Homeland Security budget redistribution... LOSERS: NYC, DC, New Orleans, Boston, San Diego, Phoenix, etc. / WINNERS: L.A., Chicago, Newark, ATL, Louisville, etc.

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/31/AR2006053101364.html

Anti-Terror Funding Cut In D.C. and New York
Homeland Security Criticized Over Grants

By Dan Eggen and Mary Beth Sheridan
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, June 1, 2006; Page A01

The Department of Homeland Security yesterday slashed anti-terrorism money for Washington and New York, part of an immediately controversial decision to reduce grant funds for major urban areas in the Northeast while providing more to mid-size cities from Jacksonville to Sacramento.

The announcement that the two cities targeted on Sept. 11, 2001, would suffer 40 percent reductions in urban security funds prompted outrage from lawmakers and local officials in both areas, who questioned the wisdom of cutting funds so deeply for cities widely recognized as prime terrorist targets. The decision came less than five months after Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff unveiled changes in the grants plan intended to focus funding on areas facing the gravest risk of attack.

Potential targets outside the Northeast also took painful hits, including New Orleans, San Diego and Phoenix. New Orleans's grants for security and disaster preparedness were cut in half even as it struggles to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina.

In Washington, where the funding dropped from about $77 million to about $46 million, Mayor Anthony A. Williams called the decision "shortsighted."

New York's grant plummeted from about $207 million to $124 million. A DHS risk scorecard for the city asserted that the home of the Empire State Building and the Brooklyn Bridge has "zero" national monuments or icons.

"As far as I'm concerned, the Department of Homeland Security and the administration have declared war on New York," Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, told the Associated Press. "It's a knife in the back to New York, and I'm going to do everything I can to make them very sorry they made this decision."

Homeland Security's grant programs have drawn criticism from cities both large and small; many have felt slighted by what they maintained was a haphazard and unfair distribution plan. This year's round of grants was supposed to ensure that enough money goes to areas at highest risk of terrorist attack by employing risk scores, effectiveness tests and 17 "peer review" panels consisting of homeland security professionals from 47 states.

But department officials struggled yesterday to defend the latest outcome even as lawmakers in both parties denounced them. Most experts and many government officials had expected that the new review process would lead to more money, rather than less, for major terrorist targets such as Washington and New York.

Tracy A. Henke, assistant secretary for grants and training, told reporters that the new funding distribution was the result of a better review process and does not indicate lesser risk for cities such as Washington or New York. Officials noted that Congress had cut the program by about $125 million in 2006, to $711 million, and that New York, Washington and other major cities still would receive the largest shares.

"We have to understand that there is risk throughout the nation," Henke said. "We worked very hard to make sure that there was fairness in the process."

The department refused to release the names of panel members or other details about the review boards.

I. Michael Greenberger, director of the Center for Homeland Safety and Security at the University of Maryland, said the plan doesn't pass the common-sense test. "It's completely inconsistent," Greenberger said. "Where are our priorities? . . . There can be no doubt that Washington and New York are the biggest potential ground zeroes for any future attack."

The Urban Areas Security Initiative provides money to 46 metropolitan areas. It is part of a broader $1.7 billion grant program at DHS, most of which attracted little controversy because it is divided evenly among states and territories.

In addition to Washington and New York, the grant decisions included a 46 percent drop for San Diego, where several of the Sept. 11 hijackers lived; a 61 percent decrease for Phoenix, where an FBI agent suspected that terrorists were taking flight training; and a 30 percent reduction for Boston, the point of origin of the two jetliners that crashed into the World Trade Center.

Phoenix Mayor Phillip Gordon called the grant reduction from $10 million to $3.9 million "outrageous." He said that Phoenix, the nation's fifth-largest city, includes a network of dams, a nuclear power plant and numerous other potential targets.

"Shame on them," Gordon said. "They are literally stripping the ability to protect this area by actions that are incomprehensible."

Winners included Atlanta, Chicago and Los Angeles, as well as smaller cities such as Louisville (up 70 percent), Charlotte (64 percent) and St. Louis (31 percent). The only notable gain in the Northeast was in the Jersey City-Newark area, where the grant rose from $19 million to $34 million.

Louisville's funding increased from $5 million to $8.5 million, and Mayor Jerry Abramson said the money will be used primarily on a project to improve communications between emergency responders. "A lot of this is about logistical issues that are very important if something were to happen," he said.

Undersecretary for Preparedness George Foresman told reporters that although the program was formed with anti-terrorism objectives in mind, the money is meant to improve readiness for "an act of terrorism or an act of Mother Nature."

Yet one of the big losers was hurricane-ravaged New Orleans, whose grant award dropped from $9.3 million to $4.6 million.

The national capital region, which includes Washington and its suburbs in Maryland and Northern Virginia, had requested $190 million in urban security funds for 2006 -- an optimistic figure that would have represented an enormous increase over the $77 million the region received last year.

Washington's deputy mayor for public safety, Edward D. Reiskin, said possible cutbacks will include $25 million planned for communications infrastructure and $10 million for "mass care shelters" to house people displaced from their homes.

"I think it's shortsighted for the federal government to cut funds this way," Williams said at his weekly news briefing. "We remain a target area."

Montgomery County's homeland security director, Gordon Aoyagi, said he was stunned by the news, and predicted "a substantive reduction in a number of regional efforts." Robert Crouch, homeland security adviser to Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine (D), said that "there will be some shakeout" because of the cuts.

New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (R) scoffed at the grant decision. "When you stop a terrorist, they have a map of New York City in their pocket," he said. "They don't have a map of any of the other 45 places."


((((((DOPplur)))n)))u))))tttt (donut), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:25 (eighteen years ago)

Granted, I wish there were more absolute money amounts discussed in the article, instead of percentage increases/decreases, which really does nothing but just exaggerate who "WON" and who "LOST"... 80% sounds mighty large, but if your budget was just $400,000 as opposed to $7,000,000... then that 80% isn't really an impressive statistic to bandy about...

Does anyone have the full details of the redistribution, dollar amounts, etc.?

((((((DOPplur)))n)))u))))tttt (donut), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:27 (eighteen years ago)

This is really fucking suspicious. I know there are sensitive power plants all across the U.S., but the cities that lost the most certainly have the most vulnerable things that need defending (Hello, San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant in San Diego County!.. that's just for starters...)

((((((DOPplur)))n)))u))))tttt (donut), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:30 (eighteen years ago)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=knRLwTfzC1U

Courtney Gidts (ex machina), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:35 (eighteen years ago)

a good proportion of the winners are places where there are big contested races this fall

gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:38 (eighteen years ago)

oh christ, louisville.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:40 (eighteen years ago)

All that money is essentially flushed right down the toilet anyway. If anything the drawdown is as likely to be a response to widespread corruption and idiotic waste anything else. NYC doesn't need a fucking big brother camera system in the motherfucking subway (HELLO MY EMPLOYER, NICE GRAFT) and DC couldn't put together an "improved communications system" if Verizon's bottom line depended on it.

The less money local yokels get to throw away at the likes of my employers and their ilk the better. Bloomberg's no better than the goddamned Feds!


TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:40 (eighteen years ago)

I'd like to hear anybody, anybody at all, name me one project (local or federal) undertaken by "homeland security" that addressed any of the shit in the 9/11 commission report.

TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:41 (eighteen years ago)

I wanted some backup info mainly because this article does seem a bit ("a bit", haha) transparent in wanting to attack the budget cuts, even though the paper would have written a separate article criticizing the implementation of Homeland Security in the first place -- which could have been more cogent (stressing "could have")

((((((DOPplur)))n)))u))))tttt (donut), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:48 (eighteen years ago)

On a similar note, HUD has $11 BILLION waiting to rebuild New Orleans and environs but refuses to hand it over to the state legislature because, hey, they elect some incredibly corrupt and horrible bastards down there, whaddaya know.

TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:50 (eighteen years ago)

So once again thanks to fat cat country clubs and the nepotistic environment of smoke-filled rooms in the clubhouses of them, we all get fucked in the eye.

I'm going to go home now.

TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Thursday, 1 June 2006 20:51 (eighteen years ago)

I'd like to hear anybody, anybody at all, name me one project (local or federal) undertaken by "homeland security" that addressed any of the shit in the 9/11 commission report.

-- TOMBOT (tombo...), Today 2:41 PM. (TOMBOT)

Hooray, hooray for the TSA!

*removes shoes even though the TSA guidelines state it's not required to*

Steve Shasta (Steve Shasta), Thursday, 1 June 2006 21:15 (eighteen years ago)

*and the fact that the only known attempted shoe bomber in all of history failed miserably and was beaten nearly to death by his own fellow passengers after attempting to ignite plastic explosives with matches*

TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Thursday, 1 June 2006 22:49 (eighteen years ago)

*and that none of the TSA's screening measures to date do anything to address the threat of ceramic knives*

TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Thursday, 1 June 2006 22:49 (eighteen years ago)

So why didn't Richard Reed light his shoebomb in the bathroom?

Steve Shasta (Steve Shasta), Thursday, 1 June 2006 22:54 (eighteen years ago)

Watching Hugh Hewitt have a cow over this is amusing. Even more amusing is that his penchant for spelling errors means that he worries about how this will effect Republican majorotoes will be affected in November.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 1 June 2006 23:10 (eighteen years ago)

ooo! ooo! i remember that the TSA guys didn't like my plastic case of silicon ear plugs, and had to check my 80mm lens, just to make sure i wasn't packing. they ran the little oxy pads on it and checked the results with the sniffer.

but it was okay; it was a slow wednesday morning and they were probably bored and wanted some more experience.

kingfish doesn't live here anymore (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 1 June 2006 23:25 (eighteen years ago)

Clearly, Charlotte got the 64% increase due to our acquisition of the right to build the NASCAR HALL OF FAME.

Jessie the Monster (scarymonsterrr), Thursday, 1 June 2006 23:47 (eighteen years ago)

Louisville: The Next Frontier in the War on Terror

Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Friday, 2 June 2006 00:10 (eighteen years ago)

Bloomberg agrees with me

gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 2 June 2006 17:41 (eighteen years ago)

Bruce Schneier:

This story is about the remote town of Dillingham, Alaska, which is probably the most watched town in the country. There are 80 surveillance cameras for the 2,400 people, which translates to one camera for every 30 people.

The cameras were bought, I assume, because the town couldn't think of anything else to do with the $202,000 Homeland Security grant they received. (One of the problems of giving this money out based on political agenda, rather than by where the actual threats are.)

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/03/80_cameras_for.html

scnnr drkly (scnnr drkly), Friday, 2 June 2006 17:48 (eighteen years ago)

SECRETARY FOR UNDERPREPAREDNESS

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 2 June 2006 18:09 (eighteen years ago)

Chertoff was on NPR a few minutes ago, doing damage control. Fairly effectively, if he wasn't lying. His essential responses were:

1. Looking at these numbers simply in terms of this year vs. last was completely unfair. Looking at cumulative totals or even trendlines would be more appropriate.
2. Within the agency, the size of grants last year for New York, Washington, were viewed as one-time increases over "normal," rather than sustainable levels.

He also used this metaphor: if a burglar breaks into your house by smashing down the front door, when you get your next paycheck, the first thing you're going to spend money on is buying a new door, making sure it had plenty of locks, etc. But when you get your second paycheck, you're not going to spend it on buying an even better door and putting even more locks on it, you're going to go to the back door, the windows, etc., and make them more secure.

pleased to mitya (mitya), Friday, 2 June 2006 20:40 (eighteen years ago)

chertoff's a guy I wouldn't mind being my boss, compared to most federal agency heads and administration stooges down here. he just happens to be stuck in charge of the worst idea anybody's had in a very long time, with a rather awful & stupid justification for its existence and a really extraordinarily poor support structure. all in all I mostly feel sympathetic for DHS staffers (heckuva job brownie being obv exception) though the TSA project can go fuck itself right in the ass.

TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Friday, 2 June 2006 20:52 (eighteen years ago)

chertoff once was my boss, in a sense

gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 2 June 2006 21:07 (eighteen years ago)

Also...
New York's grant plummeted from about $207 million to $124 million. A DHS risk scorecard for the city asserted that the home of the Empire State Building and the Brooklyn Bridge has "zero" national monuments or icons.

Chertoff mentioned that the Empire State Building was classified as an inhabited office building because, under whatever matrix this was, that made it a higher category, in terms of necessary funding or risk or something. "National monuments" or "icons" are things that we'd want to protect but where actual loss of life or economic damage would be relatively low (e.g., Mount Rushmore).

pleased to mitya (mitya), Friday, 2 June 2006 21:17 (eighteen years ago)

a lot of people in this country who aren't even close to being terrorists would be happy as all git-out if mount rushmore went ka-blooey.

hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 2 June 2006 21:27 (eighteen years ago)

I'm actually checking the numbers (for once). They don't match up perfectly but, for what it's worth:

NY 2004: $47m / 2005: $214m / 2006: $124m
DC 2004: $29m / DC 2005: $82m / DC 2006: $46m
LA 2004: $28m / LA 2005: $65m / LA 2006: $80m
Charlotte 2004: $7m / 2005: $5.5m / 2006: $9m

The story here is that the urban areas security program was cut overall, not that Louisville is getting a piddling $3.5m more.

pleased to mitya (mitya), Friday, 2 June 2006 21:32 (eighteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.