Staff Reports
The Secret Service has found itself under a spotlight brighter than the neon lights on Vegas Boulevard following two assassination attempts on former President Donald Trump. While it should come as no surprise that the agency responsible for protecting the President has some critics, members of Congress are now scratching their heads, wondering if housing the Secret Service within the sprawling Department of Homeland Security is a good idea or just a recipe for disaster.
Lawmakers across the aisle are echoing concerns that the Department of Homeland Security is a logistical mess, too overloaded with various missions to effectively lead the Secret Service. Texas representative Roger Williams is particularly agitated; he’s long been advocating for a return of the Secret Service to its former home at the Treasury Department, where it managed to keep its head above water for more than a century. Williams believes that focusing on its original function could bring a more streamlined, effective approach to the agency instead of the bureaucratic quagmire it currently finds itself in.
Congress all over the map with ideas to move embattled Secret Service out of Homeland Securityhttps://t.co/6cx3qji60I pic.twitter.com/b6bmuoWJ0Y
— The Washington Times (@WashTimes) October 17, 2024
Other options have been floated around like a hot potato, with suggestions flying to move the Secret Service directly under the White House or placing it under the Director of National Intelligence. After all, if security is the name of the game, wouldn’t it make sense to align the agency more closely with the highest level protectee, the President himself? Yet while most agree there’s a need for reform, opinions diverge like cat chasing a laser pointer on where the Secret Service should end up.
Senator Lindsey Graham is still in the ring fighting for the notion but is also wielding a reality check, stating he doesn’t foresee any substantial action before the next Congress. This is emblematic of a broader sentiment among lawmakers, who seem to agree that changing locations on the government chessboard won’t solve the real issue—the worrisome competency of the agency itself. One might say there’s a truckload of red tape getting in the way of doing the agency’s job, which, let’s face it, is pretty crucial in a democracy.
But not everyone is convinced that rearranging furniture in the bureaucratic mansion will yield any better results. Some, like Senator Ron Johnson, are skeptical about whether a change of scenery really addresses the underlying issues plaguing the Secret Service. His exasperation is palpable as he has mentioned that if he were in Trump’s shoes, he’d simply hire his own security detail and use government resources when necessary. Johnson’s cynicism isn’t unfounded; many Americans might be left wondering why these so-called guardians of the presidency couldn’t safeguard their charge better amidst serious threats.
Meanwhile, a cross-section of lawmakers from both sides seem to be treading carefully around this issue, hinting that while structural change should be considered, a comprehensive review is also necessary before any major decisions are made. The current consensus appears to be that before moving agencies around like chess pieces in a never-ending game, perhaps a good old-fashioned soul-searching exercise within the Secret Service itself might prove beneficial. After all, when it comes to protecting critical national leaders, the stakes have never been higher, and this is one game where “checkmate” could mean catastrophe.
