaul Likely To Shrink FBI Drug War Role
Posted by FoM on December 10, 2001 at 07:49:55 PT
By Naftali Bendavid, Washington Bureau
Source: Chicago Tribune 
As the FBI, the nation's premier crime-fighting force, undergoes a historic reorientation from crime-solving to the war on terrorism, many are asking what will happen to the previous great national mission: the war on drugs.Nearly one-quarter of the FBI's $3.4 billion budget, and thousands of its agents, is dedicated to helping fight drug trafficking. FBI Director Robert Mueller is scheduled to announce a complete overhaul of the bureau early next year, and most observers say it is likely to include a far smaller role for FBI agents in fighting drugs. Mueller announced a restructuring of bureau management last week.
That means the burden will fall on state and local police departments, which are already overtaxed, and the Drug Enforcement Administration, which would need an infusion of dollars to take up the slack."I don't know what they are going to do, but they are going to have to articulate something," said Nicholas Gess, a former Clinton administration Justice Department official. "Governors and mayors will not let them get away with just transferring it to them. When the crime rate goes up, it's the mayor who gets voted out."Mueller has acknowledged that he cannot simply declare the FBI is no longer in the drug-fighting business because its 11,000 agents are needed to fight terrorism."I'm sensitive to the fact that when you don't do something, you have to fill that gap," Mueller said last week. "Whenever we make a decision as to taking something away from one area, we have to know who will fill the void, and whether they are capable and willing to fill the void."But it is unclear how the gap will be filled, not only regarding drug crimes but other investigations as well. From bank robbery to gun offenses to pornography, police who depend heavily on the bureau to help with challenging crimes worry about what will happen when the FBI announces its reorganization."I'm concerned about bank robbery," said Bill Berger, North Miami Beach police chief. "It's not a local crime. It tends to be individuals who go from state to state and may have a political agenda. Unfortunately, police departments don't communicate that well among each other. That is the one crime that concerns me." Money question rises again Lawmakers may find themselves facing a difficult decision: Whether to spend much more money on law enforcement, despite the sputtering economy and the re-emergence of budget deficits, or to allow investigation of some crimes to fall by the wayside."The obvious response from the FBI is, `Take your pick. Do you want us to increase the size of our force to fight terrorism, or will you run us ragged with everything you can dream up? And if you pick the second, we need money,'" said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.Lee Colwell, a former associate director of the FBI, agreed."I don't see any clear, clean choices," he said. "It's a reordering of priorities based on the threat now. It's not an easy policy issue, and there are no easy choices. But I don't think anyone would dispute that the threat of terrorism has provided a mandate to do something."Last week Mueller announced Phase 1 of the bureau's reorganization, one that dealt mostly with changes at headquarters. Phase 2, expected early next year, is likely to prove far more controversial.The shift Mueller is contemplating is a historic one. The FBI was not always in the business of drug investigations; its original mission was complex, interstate crimes that would overwhelm city police forces--Mafia racketeering, city hall corruption, white-collar fraud.But when President Ronald Reagan launched his war on drugs 20 years ago, he conscripted the FBI into the crusade, over the protest of many agents. And Congress for two decades has sought to prove its tough-on-crime credentials by making more and more offenses into federal crimes and assigning them to the FBI--carjacking and gun crimes for example.In essence, Mueller's reorganization not only will be an overhaul of his agency, but it will amount to a realignment of American law enforcement. After two decades of trying to persuade federal agents to handle local crimes and work with city police, the FBI suddenly will be pulling back.Justice Department leaders have not specified which investigations the FBI will abandon. But clearly they will be related to offenses that do not require the bureau's sophistication and national reach."The department will not be all things to all people," Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft told his staff last month. "We cannot do everything we once did, because lives now depend on us doing a few things very well. We must strive to maximize our potential even as we recognize our limitations."While some are worried, others welcome this change, saying it never made sense for the FBI to handle local crimes."In terms of violent crime, the federal role was always improper," said Eric Sterling, president of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation."If the FBI is not involved, I don't see that this is in any way going to be catastrophic to the investigations."Some police chiefs, meanwhile, insist they have improved their ability to handle drug cases. Others say it is redundant for the DEA and FBI to target drugs."I in fact recommended to Director Mueller that the FBI get out of the drug business," said Robert Olson, police chief of Minneapolis.In any case the FBI would not drop all drug cases. Its agents likely would step in on complex cases involving organized crime, powerful gangs or international cartels.But it appears inescapable that the FBI will pull important resources out of what was until Sept. 11 the nation's top law-enforcement priority.The reorientation presents other dangers as well. Several agents warned that as the FBI pulls out of local cases, it risks damaging a federal-local partnership that has been nurtured over the years."There is a law-enforcement fabric that has been woven over a long period of time of how we work with state and local offices," said Nancy Savage, an FBI agent in Eugene, Ore., who heads the FBI Agents Association. "It's woven based on mutual assistance. We don't want it to be broken. We would be less effective in every respect, including terrorism." An important link  Even the actions that virtually everyone agrees the FBI must take, such as pulling out of investigating some simpler crimes, will not be easy."Even when it comes to violent crime, the FBI performs a unique function because they have nationwide jurisdiction," said Gess, a senior consultant with Bingham Consulting Group. "It's all very well and good to say a police officer in New York can call a police officer in Los Angeles, but who do you call? There is no good system."Some fear that other priorities inevitably will be lost. Even if the FBI keeps its mandate to investigate such complex matters such as antitrust cases, environmental offenses and civil rights violations, these crimes may not get the attention they deserve."Some will be tempted to use this as an excuse to get the FBI out of those things that from a political perspective they don't want to have examined, such as civil rights and environmental matters," said Eric Holder, the No. 2 official in the Clinton Justice Department. "I would hope that would not happen."Note: Carrying burden worries local law enforcement.Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)Author: Naftali Bendavid, Washington BureauPublished: December 10, 2001Copyright: 2001 Chicago Tribune CompanyContact: ctc-TribLetter Tribune.comWebsite: http://www.chicagotribune.com/Related Articles:CannabisNews Articles - FBIhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/FBI.shtmlFBI Focus on Terrorism Sidelines Other Categories http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11492.shtmlFBI Rushes To Remake Its Mission http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11324.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #3 posted by dddd on December 10, 2001 at 20:58:36 PT
Fake "gap",,, Fabricated "burden"
"I'm sensitive to the fact that when you don't do something, you have to fill that gap," Mueller said last week. "Whenever we make a
      decision as to taking something away from one area, we have to know who will fill the void, and whether they are capable and willing
      to fill the void.""That means the burden will fall on state and local police departments, which are already overtaxed,
      and the Drug Enforcement Administration, which would need an infusion of dollars to take up the slack."...What a pile of CRAP!....Suggesting that there is somehow not enough funding,or "dollars" for the drug war. ...Well,maybe we could find some money being spent elsewhere to "take up the slack"..Maybe they could spare a billion or so from the defense budget,or,,how bout aid to Isreal? Israel has cost the U.S. taxpayers $250 billion. That's $1,000 for every American living today, or $50,000 for every Jewish man, woman and child living in Israel today.This article is full of false assumptions,and obscured lies...It is another good example of federally spun propaganda,that is important in maintaining the alliegance of the brainwashed flock.......dddd
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on December 10, 2001 at 11:26:38 PT
FBI get out of the drug war!
>>Mueller has acknowledged that he cannot simply declare the FBI is no longer in the drug-fighting business because its 11,000 agents are needed to fight terrorism.  Why not? Who writes these unwritten rules, anyway? Like the rule that says the parts of California that don't agree with Prop 215 have the right to ignore it at their will?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Dark Star on December 10, 2001 at 10:25:24 PT
Pros and Cons
The ulitimate ramifications of this development are unclear. FBI abuses are well documented, but DEA has not inspired confidence. With an emphasis on a greater role for local law enforcement, the potential for corruption increases exponentially. There is only one reasonable solution: Legalize drugs, medicalize the issue, and take the profit out of it for organized crime, cartels, etc.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment