A year after Butler: Remembering a fallen hero, reckoning with security breakdown

One year ago, the attempted assassination of then-presidential candidate Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, marked a pivotal and deeply troubling moment for the nation—and especially for the U.S. Secret Service, the agency charged with protecting America's top leaders.

The attack, which occurred at a campaign rally, claimed the life of fire chief Corey Comperatore, who was shielding his family during the gunfire. His death underscored the tragedy of what many now describe as a catastrophic security lapse.

For an agency with what has been described as a "zero-fail mission," the events of July 13, 2024, raised urgent questions about systemic failures.

In the days and months that followed, at least five separate investigations were launched, including internal reviews by the Secret Service, FBI, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), as well as probes by both chambers of Congress. The findings highlighted a range of failures, from lapses in intelligence sharing to gaps in event coordination and local enforcement communication.

One year later, the Secret Service released a public update outlining 37 reform measures in response to those findings.

These recommendations were echoed in reports from the House Task Force and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. However, what remains unanswered is a more fundamental question: How did a globally renowned protective agency allow such a breakdown to happen?

A long road from 9/11 to Butler

To understand the present, many experts point to the past- -- specifically the post-9/11 restructuring of America's homeland security apparatus.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, were the result of detailed planning by al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, who had long viewed the U.S. presidency as a primary target, according to an ABC News analysis.

The federal government responded with sweeping reforms, including creating the Department of Homeland Security in 2003. Agencies, including the Secret Service—formerly under the Treasury Department—were absorbed into DHS.

The change significantly expanded the Secret Service's responsibilities. Not only did the agency's protective mission double, but it also took on an enhanced investigative role under the Patriot Act. Yet, unlike other federal agencies that received substantial boosts in budget and staffing, the Secret Service's resources grew only modestly.

For example, in 2001, the FBI operated with a $3.3 billion budget and around 25,000 personnel. By 2025, the agency reported it requested $11.3 billion and employs over 37,000 staff.

In contrast, the Secret Service's budget rose from $859 million in 2001 to just over $3 billion today, with a workforce of about 8,000, according to a Homeland Security report.

Despite its expanded mission, the agency faced persistent recruitment and retention challenges similar to police staffing shortages seen throughout the U.S, according to the non-profit International Association of Chiefs of Police.

"Contributing factors include staffing challenges, high turnover and public criticism stemming from the pandemic, reported misconduct incidents and the 'defund the police' movement," the IACP said.

Reforms delayed, warnings ignored

The Secret Service's structural issues were not unknown. A series of high-profile incidents—including White House perimeter breaches and security threats during the 2016 campaign—prompted calls by legislators for reform.

In 2015, a House Oversight Committee report titled "The Secret Service: An Agency in Crisis" laid out key recommendations, including expanded training, staffing increases, technology integration, and a more unified federal protective strategy.

The agency embraced those recommendations, but implementation was uneven and often hamstrung by lack of congressional funding. A 2016 report by the National Academy of Public Administration further emphasized that the Secret Service was still in "early stages of transformation" and warned that "budget and staffing constraints inevitably lead to trade-offs."

According to recent congressional data, the number of personnel assigned to protective missions has decreased—dropping from 4,027 in FY2014 to 3,671 today.

What's changing now and what isn't

In the wake of the Butler shooting, Secret Service director Sean Curran unveiled a strategic overhaul built on five pillars: Operations, Human Capital, Resources and Physical Assets, Training, and Technology. Read the Secret Service Strategic Plan

The agency says its reforms include: Clearer lines of command for protective events, enhanced coordination with local law enforcement, improved intelligence sharing, recording of radio transmissions at protective events and integration of new surveillance and threat-detection technologies.

Still, at least 10 of the 37 recommendations require congressional or executive action. These include reassessing whether the Secret Service should remain under DHS, increasing its budget and staffing, and narrowing the scope of individuals eligible for protection under 18 U.S. Code § 3056—a legacy of expanded protection following 9/11.

Many of these issues were flagged a decade ago in the 2014 DHS Protective Mission Panel report, but substantive legislative follow-through has remained elusive.

The mission must be matched with resources

While mistakes were clearly made in Butler, it's also true that President Trump survived because of the extraordinary bravery of Secret Service agents, who placed themselves between the shooter and the former president. Their selflessness stands as a powerful reminder of the agency's mission and the personal risk involved in fulfilling it.

But as policymakers continue to investigate and debate long-term reforms, one thing is clear: The Secret Service's "no-fail" mission must be matched with "no-fail" support—from both Congress and the White House.

Until then, the events of Butler will remain a stark warning of what happens when an elite agency is allowed to operate without the resources, staffing, and clarity of mission it so clearly deserves.