Vetted Conversations
Vetted Conversations is a podcast created by We the Veterans & Military Families to help Americans - especially the veteran community - better understand their rights and responsibilities as citizens and how they can get involved to reinforce our constitutional republic and representative democracy. We are focused on bringing Americans together to help create a more perfect union. This podcast was formerly titled Vet our Democracy and was rebranded with the launch of Season 2 to reflect our expanded goals.
Vetted Conversations
Ep. 4: Myth Busting: Understanding the Department of Homeland Security with Admiral Steve Abbot and Col. Dave Lapan
In this episode we hear from retired Navy Admiral Steve Abbot who served as the deputy homeland security advisor to the President of the United States. You'll also hear from retired Marine Corps Colonel David Lapan who served as the press secretary and deputy assistant secretary for media relations during the last administration. They both join Ellen Gustafson and Jeremy Butler (USN) to dispel myths and highlight the accomplishments of the DHS over the last two decades.
For more, check us out at www.wetheveterans.us and at https://linktr.ee/vettedconversations
Americans eventually do the right thing. I think uh Winston Churchill said that uh, you know, after they've tried everything else. And and uh Dave was uh spot on when he talked about the fact that, you know, we've it's a messy thing. Um I'd like to point out that you know the uh plan that they hatched in 1776 and 1789 was was not an immaculate conception. It had some flaws, and those have need needed to be worked out over the history of the country. They they were some major flaws, as we all know.
SPEAKER_01:Hello, and welcome to Vet Our Democracy Podcast, created by us, the nonprofit, nonpartisan pro-democracy group, We the Veterans and Military Families. In this series, we explore what it means to be a citizen, what veterans and military families can do in supporting and defending our constitution following military service, and how you can get more involved to help create a more perfect union. We're all in this democracy thing together, and it's important to know our rights and responsibilities. As citizens, we need to know how our government is supposed to work so we can engage patriotically and positively to bring about the best version of America. If you care about America, democracy, baseball, mom, and apple pie, then this is a podcast for you. Joining us today are two special guests, retired Navy Admiral Steve Abbott, who served as the Deputy Homeland Security Advisor to the President from 2001 to 2003, and retired Marine Corps Colonel Dave LePan, who served as a press secretary and deputy assistant secretary for media operations for the Secretary of Homeland Security in 2017. Ellen, take it away.
SPEAKER_02:Welcome, David LePan and Admiral Steve Abbott. We are so thrilled to have this conversation. I'm especially thrilled to have this conversation with you. Um I am a former New Yorker, an expat New Yorker who was living in New York City on 9-11. And then I was a young researcher at the Council on Foreign Relations in 2002, 2003, studying terrorism and sort of uh working with military fellows. And I can remember very deeply the Department of Homeland Security being created by President George W. Bush and understanding very deeply why it was important. Um I it was established by law on November 25th, 2002, um, and it combined, of course, 22 different federal departments and agencies into a unified, integrated cabinet agency. Um it was obviously a response to the 9-11 attacks, but it has now become the third largest cabinet department, is my understanding, um, after the Department of Defense and Veteran Affairs. So again, um our government doing all it can to protect its citizens. It's an honor to have this conversation with you both, who played an essential role in our country's history with creating this department and sort of understanding, you know, working at the very forefront of homeland security. Um would love, before I ask you our civics question, if you can both introduce yourselves and your connection to this conversation, starting with Admiral Abbott.
SPEAKER_03:Well, Ellen, thank you very much, and thank you uh for putting this together. And I'm grateful to be a participant. Um and uh I'm uh a little concerned about getting the civics question, so I I'll start off with a little uh history on why I happen to be here. It's really a uh total uh chance uh occurrence. Uh I don't know whether you remember the actor Peter Sellers, uh, the comedian, he made a movie called Being There. He was actually the gardener at the White House, and he happened to be uh around when there was a discussion, and someone said to him, What do you think? And he said, There'll be growth in the spring. So they brought him into the White House and he became a senior official. That's essentially what happened to me. I was uh doing a study at the White House in the summer of 2001 on WMD terrorism, and I happened to be there on 9-11. And when Governor Ridge was brought when he volunteered to leave his governorship and come to the White House, they asked me to help Governor Ridge get started. And I did that, and after a couple of weeks, he asked me to stay on as his deputy, and as they say, the rest was history. So I spent two years at the White House at the Homeland Security Council and was involved in the development of the legislation that was eventually passed, as you mentioned, in November of 2002. So I'll pause with that uh part of the history lesson and pass it over to Dave.
SPEAKER_00:Well, thanks, Admiral. Uh that that's quite the origin story. My my experience at Homeland Security came a bit later. I'm a retired Marine, uh, started my career in aviation, and then spent the last 20 years in public affairs. So I served as a spokesman for the Pentagon, for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, had a lot of great assignments, both here in the United States and in deployed areas. Um and then General John Kelly, who I had served in the Marines with and had known for many years when he became the Secretary of Homeland Security, asked me to come and work for him uh as his press secretary. So I spent the first uh nine months of 2017 um working as the press secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, both under him and then under the acting um secretary who had been the deputy, Elaine Duke. And so that's what brings me both to the conversation. Uh Joe Plensler and I have known each other as Marines a long time, uh, and my relationship with General John Kelly and my time at Homeland Security. So again, I'm happy to be part of the conversation.
SPEAKER_02:That's great. It's it's so exciting to have um someone who was there at the outset and then someone who was there kind of, you know, during uh it's it's the heart of its incredibly important work um in more recent years. So okay, here's the civics question that you've all been waiting for. Um this is on the citizenship test. People have to answer uh 10 questions. There are a hundred possible questions, and they have to get uh at least six of them right in order to pass. Um so here's the question number 31. If both the president and vice president can no longer serve, who becomes the president?
SPEAKER_03:So do I get to go?
SPEAKER_02:Uh yeah, you get to go.
SPEAKER_03:Because that's a pretty current topic at the moment. It's the speaker of the house, and uh we currently don't have one. Uh so that's a particularly timely question for the civics exam.
SPEAKER_02:Well, I love that you said that because you just gave me an out. I actually answered the president pro tem of the Senate, which it was wrong, um, because that's the next in line after the speaker, but I could have just said, well, there's no speaker right now, so that's the actually correct answer. Um, so now I'm gonna ask a super hard follow-up um because I was super curious about this. Which number in line for the presidency is the Secretary of Homeland Security?
SPEAKER_00:I would say the last because it was the most recently created cabinet position.
SPEAKER_02:Okay, you're 100% right. It's the last, but do you know what number that is?
SPEAKER_00:I do not. That's hard.
SPEAKER_02:I know it's really hard. Okay. It's it's it's it's the 18th. It's the 18th. It's the 18th in line. So I just wanted you guys both to be really um up on that. Um, okay, so so along with being the most recent cabinet um level agency, it's honestly one of the least uh understood. Um and there's been so many conversations about this agency in recent years and what incredibly important work it does. So I just would love um to hear from both of you, First Admiral Abbott, you know, how how would you describe how DHS fits into our whole national security system?
SPEAKER_03:Well, I would say that um, you know, 9-11 was the catalyst for the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, but it was a uh reorganization that actually needed to be done and had needed to be done for many years. Um it had actually been studied by several commissions. Uh, the issue of how would we better organize ourselves, you know, most countries have interior departments and other uh organizations of a similar name that perform the functions of our Department of Homeland Security. But we, as you pointed out, had you know those uh duties spread out among 22 different agencies, and and one of the things that was described to me early on was we have somebody drive up to our uh border, and uh they have not one official who comes over to talk to the person after he rolls the window down. We have five different folks that come over, you know, for customs and agriculture and uh security and so forth. Uh it was recognized that the country truly did need to have a reorganization because um it was very inefficient the way we were running it, and 9-11 showed that we had really serious vulnerabilities. Americans generally think about defense as something that we do overseas, and 9-11 brought it home to us that uh we we have to ensure that we're defending Americans here at home. Uh, and that's the duty of the Department of Homeland Security. And so that's its uh role in our national defense. And I think you if you can break it down and talk about its individual parts and how each of them uh fit into that, whether it's the Coast Guard or the Transportation Security Administration or U.S. Customs, but they all form part of the defense of the country, and they also perform services for our citizens that are essential. So uh that's why we needed it, that's why we have it, and uh that's why it's a whole lot better than what uh existed before.
SPEAKER_02:Thank you. Yeah, I mean I I like I said I distinctly remember that as a student of you know international relations and national security, and and again living in New York during 9-11, um, that we learned that we had this vulnerability. Um but then I would argue as a citizen uh closely watching these these things, um, that by the time, Dave, that you kind of entered the DHS world, 14 years, I guess, into its existence, um, DHS had essentially been a successful agency in terms of protecting us at home. And and then the Department of Defense had been successful in, I would argue, taking the fight back to the enemy and uh keeping sort of the American populace as far away from it as possible. How would you say, um, you know, from your experience during that time, how did you see DHS fitting into the general national security apparatus and keeping people safe?
SPEAKER_00:Um well, exactly to your point, um, one thing that I used to say frequently when I was at the department was DHS is the only agency solely focused on the security of the homeland. Obviously, DOD has a part uh that play in that, but again, it has many other roles, especially away from our borders. Um, again, in the in the military, we used to say, you know, we always want to fight the away game, right? We want to extend our power out away from our shores so that we don't have to fight um enemies here in the United States. Uh however, DHS is mostly focused on that internal piece. But one of the things I think people may not understand is the role that DOD, or I'm sorry, that DHS does play overseas, whether it's the Coast Guard or TSA or other elements, uh, customs and border protection, for example, um, also have uh focus outside the borders of the United States to protect things that are coming into the country. So we're not just stagnant here in the homeland and protecting our borders, uh, but we also project out not quite the way the Department of Defense does. But I think between DOD and DHS, you have that layered approach to defending and protecting the homeland.
SPEAKER_02:And so you alluded to uh sort of the general misconceptions of of the agency and its job. And it seems like in in recent years that's become um, you know, some sort of mythology around what DHS does and and and what it's supposed to do. Um, can you both just talk a little bit about what misconceptions about DHS you've you've heard and you've come across and and and if you have any words to dispel those?
SPEAKER_03:Well, I could say um, Ellen, uh you know, I think the reorganization of those 22 agencies and their uh commencement of operations together is one of the great success stories for uh this country and its uh you know administrative machinery in the executive branch. It it was a monumental undertaking from the you know number of individuals that uh were involved. And of course, some of uh the Transportation Security Administration uh was less than two years old. Uh it it had been formed just immediately after 9-11, but uh they had to hire a huge number of individuals to put that uh particular element uh into operation, and people have different views about the Transportation Security Administration, but my own is that it's been an enormous success for the country. And and it parallels what else was going on in the Department of Homeland Security, bringing all those very, very different organizations uh under one headquarters. A good example is the Coast Guard, which of course had migrated around in government quite a bit. I remember the story of Lyndon Johnson calling the Secretary of the Treasury uh when he was trying to form the Department of Transportation to let the Treasury Secretary know that uh they were going to move that Coast Guard over to transportation if the Secretary of the Treasury didn't have too much of an objection. Well, here it migrated again uh from transportation into homeland security. Uh, and it for a different reason, by the way. The reason that Lyndon Johnson wanted it migrated into transportation is that he needed the Department of Transportation to have some more heft than it was uh originally uh envisioned to have. Whereas the Coast Guard's a logical element of our homeland security posture, and it has worked, in my humble opinion, extremely well and smoothly in the new department. And you could go through that list of the 22 agencies, and I think there's a similar argument that they've done a remarkable job of uh of folding in and adapting to the new department. And um, you know, nothing's perfect, and Dave has more current, you know, uh experience than I do in this regard, but uh from the outside, I see the Department of Homeland Security doing a marvelous job.
SPEAKER_02:Thanks. Yeah, Dave, any other insights on sort of misconceptions and and and you know, words to dispel them?
SPEAKER_00:Sure, a couple of things. One, um as we've talked about, 22 disparate agencies that were all brought together under one roof to become the Department of Home of Homeland Security. I think most Americans don't understand what that is, right? I I think they have in their mind that there's this Department of Homeland Security, but they couldn't tell you what the parts and pieces are. Unlike the Department of Defense, where most Americans can tell you it's the Army, it's the Navy, it's the Marines, it's the Air Force, and now it's the Space Force. Um Americans, again, wouldn't understand where all the parts and pieces are. They probably couldn't tell you that the Secret Service is part of the Department of Homeland Security, uh, or that the Cyber and Infrastructure Security Agency is part of Homeland Security. Um unfortunately, for my time back at the beginning of the Trump administration, unfortunately, a lot of the focus became on immigration. And I argued at the time that uh it created this misperception that instead of the Department of Homeland Security, we were the Department of Border Enforcement, which is just one of the many uh missions that the department has. Um and I think that contributes to uh misconceptions and misunderstandings about all the different parts of the Department of Homeland Security and how they operate differently and with different missions, but all with the same core mission of protecting the homeland. Um so one thing is is again improving the knowledge uh so people do understand what the parts and pieces of the Department of Homeland Security are and how they work together to protect the homeland. Um I'll leave it there and keep going.
SPEAKER_02:Well, it's so interesting because you know, I think in recent years, and you you referred to one of the kind of touch points, is we've seen people and groups and politicians on the left being frustrated at DHS for for some reasons and angry and you know, and then people on the right being frustrated and angry at DHS for other reasons. And I I kind of feel like that means you're doing a great job when you've got both sides um, you know, mad about uh you know overstepping or doing your job. Um I think that that's probably a good sign. What do you guys think?
SPEAKER_03:I think that that's a valid observation, but I also believe that the individuals in the Department of Homeland Security have executed their duties on the missions they have been given in a truly fine and professional manner in general terms. There are certainly incidents that people can point to, but individuals who work in the executive branch are working to policies that have been set by the political element of our government. And if there are problems with uh what those policies are as they translate into the work that's being done. For instance, at the border, that's not to be laid on the head of those people in uniform in customs and border protection, in my humble view, it's laid at the feet of the politicians who are setting the policy.
SPEAKER_02:Yeah, absolutely. And you know, that's something we often forget also with our military. We have had the same issue over the years with people blaming military members for executing policy. So speaking of military members and policy and all the things, we are living in extremely volatile times, especially in this exact current moment with a new conflict developed and on the horizon. So that's abroad, but also there's incredible volatility at home. Would love to hear both of your thoughts as you know leaders over the years in this exact field about what the greatest threats are to uh the homeland, but also to the institutions and our democracy. I kind of want to see, you know, there's there's two all there's two answers, right? There's what are the threats to the homeland, and then also what are the threats to our democracy and institutions.
SPEAKER_03:Dave, I'm gonna defer to you to go first.
SPEAKER_00:Okay, thank you. Um, it's a great question because I would start with the threats to our democracy. To me, the threats to our democracy can undermine our ability to respond to those other threats, right? And so that's the part that we really have to get right. Because if we allow our democracy uh to crumble, if we allow our democracy, um I don't know that we're in the danger of it failing, but we're certainly in the in the place where our democracy and our institutions are highly damaged. And in that state, our ability to respond to external threats, you know, whether it's Russia and Ukraine, whether it's China, whether it's North Korea, whether it's cyber, uh, whether it's terrorism, right? So there are a lot of threats out there. Um, but what underpins it for me is the threat to our democracy. And if we do not strengthen our democracy, if we do not get back on track, uh those other threats loom larger than they might. Uh, I think in this current um environment in which we're facing, both with the the absence of a speaker of the House, uh the absence of the House being able to conduct its business, um, puts the United States in a very vulnerable position with our adversaries uh that might take advantage of what they perceive as our weakness. So to me, we got to get our democracy back uh in line and strengthened so that we can protect against the more physical threats that our country faces.
SPEAKER_02:Thanks. Yeah, Admiral Abbott.
SPEAKER_03:I think Dave is exactly right that the uh instability in our legislative branch in the House uh of uh recently has been characterized by others uh as just delighting Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. I think that's right. That they see it as uh you know proof that United States democracy really doesn't run well. Well, uh they have a point, and it's up to us, the people, to do the necessary maintenance on the system to help it run better than it has. And I'm not just talking about the legislative branch here, that there are plenty of you know examples in the legislative branch that we know too recent ones are the you know uh inability of the House to do the nation's business as it deals with the replacement of the speaker. But I would add, for instance, the hold that's been placed on the appointment of senior uh military officers to their positions. I uh last time I looked, it was several hundred of those appointments are held up. That's an impact on our national security, and it's a flaw of our system, and uh it needs to be fixed. And I could go into uh a you know a litany of other uh problems that we have in the electoral system, uh gerrymandering, um the electoral reform act uh obviously much needed, but it's not just the uh legislative branch, it's also the judiciary and it's also the executive branch. And my opinion is that uh there needs to be a look at what could be done to fix these problems and uh where they are entrenched in a system like our Congress, where they simply can't fix themselves because of the fact that it would dilute the power of individual members, then it needs to be made uh by some you know deliberation of others or perhaps bring back a Simpson Bowls type approach to look at democratic uh process and make recommendations to help uh fix the democracy, which as Dave and I mentioned before this started, has gone wobbly. And we need to work together to right the ship. And I hope perhaps we can get around to talking about well, should people who served in uniform be involved in any of this?
SPEAKER_02:Well, we will, we will get around to that. Uh absolutely. I I though I'm really curious because you you both made me think that you both talked about the current, right now, 2023, you know, sort of volatility within our democracy. And a lot of times people say, you know, oh, well, America's been at odds before and there's been partisans, hyperpartisanship before. But you have both been involved in DHS and Homeland Security at times when I don't know if in 2017 and in 2002, 2001, 2002, people would have said the biggest threat to America is what's happening internally. I think people you might have had a different answer then. And I'm curious if you can contextualize that from those those moments in history. Would would you have said that it was like the internal American democratic institution that was the problem? Or would you have actually looked at at outside threats as the as the bigger problem?
SPEAKER_00:I would have looked at the outside threats. Uh again, our our our democracy is meant to be, right? It was built to be messy. It's never going to be perfect. Um there's always going to be some level of dissension and disagreement. Uh one of the things I didn't talk about in my um bio is that I worked for a time at the bipartisan policy center, right? The days and and when I was there, I would, you know, tell people I worked there and I would get some version of, yeah, how's that going? Um because over time we've seen this atrophy of the strength of our institutions and bipartisanship. So again, looking back in history, Democrats and Republicans didn't get along. They had arguments, they had principled arguments. Uh, but at the end of the day, they weren't attacking one another, they weren't attacking the system, right? They could have principled disagreements, but they sought compromise. Um, I think where we are today has moved so far beyond that that that leaves us as a democracy and as a country vulnerable. So I do think we need to, you know, again, it's not as if it's always been perfect. Uh there was no time in history uh where we haven't had disagreements, um, but previously the disagreements were policy-driven and not personal, personal and personality. Uh, and they weren't done in a way to damage the institutions in the ways that we're seeing today. And I think that makes us weaker and more vulnerable than we have been in the past.
SPEAKER_02:Yeah, I mean, not to be a total history nerd, but a lot of people might not remember that there was an insanely contentious election in 2000 that led to involvement by the courts and eventually a president who didn't win the popular vote but became the president and was not a president in a massively united country. But amazingly, if I remember history correctly, uh, you know, in my in my younger days, and I Admiral Abbott was living this moment in history as he previously said, we did come together. There was an unbelievable groundswell of unification after 9-11. And I'm just curious, Admiral Abbott, if you would agree that that was, you know, challenges to our domestic, you know, by our domestic politics to our democracy was not the threat to the homeland and our security uh then as it is today.
SPEAKER_03:So um Americans eventually do the right thing. I think uh Winston Churchill said that uh, you know, after they've tried everything else. And and uh Dave was uh spot on when he talked about the fact that you know we it's a messy thing. Um I like to point out that you know the uh plan that they hatched in 1776 and 1789 was was not an immaculate conception. It had some flaws, and those have need needed to be worked out over the history of the country. They they were some major flaws, as we all know. And uh the the way the um you know uh electoral machinery uh ran uh was uh not entirely uh you know the voice of the people deciding, for instance, who was going to be president if you look at the election of 1876, uh it's a you know, which resulted in the you know, the end of the Jim Crow era, that it was a messy uh process that eventually got fixed. And so uh, you know, I could go on with you know the uh women's emancipation and you know the civil rights era, uh, so many examples where the country worked through its problems. I think that actually trying to hold up a yardstick to for me to say, you know, the internal threat is greater at the moment than the external threat. Uh I don't think that's the way I look at it. I I say, you know, the threats ebb and flow and sometimes can't be anticipated. And we need to be prepared to meet those threats when they do, and that's true both domestically and uh overseas, and some of the modern challenges that presented enormous issues for us as a society. Um I just raised the cyber world as one example. Uh, but we we need to do both things well, and we've needed the Department of Homeland Security to mature just as it has in order to handle the internal threat.
SPEAKER_02:So to get to the question you were you were hoping to go to before, Admiral Abbott, you know, you are both um you're both veterans, although I know once a marine, always a marine, so I'll call you a veteran and a marine, Dave. Um and and you know, you're obviously both you're obviously both patriots. You've served your country in uniform and in other capacities. Um and so it's it's interesting that we have often these um these perceptions that you know, what is the role, the special role of veterans and their families to comment on the state of our democratic system, how that affects national security, because it really does affect us and it had it affected our lives, your lives when you, you know, in in uniform. Um what do you think veterans and and military families uh you know could be doing, should be doing, can be doing to help reinforce our democratic system because it is so pertinent to uh our national security.
SPEAKER_03:Ellen, would you like me to jump on this one? Uh it's one of my favorite.
SPEAKER_02:Yes, I know. This is your thing. I know. Go for it.
SPEAKER_03:Well, I usually start out by saying that uh all of us who wore a uniform swore an oath, you know, to support and defend the Constitution. And uh that was a solemn oath. We were bound to it. Um but in the years since I left uniform, I realized I still have a commitment to that oath, which I think goes over for all of us as citizens to support and defend the Constitution. And it's not just those of us who were former military, uh, you know, veterans, retirees, people who are in the families of those of us who were actually in uniform. It it's every citizen in the United States ought to be part of the effort. We were talking, I think, earlier about how civics education is, you know, we need to turn the Rheastat up on civics education. But for those of us who were in uniform, I I think we understand that you can continue to serve, and it depends on what your circumstances are. Um if you're Dave Le Pan and you're in a position to be able to go serve in a senior uh policy position in the Department of Homeland Security, what a wonderful way to contribute to to your country. It's not something everyone is is either equipped or positioned to be able to do, but but we all can participate in one way or another. Joe Plinsler drafted me into being a uh a worker at my local precinct in the election process. So I'm I'm an election worker now because of Joe Plinsler. And uh I think all of us should be looking for those ways in which we can help the country move along, and it depends on where we are and what we have and what we can do, but we all ought to participate. I have one of my best family friends became the mayor of Winter Park, Florida. And uh we all know we've had wonderful uh former military people in senior positions. Uh John McCain was a family friend. Uh I often remind people that five of our presidents were career military officers. So it's perfectly reasonable for former military to continue to serve their country after they leave uniform.
SPEAKER_02:Dave, any thoughts about ways that our community, veterans, military families can reinforce the system, the norms, as it especially because it's so important to national security?
SPEAKER_00:Uh absolutely. I'd uh make three points following on what Emerald Abbott said first, uh, as he mentioned, right? When we served in uniform, we raised our right hand. We swore that oath to the Constitution. We I think by and large, and I can't obviously speak for everyone, but for me, when I took off the uniform, that didn't go away, right? I didn't only have that oath to protect and defend the Constitution because I was in uniform. And then once I retired from the military, I no longer had that obligation. Uh I certainly didn't have to raise my hand every time and do it as regularly as I did in the military. But within me, there was still that uh oath that whether I'm in uniform or without or outside uniform, I'm going to uh take those same steps. Uh and I think that that's important for veterans to remember is that when they take off the uniform, it doesn't mean that their dedication to our constitution and to our country ends there. Um of the things I think, though, that that veterans uh once they leave the military often feel out of place in politics or engaging in politics. One, because while they were in uniform, it was restricted. It's not as if they couldn't. Um, but I think a lot of military folks uh and and me personally, there was a time that I didn't actively participate in politics because of this idea that you know we have to remain apolitical or at least uh nonpartisan, right? And so once you take off the uniform and you know retire, you become a veteran by any means, uh, you have more freedom to engage in the electoral process and whatever that is, whether it's you know simply voting, um, you know, the basic uh responsibility of Americans to vote, whether it's getting involved in campaigns, whether it's you know, fundraising, whether, you know, there are many ways to do that. Uh, and I think sometimes veterans come out of the military not really sure not really sure how uh to make that transition into a world that they didn't really participate in, at least very actively uh while they were in uniform. Um and as Joe has done, and as Emerald Abbott talked about, you know, volunteering to serve um on election day or at polling places, uh, the key there, the key terms there are volunteering and serving, which is what we in the military and and those who become veterans uh often look to do after we hang up the uniform. So those are great opportunities to get involved. Um again, I go back to the initial point that because we swore this oath to defend the Constitution, once we take off the uniform, those are very concrete ways that we can continue to support and defend the Constitution by getting involved in political activity, in voting, um, and by serving as voices. I mean, we've gained a lot of experience that most Americans don't have the opportunity to have, uh serving overseas, experience in different cultures, frankly, serving in places where democracy doesn't exist and having to have that perspective. Um, so there's value to us in bringing that into the political arena uh once we leave uniform.
SPEAKER_02:Yeah, thank you so much. You know, one thing we talk a lot about at We the Veterans in Military Families is that we have lots of discussions in our um in our political, you know, um uh arena about our rights, but fewer about our responsibilities as citizens. And of course, people who have joined the military have taken responsibility for their citizenship and signed up to to defend um you know, taken the oath to defend the Constitution. And I think it's so interesting, you know, one of our responsibilities, it seems, that, you know, especially like I say, living through this. That when change was needed to find a way to better protect our homeland, leaders under George W. Bush and, you know, uh Governor Ridge stepped up and said we need, we have the responsibility to make a change that will better protect our homeland. And again, you know, looking at it now, it's been uh 21 years, um, 20 years, I guess, since the department was stood up, it seems like it was incredibly successful. You know, that change, that that um, you know, that that new way of doing uh and organizing our our homeland security was was successful. And I, you know, I would say you too um had uh a hand in that. And we are uh very, very grateful for the fact that you continued to serve after you took off the uniform and serve in the capacity that you did.
SPEAKER_03:Any final thoughts um about DHS that everyone, especially military families and veterans, should know I would only say that um every time I see a member of the department, and I think like a lot of people, uh much of that is traveling through airports these days, but it also involves uh you know getting my passports stamped. Um and uh I I would just want to acknowledge the wonderful service of those individuals, how much we rely on them, and say that I'm truly grateful for it.
SPEAKER_02:Dave, any final thoughts?
SPEAKER_00:Um final thought. Going back to your original um question about the citizenship test, right? Uh it's not lost on me that to become an American citizen, you have to pass this test, right? You have to understand civics, you have to understand the system of government. To be an American, you don't have to have any of that. Um So I think the obligation uh for all Americans, but certainly for veterans and veteran families to lead the way is on being educated and remaining educated about our system of government and taking an active role in making it better. Again, it's it's sloppy, it's never going to be perfect. Um, but the worst thing that can happen to our democracy is antipathy or um people turning away. I know that it's tough to watch the news every day, it's there's lots going on. Uh, it can affect people, you know, viscerally. Um, but I worry that in an effort to kind of you know protect ourselves from some ugliness that's out there in the world, both outside our borders and now inside, is that um people turn away and stop paying attention. And I worry that someday folks are gonna wake up and say, how did that happen? Right. So the key is remaining educated, remaining engaged uh, and not turning away just because it's tough, because that's when we're again like on 9-11, we're gonna be surprised um by what happens.
SPEAKER_02:Well, a round of thank yous. Um, thank you, Admiral Steve Abbott, thank you, Dave Le Pen, for your leadership, your service uh both in the military and at the Department of Homeland Security. And I think uh a final thank you I I want to make is uh to remind people that are listening to this to thank your TSA, uh, your TSA workers because they are also serving. And um, the fact that you know we were so incredibly grateful for them 21 years ago, 23 years ago, you know, when when we were um you know in the aftermath of an attack and and and we needed that security, and now there are signs up begging American citizens to not harass these folks is is something that we should all care about, turning the tide on, especially uh veterans and and military family members. So thank you both, and please go out and thank your TSA uh security folks because they're they're doing their best.
SPEAKER_01:Thank you so much for listening. If you found this podcast episode interesting or useful, please share it with the people you know. This episode was co-hosted by Joe Plunzler, Ellen Giftson, and Jeremy Buller. The audio and video were edited by Cameron King. Vet Our Democracy is a production of We the Veterans and Military Families, a 501c3 non-for-profit, nonpartisan, pro-democracy organization. We are focused on promoting positive and patriotic civic engagement to strengthen American democracy. Find out more about us at we the veterans.us and follow us on social media. Until next time.
