re: "State Department reform: Much ado about nothing?"

Thomas M. Hill at The Brookings Institution ("a nonprofit public policy organization") is thinking about State Department's reorganization plan.

Money quote(s):

"A second rumored reform to fold State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs and Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration into the Department of Homeland Security came under attack from Senators Ben Cardin (D-Md.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) as well as House Democrats. Senator Cardin stated, “I firmly believe the State Department should remain the face of America to the world and the entry point for foreigners traveling here, for consular activities and refugee resettlement.”"

It's fine for all options to be on the table and to give consideration to major changes.  It's not necessarily a bad thing to have to stop and consider why things are being done a certain way or why things are a certain way.  If nothing else, Sec. Tillerson and others now have a firmer grasp of why it makes sense for State to be the "front end" of the visa and other consular services, even where there are shared and even overlapping responsibilities with DHS.

"The opposition to these rumored reforms was so significant that Secretary Tillerson felt compelled to include a slide in the reorganization plan preview titled “what redesign is not” and saying, “there is no intention by State or USAID to undertake the following actions at this time: moving Consular Affairs to DHS… Dismantling State or USAID…”"

Glad that's settled then.