As DHS prepares for its first change of administration, a handful of career civil servants are guiding the transition—and the future of the department.

Since its inception, critics of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have contended that the agency was politicized to the point where it didn’t function effectively.

Concerns revolved around the number of political appointees at the young agency, particularly at the headquarters level, and questions about whether political connections have carried more weight than quality in key appointments. The worst example was former Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Director Michael Brown, whose only professional credential prior to joining FEMA was as a top official at the Arabian Horse Association.

This year, DHS officials are acutely conscious that all eyes are on the Nebraska Avenue headquarters as it prepares for its first presidential transition since opening its doors in 2003. Next month’s elections will not only herald a new era in American political leadership but will also serve as a test of whether this agency can avoid the typical pitfalls of appointee exodus and a tediously long confirmation process while ensuring continuity.

“They have a mission-critical function in providing for the national security of our country. We have to have trained, experienced people ready to go, immediately and decisively, should a crisis happen,” said Frank Chellino, chairman of a panel assembled by the National Academy of Public Administration for DHS and the Congress to look at 2009 transition issues. Its July report, Addressing the 2009 Presidential Transition at the Department of Homeland Security, focused on the agency’s many challenges, not the least of which was filling vacancies among executive staff—139 out of 775 as of March—and making sure career people are moved into deputy-level positions at headquarters and at various DHS components, taking the reins until new assistant secretaries, and the DHS secretary, are confirmed and sworn into office.

Chellino told HSToday that over 83 political appointees are expected to leave DHS with the administration of President George Bush and that the panel remained concerned about whether the executive office, faced with empty holes and the biggest number of political appointees of any of its 22 individual component departments, was equipped for the transition.

But DHS officials insist they are successfully pursuing a “five-pronged” transition plan that includes filling vacancies and engaging in a host of intra-departmental leadership and gaming seminars to get all the components working from the same playbook ahead of the big changes expected next year.

They know that some of the biggest terror attacks and foiled plots in recent memory have happened during transition periods—whether it be the first World Trade Center bombing a month after President Bill Clinton’s inauguration in 1993 or the Madrid train bombings three days before Spain’s general elections in March 2004. Getting caught unawares would not only be bad government but could be fatal.

“We can’t call a time-out for six months, because the world isn’t going to call a time-out,” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told The Associated Press last spring.

Looking ahead, here are some of the career people at the head office and throughout key agencies under DHS who say Nebraska Avenue will beat the wary expectations. They’re currently shadowing the political appointees and ready to step into the vacancy when the time comes:

John Torres: ICE man

John Torres’ resume sounds straight out of a movie script. He was a federal agent during some of recent history’s most dramatic events: the Los Angeles riots in 1992, the deadly 1996 attack on Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, the first post-Sept. 11, 2001, Olympics in Salt Lake City in 2002, the massive manhunt for the so-called “railway killer” in Texas in 1999. He served on an investigative team at the Federal Bureau of Investigation after 9/11 and participated in numerous other overt—and undercover— operations.

Having all that experience gives Torres—now at US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—a firm understanding that times of transition spell vulnerability for the country and that the proverbial ball cannot be dropped while future assistant secretaries shuttle through the nomination process. “Because of what we’ve learned from history over the years, for those people who want to do us harm they will try to take advantage of us when we are most vulnerable,” he said. “They will look to the path of least resistance.”

As part of a revised “DHS Succession Order and Order for Delegation” issued by Chertoff in January, the majority of the top staff in ICE are now career people like Torres. He was promoted from director of the Office of Detention and Removal Operation to deputy assistant secretary for operations, right behind Assistant Secretary Julie Myers. Like most department or component heads, this is a political appointment and days in the position are numbered.

“We work together,” Torres, 44, insisted. He and Myers are bringing down the number of vacancies in the department and engaging in leadership conferences and “table top” exercises to game out responses to potential security events ahead of the administration changeover.

Torres’ area of operations is broad—the largest investigative arm of DHS— and no doubt represents some of the most hot-bed, controversial issues on Capitol Hill, if not for the whole American public. It includes oversight of the Federal Protective Service (FPS), which provides security for the nation’s federal buildings. The FPS has been under congressional scrutiny lately for a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report (www.gao.gov/new.items/d08683.pdf) that found that a reduction in manpower and lack of planning were leading to security gaps at federal sites.

He is also in charge of the Office of Detention and Removal Operations, which was in part the focus of a recent four-part investigative series by The Washington Post about health care in the detention centers for individuals who have come into the country illegally. The federal government’s ability to apprehend, detain and deport illegal immigrants effectively has also come into question, particularly in the current election cycle.

With the immigration issue having so many political implications, there is naturally a question whether a new administration—Republican or Democrat—will bring in an ICE chief with very different policy ideas than the current one.

Torres isn’t worried. “Ultimately, the law doesn’t change. People will question whether the priorities will shift.” However, the core mission, protecting national and public security, “will continue without a doubt” whether individual priorities change or not, according to the ICE website.