Let me provide a few highlights on what takes effect today and our plans for next week. First, effective today I have resigned as the President's Homeland Security advisor. I did privately and again publicly express my gratitude to the President of the United States for the confidence and the opportunity he gave me to serve with him as a member of the staff, as Assistant to the President for Homeland Security. It gave me an opportunity to work with him and the extraordinary team that he's assembled during these critical times in America's history and I'm very proud and grateful for that opportunity.

I also reiterated to the President my commitment to do everything I can and to harness the energy and the creativity and the will and the commitment of 170,000 plus people to do everything they can every single day to accomplish the mission of homeland security, and that is to do everything we can to prevent a terrorist attack, to reduce our vulnerability, to prepare for an attack, to respond as quickly as possible, to do it to our very best ability every single day.

I will continue to meet with the president, as I've done as an Assistant to the President, but I will now meet with him in the morning during the daily briefing sessions that we have. That includes obviously the Vice President, George Tenet, CIA, Director Mueller, the Attorney General and others.

Now, yesterday the President signed an Executive Order that includes amendments to - this is some of the paperwork you're not going to spend too much time writing about, but the paperwork involving 16 existing executive orders that will give me, as the newly sworn-in secretary, specific authority so that I may more effectively undertake the responsibilities of leading this new Department.

The Executive Order assigns to the Secretary of Homeland Security the responsibility for coordinating any domestic response if an attack occurs between today and March 1st.

Remember today is a milestone because it creates the Office of the Secretary of Homeland Security. The agencies and departments begin moving in on March 1st and most of them legally become part of that Department. We have that intervening five weeks. We want to make sure we understand everybody's role and responsibility and it will continue to be my responsibility to coordinate any response in the event of a terrorist attack between now and March 1st.

Thereafter, it's obviously my responsibility by virtue of being the Secretary of the new Department. The other authorities include provisions and amendments ranging from providing the Secretary and his team with the ability to consult through the committees that have been established over at State and Treasury and the Attorney General. Again, just formalizing some of the day-to-day contacts that we have as individuals as well as respected members of our staff.

The Executive Order also officially identifies the Department's Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection as the newest member in the U.S. intelligence community. You are well aware there's a new unit within this Department, the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection unit. The Executive Order recognizes that this unit in this Department is now a formal member of our national intelligence community.

As you already know, our initial headquarters will be at Nebraska Avenue and Pennsylvania in northwestern Washington, D.C. I tried to get it up at my home in Pennsylvania, but since they have two or three feet of snow we decided to keep it down here.

We're very pleased to move to this facility. We have had the opportunity to work with the Navy out there for some time. We have a monitoring center out there, our coordination center out there, our incident management center is out there, so for the time being we will be located and are prepared to commence operations immediately. This includes - and again one of the reasons we're moving out there, we have got the computers and secure communications and equipment that connect us with the rest of the federal agencies, that connect us with the Governors, connect us in many instances with the emergency management agencies of the respective states and territories.

This facility also meets the security requirements of the new Department. As I mentioned before, it currently houses much of the infrastructure of the Office of Homeland Security that we build up and work with on a day-to-day basis.

Our new website, www.dhs.gov, went up last night at midnight. It will be an indispensable tool as we continue to build and then sustain the partnerships we need with the states and local governments, with the private sector, as well with citizens. We expect that we'll get very constructive feedback over the weeks and months ahead and it will be one of our primary information-sharing tools that we will employ on a day-to-day basis. You will also note that we have an e-mail system ready to go to connect us. One of our larger challenges when you bring these 22 departments in is to make sure that we set up a 21st century department, that we equip it with the technology of the 21st century so that we are better informed internally and in turn are better equipped with that knowledge and information to work with our strategic partners in both the public and the private sector.

We realize that today marks one step in the process of building not only the new Department but continuing on a daily basis to better protect our fellow citizens and our way of life. We also realize we have a long way to go. We look forward to building on the relationships we developed over the past 14 months and the work we have done since the Office of Homeland Security was set up on October 8th of 2001.

We certainly look forward to March 1st when most of the 22 departments and units become a formal part, a legal part of the new Department of Homeland Security. Now, seated to my left are some of the extraordinary men and women who have volunteered to be part of our team, our management team. We still clearly have positions to fill. We're going to move as quickly as possible and we want to move quickly. Our first priority is to move and do things right, rather than do them quickly.

I signed an order this morning that will enable those who have not been confirmed by the United States Senate to move into the new Department as effective today and to serve as acting secretaries.

Of course Asa Hutchinson was confirmed last night as Undersecretary for Border and Transportation Security but another example is Janet Hale will be Undersecretary of Management. As of today she's an acting position, acting Undersecretary within our Department.

Our good friend, fabulous Secretary of the Navy is now our Deputy Secretary, now in an acting capacity. We hope shortly and unanimously confirmed by the men and women that respect the job he's done at Navy soon, tomorrow I hope.

Today, Monday, I don't know. But we're ready. We're not worried about the confirmation, we're ready to go to work and we have been working.

That's the way it is and that's the way it's going to be. I thank you for the opportunity to share these few comments with you and would be happy to respond to any questions you might have.

Questions from Members of the Press

Q:

What is going in first in your priorities with agencies coming in?

A:

I will tell you it's really what is not going in. Just about all the major components. The Customs move in, TSA, Secret Service, Coast Guard. Some of the smaller units like the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service would move in June, but I would say if I recall correctly 18 or 19 of the units move in as of March 1st. So we will be robust and up with basically just about everybody in every department on March 1.

Q:

This has been compared to trying to overhaul the engine of an airplane in mid-flight. Very difficult job. What do you address first in terms of the vulnerabilities that face the country?

A:

Every day I think the President has charged us with the responsibility to build capacities. We're going to do things differently; we need to do things differently. We build on the existing capacities we have. We have 170,000 men and women who go to work every day trying to protect America. They work at the borders, they work at airports, they work at labs. And this new Department gives us a chance to do a better job of putting them together where we think consolidating some of their work will make our borders safer, doing things differently with information sharing so that more people empowered by more information can do a better job of preventing a terrorist attack or reducing vulnerabilities. So I think the first challenge we have is just building up new capacities. In that effort I think we look to begin simultaneously working with the men and women who work there. You know, we are going to build a new human resource management system. We want these men and women to be empowered. I know they feel good about their jobs. I've been at the borders, I've been at the airports, I've been at the labs, I've been on the vessels with the Coast Guard. They have enormous pride in what they do and I think they should because they go to work hard every day. They go to work hard every day trying to make a difference. Listen, some of these agencies have been criticized for what they did or did not do, but I know in the heart and mind of everybody that goes to work with me in the Office of Homeland Security, they're going to do the best they possibly can. We're going to talk about training, we're going to talk about incentives, and we're going to talk about how we can take better advantage of what they do. We're going to sit down, I think we're going down to Miami next week. We're going to sit down with some of these folks. They have got a huge airport down there, we're going to sit down and have a little tabletop exercise with the men and women that work at those places and say, hey, what do you think we ought to do. How can we help you do a better job protecting America.

Q:

What are your priorities for Information Technology in the new Department, such as weaving together the networks that you have in place and breaking down the stovepipes?

A:

We have two responsibilities. One, we need to and will take a look at all our own internal needs to make sure that the information that we generate - remember, we will generate a lot of information ourselves regarding potential terrorist activity, because the Customs Service generates intelligence information and to a certain extent depending on circumstances, the INS might, the Coast Guard does, Transportation Security Administration does. So, first of all, we need to be able to communicate with one another, as effectively as existing technology will allow. We are presently - I mean we have been working this transition for quite some time. We have been working with DoD, we have been talking to Bob Mueller over at the FBI, and we have been working with George Tenet to see how, after we get done with our work internally, we can hook up technologically. You'll hear more about that in the future because, again, this has been a discussion that's on the way for quite some time.

Q:

Mr. Secretary, the agencies that are moving over, some of the tasks within those agencies, particularly Coast Guard and INS, are not directly related to combating terrorism directed to the homeland security mission, they have service requirements as well. How are those requirements going to not be left behind or take a back seat to the main mission of the Department, which is protecting the homeland?

A:

The President has said, the Congress has said and I think by and large 285 million Americans believe that these people had an historic job and they have got to keep doing those jobs. They have a new mission, an enhanced mission, because a lot of these people have been doing homeland security missions nobody ever paid attention to. So it's our job, and we accept that responsibility and will get it done, to make sure that they continue to do and perform the - provide the services that they have done historically in a non-homeland security area but when the new mission has been enhanced or if a new mission, they have the resources and people to do that as well. Part of the responsibility of the Secretary is to get it done.

Q:

Do you think there will come a time when you realize that some of these tasks need to be moved out of homeland security and would better serve the public in some of the other agencies, as some of the members of Congress have suggested?

A:

I think one of the challenges we have is to help build the strongest possible Department with the focus that the President and the Congress have given to the new Secretary and the 170,000 men and women through the legislation. And it would be foolish to conclude that there may not be some of that discussion down the road. I think it's much, much too early to make any determination. Right now we have got a lot of people who do a lot of jobs, and it's our job to make sure they do them all and they do them all better.

Q:

Mr. Secretary, do you have any plans to change your color coding alert system? And what are your plans for briefing the public and the press on terrorist threats and just keeping us informed about what's going on? I know you don't believe this, but some secretaries are sworn in and never heard from again. Are you going to be available?

A:

Gordon, what do you think? First of all, we believe that in time because of the work that has been done not just by the federal government that has accepted the color-coded system, but there are states beginning to adapt and protect the measures as it relates to the operation of state government, companies and citizens will become accustomed to the color-coded system. You give me an opportunity to explain an issue that I think is very, very important for all of us to understand. There are times when there is information that some agency in the federal government, more often than not the FBI, but there may be occasions when it's the CIA and occasions when it's the DHS or collectively, we need to notify either a community, a joint terrorism task force, a sector of the economy. It may not be actionable information, but it is information we send out to either law enforcement or security people just because we want them to know what we know. Not that at that time they need to take action on it. We're going to have to learn to distinguish when Bob Mueller sends a law enforcement announcement to law enforcement, electronic message, anything, to one of his 56 joint terrorism task force and then somehow, we normally have to predict it because of aggressive journalists and how you are able to access information, you get a hold of that. And then suddenly it appears on TV and people say what are they going to do about the warning. Well, we're not going to do anything about the warning. We're not going to raise it to a different color because it's not actionable information, but it's information that we think these men and women in that community or that region or that business just need to have because down the road we may need to act on it. So we're all in the process of learning how to distinguish between times when the federal government shares information, and we want to do more of that, not less. It isn't necessarily actionable, it's not sent out to alarm or direct action, It's just sent out to the security or law enforcement community so they have that as part of the knowledge upon which they may base future operations.

Q:

Since 85% of the nation's infrastructure is in private hands, what plans do you have to get the private sector to take a bigger role in protecting itself and its infrastructure?

A:

We are very close to the conclusion and sharing with you and the public generally some work that's been going on for several months dealing with physical infrastructure protection and cyber security. And you appropriately pointed out that, one, about 85% of that infrastructure, be it physical or cyber, is owned by the private sector. And, two, there's really no distinction. They are basically one. And as you know, one of the units, the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection unit will require us to deal on a day-to-day basis with the private sector. So there has been, through the Office of Homeland Security, a process that has been underway to sit down with these 14 different sectors that we have identified consistent with the President's national strategy, to sit down with them, let's talk about best practices, let's share some information, so that will be an ongoing day-to-day responsibility of the new office.

Q:

Mr. Secretary, the fact that the military is preparing for possible action with Iraq, does that have any impact on the planning that you're doing in your Department or what you're going to be focusing on early?

A:

Well, we know the military is planning. We also know the President has not made a decision. We also know that regardless of whether the President makes the decision to use the military against Iraq or not, we have to be prepared for any and all contingencies, whether it is sponsored or directed by a state like Iraq or a terrorist organization. If and when that decision is made, I assure you we will be prepared to respond to whatever additional contingencies might arise. That will be our responsibility to be involved in that.

Q:

Sir, you've been very concerned about securing the borders, Mexico and Canada, and you have been very proactive working on that. Recently your counterpart, Mexican counterpart was here. Is it true that the United States and Mexico had increased the level of exchange of intelligence information to prevent any terrorists who come into the United States or attack Americans overseas in tourist places like Mexico? It's just a hypothetical, but what happened in Bali is a matter to be aware.

A:

I would just tell you that the cooperation between the law enforcement intelligence community between the United States and Mexico continues to get better and better every day as we work more closely together every day. We had a great meeting several hours long with Secretary Creel. I think we're going to meet again in the next month or so. There are a lot of issues associated with the smart border agreement we're trying to develop along our common border. But make no mistake about it, the cooperation between the two governments is very strong and it's getting better every day.

Q:

I have a follow-up. Will the United States be - will you be in favor or will you talk - would you be willing to talk about immigration if Mexico increases security at their borders?

A:

I think it is inevitable that at some point in time given the decision by the Congress and the direction of the President of the United States to, one, change the structure of the INS so that we have a citizenship and immigration component and we have an enforcement component, that the question of immigration that has been raised from time to time, very appropriately between the two governments at the highest level, leads to more complete discussion. But right now for the time being, we have been focused on how we can do a better job of making sure that legal residents and citizens go back And forth across the border more easily than they have been the past year, so the legitimate flow of commerce across the border. I think clearly that responsibility and that conversation will ultimately end up in the new Department. Yes.

Q:

Mr. Secretary, now that you have been sworn in, do you plan to do anything to assuage some of the concerns about the huge costs involved with homeland security?

A:

From my experience as a Governor and a great working relationship with Mayors of cities large and small, I can understand right now there are huge frustrations with Washington, D.C., because the President has sent a budget to the hill last February and I think he increased bioterrorism money from $1.5 billion to nearly $6 billion. There was a thousand percent increase in first responder money up to $3.5 billion. And, frankly, we have been talking to the Governors and the Mayors about getting that money and how we'd like to use that money to build a national plant and they still haven't seen dime one. So I think we'll be able to relieve some of that frustration and concern as soon as congress gets the Omnibus Bill passed and they begin distributing these dollars. Then we move right into the 2004 budget and assure them that their sector of homeland security - I think they'll be pretty pleased with the dollar amounts that are there. I certainly was.

Q:

There are a lot of people saying even if the President got everything he wants in the 2003 request that it isn't enough. Yesterday they said there should be another $7 to $10 billion in that request. Can you respond to that and look forward to 2004 and give us some sense of what the budget allocation will be?

A:

Well, I will tell you that the President sustained his strong commitment to the priorities that we had established for the 2003 budget plus some new priorities that we included in the 2004 budget. I think people - I will let the President send his budget to the hill and then you and I can have a more specific discussion about its components. Again, we made a commitment to first responders in the 2003 budget and the same commitment exists in the 2004. We made a commitment to homeland security generally and the budget reflects the sustained commitment to be very aggressive and very supportive of our office's request for additional resources to help the state and locals.

Q:

Mr. Secretary, you're going to be moving into the Northwest there, your new headquarters. We were wondering, how long do you plan to be there, and if there's room for the agency to grow and would you plan to grow there?

A:

The decision about the facilities ultimately does rest with GSA. We're very comfortable and very pleased to be moving to the homeland security operation, part of which we previously set up at the Nebraska Avenue site. I would say generally we may be there at a minimum four months, six months. I really don't have any idea. We still have - it's an ongoing process to get a site that benefits, that meets all our requirements. It gives me an opportunity to say, however, that our portion of the headquarters, some folks - let me just back down a little bit. There are, and the number goes up or down, depending on who you talk to, but we know there's 170,000 plus people in the new Department. About 10% of them work and live in the national capital region, so that's about 17,000 people. The headquarters itself won't be much larger than 800 to 1,000 once we get it all ramped up. So it's not as if we have this huge massive migration of people from the city to the new Department. Now, that may vary from time to time, but you're not going to see that enormous location. I've talked to Mayor Williams about it a couple of times. He's very worried suddenly there will be 17,000 people moving out of the city, and I just want to assure you that our goal is to have an organization that's pretty lean. We know what we need to get the job done. We also know what we need to get the job done, and that's putting resources outside of Washington, D.C. You can't really secure the homeland from the nation's capital. I know a lot of people in this town would like to think we could, but the bottom line is most of the resources, most of the people and the biggest challenges are outside the national capital region. So as we go about deploying new people and resources, you'll probably see more of that outside of Washington than inside.

Q:

Sir, would, then, the location be considered among the places you're considering for a permanent headquarters with this 800 to 1,000 people?

A:

I can't answer that question because I don't know, frankly, how much space is available out there. Again, there are certain things that I'm concentrating right now on and there's a division of labor, and wherever GSA says this property meets all your needs that we have set up, they sign the lease, put the sign on, that's where we'll be. I think there's a question now whether or not that could or could not be the permanent headquarters. I'm not in a position to answer it. I'll let people more qualified do that.

Q:

How are you involving your employees in discussions about the transition and, specifically, what kind of meetings have you had with labor leaders thus far?

A:

Well, the question of taking advantage of the years of experience of the men and women who have worked at the borders and have worked in Customs and have worked in INS and who are represented by organized labor is something that we are certainly committed to, and we are committed to doing it to the extent that we are - that we have begun discussing with them the very - the process. The process of how we sit down and start going through the issues that concern their workers about security and pay and all those kinds of things, and so they will be involved from the very beginning. The legislation outlines a fairly rigid process and it sets certain timelines. We may or may not meet the timelines, but we believe - we believe it's very important to engage their representatives of these men and women at the outset. We're not going to come to an agreement internally and then give it to them for their review. We'd like to discuss it, negotiate it, review it and see how much common ground we can find at the outset. That is our intention and it will be done that way. That doesn't mean we're going to reach any final agreement, but it's certainly going to be every effort to do so.

Q:

Do you think state and local law enforcement should have access to the federal terrorist watch list?

A:

I think there's a question of access to names and other kinds of information that we're going to have to work with the state and locals to resolve. I believe from time to time giving people information that includes names will be helpful. Again, we are - we are charged with the responsibility of creating an information flow that goes from the federal government down to the state and local with the hope that the information flow will generate information that comes back up. And so it's not just names that may or may not be on a watch list, but there are other kinds of information that will be dealing with the law enforcement and intelligence community in this town as we determine what we share and when we share it. So it's under active discussion as we speak.

Q:

Even with the creation of this Department and the government criticizing the Administration for not doing enough to protect the homeland, Senator Clinton said they are cloistering a myth of homeland security. How would you respond?

A:

I read that. Well, it's not a myth that 170,000 people go to work every day at the borders. I suspect that everybody in Congress sees the work force at airports on their way home to recess and they may encounter them at the Coast Guard and may be calling someone at the INS trying to expedite an application. It's not a myth that for the past 14 months these agencies have their own initiative. For example, Customs has gone out and begun to work with foreign countries and companies so that we can do a better job of inspecting cargo in the ports, the mega ports around the world. It's not a myth that the information sharing between the CIA and the FBI and the Office of Homeland Security gets better every day. It's not a myth that twice a day representatives of the intelligence community through video conferencing consult with one another about either the information they receive, threats that they're monitoring or situations that they're working on. It's not a myth that ETA - I think it's rather unfortunate to categorize the work that these men and women have been doing in the Department as a myth. For example, EPA has an air quality monitoring system. For several weeks and months EPA and Governor Whitman have been working with Science and Technology, Office of Science and Technology, and developed a program called Biowatch so we can pick up pathogens that may float through the air so we can get an indication if there's a biological attack. This week we start inoculating the medical community so that we have enough men and women and first responders to respond in the event there's a smallpox attack. I met this week with Secretary Creel and talked about the smart border agreements that we have got up in - with Mexico and Canada, so the bottom line is I think it's a very, very unfortunate characterization of - because there's been a lot of extraordinary work that's gone on within the government, and that's just talking about the federal government, the states and locals, every single day. I had a good conversation today with Governor Bush and his chief law enforcement people as to how they have consolidated some information so they could do a better job both on the law enforcement side and the terrorist side. I had a conversation yesterday with Mike Leavitt from Utah working with a group of Governors around the country to develop standards so they could connect themselves and be part of a national information exchange program. So I think it's a very unfortunate characterization of the work that people are doing.

Q:	Are you going to be replaced as homeland security advisor?
A:	Yes. I resigned that position today. But the President said during the debate around the creation of the new Department of Homeland Security that he intended on preserving that Office within the White House.

Q:	Do you have any ideas -
A:	Do not.

Q:

Mr. Secretary, do you have anything on this first day as Secretary that is not done that you would have preferred to be complete?

A:

The first day's a great day because that means legally today that is a milestone. We go from being - we now have the legal responsibility, the authority and the accountability to start building this extraordinary organization and to start reaching out in a very aggressive way with all the different components so that every single day we get better and we can get stronger. Now, this has been on a fast track. I mean you have to give - you take a look at from June - remember I was a member of Congress for 12 years. The notion from June through November the Congress would debate, discuss, negotiate and then complete action on this historic reorganization is in itself historic. The President has said we need to move as quickly as possible. The day after the legislation was signed, we sent out the preliminary reorganization approach. We're here in a timely way and we're at work.

Thank you.

Thanks very much.