Risk, not politics, should drive Homeland Security spending
Friday, August 15, 2008 1:13 AM PDT
Printable version
E-mail this articleAug. 15 Daily News editorial
Forty-three cities, Seattle included, will receive fewer federal dollars for anti-terror programs this year, according to a new Department of Homeland Security grant list obtained by The Associated Press. The funding cuts are relatively modest — probably less than what they should be. But we can expect whining from a good many angry public officials once the list is officially released.
Members of Congress and city officials have come to count on this revenue in the years since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Until very recently, Congress exercised tight control over the distribution of the grants, doling out these Homeland Security dollars like so much pork, without regard to the likelihood of attack. Members ignored the Bush administration’s repeated calls to distribute the anti-terror money on the basis of risk. Congress instead chose to spread a large portion of available revenue evenly among the states.
Wisely, that began to change a couple of years ago. The administration shamed a majority of lawmakers into altering the grant distribution formula to allow the Department of Homeland Security to direct most of the money to those cities deemed to be at greatest risk of terrorist attack or natural disasters. The tipping point for Congress came in the spring of 2006, with the release of Congress’ thoroughly politicized grant list.
Large, coastal cities generally considered to be at greatest risk of attack saw their funding for first responders slashed that year, while mid-sized cities such as Omaha, Neb., and Louisville, Ky., enjoyed big increases in anti-terror funding. New York and Washington, D.C. — the two cities attacked on Sept. 11, 2001, and still considered to be at greatest risk of future attacks — sustained 40 percent funding cuts in 2006. New Orleans, a city virtually destroyed by Hurricane Katrina the year before, had its funding reduced by half.
While the current grant distribution formula allows for more risk assessment, members of Congress continue to push for a say in the process. Last year, the initial grant list contained 45 metropolitan areas, and Congress insisted that Homeland Security consider around 100 cities, according to The Associated Press.
Factoring politics out of the equation may be expecting too much from this or any other Congress. But it’s important that the Department of Homeland Security resist congressional pressures to spread this money around without regard to risk. The U.S. Treasury is not so flush that the government can afford to award any of these grants to help lawmakers win re-election. Every dollar should be awarded on the basis of risk, alone.
Past Month's Most Commented Stories