BELFERCENTER.ORG/HOMELANDSECURITY | APRIL 2020
HOMELAND SECURITY POLICY PAPER #
Closing Critical Gaps that Hinder
Homeland Security Technology Innovation
* Nate Bruggeman held senior policy positions at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection addressing border se-
curity, law enforcement intelligence, and U.S-Mexico engagement. He has also had a distinguished legal career, most recently at the Colorado Department
of Law and previously in private practice. Bruggeman is a Fellow at the Belfer Center’s Homeland Security Project and the Executive Editor of its Homeland
Security Policy Paper Series
† Ben Rohrbaugh has been at the forefront of border and supply chain security and advancing U.S.-Mexico relations for a decade. Rohrbaugh held senior
policy positions at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and he was a Director on the White House’s
National Security Council where he developed policy on border and supply chain security issues. Rohrbaugh is currently a Fellow at the Strauss Center for
International Security and Law at the University of Texas-Austin.
Rohrbaugh is also a founder of a startup company, Lantern UAS, which develops systems using aerial drones for screening cargo containers. Lantern UAS
has worked through DHS-sponsored funding mechanisms to support its research.
Nate Bruggeman
*
and Ben Rohrbaugh
†
Authors’ Note
We draed this paper before the full extent of the coronavirus/COVID-19 pandemic became clear. We have been deeply concerned about
the homeland security enterprise’s approach to technological innovation for over a decade. e pandemic has only served to conrm our
concerns. COVID-19 has overwhelmed the response systems of the United States and clearly shown the scale of the federal government’s
underinvestment in public safety technology. From developing testing capacity to producing medical supplies to rapidly expanding
treatment capacity to developing a vaccine, the federal government has been unable to lead. e country instead relies on a patchwork of
federal, state, local, and private sector resources to respond to a widespread public health emergency.
Stories are emerging of potentially lifesaving research or developed technologies that are not in place because of shortsighted decisions
or budget cuts. One illustrative example is the U.S Department of Health and Human Services’ irtation with and ultimate abandonment
of an initiative to improve facemask readiness.
1
For its part, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has had a minimal public role
in providing any kind of public safety technology in this crisis. e issues attendant to responding to the virus are only the most recent,
dramatic example of the innovation challenges facing the DHS and the broader homeland security enterprise. We are hopeful that, when
the pandemic subsides, policymakers will pay particular attention to the government’s technology and innovation decits.
