Chairman Cox Statement:
Subcommittee on Infrastructure
and Border Security and the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Science
Research & Development
Today, the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Infrastructure and Border
Security and the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Science, and Research
and Development held a joint hearing to examine the relationship
between the Department of Homeland Security and the critical infrastructure
sectors. Chairman Christopher Cox (R-CA) made the following statement:
“The Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection
Directorate (IAIP) gets a lot of attention because it is truly
the nerve center of the new Department of Homeland Security.
IAIP is at the heart of DHS’ core mission to prevent terrorism
and protect the infrastructure that is vital to the security
and economic well-being of our Nation.
“IAIP is tasked with integrating information
from various public and private sources to form a comprehensive
of the terrorist threats we face, and to map this assessment
the vulnerabilities of our critical infrastructure to produce
a prioritized and risk-based plan for securing our homeland.
This is not a one-time task, but a continuous responsibility,
in a dynamic and constantly changing environment.
“We have no choice but to continue to press IAIP to build
the analytic capabilities necessary to carry out its mandate
under the Homeland Security Act. Risk-based assessments produced
by IAIP must guide both the Department’s overall homeland
security strategy and the allocation of resources to priority
“Eighty-five percent of our critical infrastructure is
owned by the private sector, and it is appropriate that the private
sector take a lead role in protecting these assets, with assistance – including
the provision of actionable threat-based information – and
oversight by the Federal government.
“One key manifestation of the public-private partnership
envisioned by the Homeland Security Act is the continued operation
of – and in some cases, the creation of new – Information
Sharing and Analysis Centers (ISAC) for critical infrastructure
sectors. I wish to examine how the ISAC model has worked so far
and whether we need to formalize and fund the ISAC process legislatively.
we continue to work with DHS to enhance the public-private partnership,
must resist efforts to make DHS the regulator
of more and more sectors of our economy. The Homeland Security
Act clearly bars any such role for DHS, and we should alter that
formula only with great caution. I see no reason to do so now
or for the foreseeable future.”