Steve Quayle News Alerts

March 4, 2003
By Brock N. Meeks, MSNBC

WASHINGTON, — Despite the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the real burden of protecting America’s towns, bridges, reservoirs, pipelines, factories, power plants and ports falls to state and local officials, who, short of money, training and personnel, find themselves unable to meet Washington’s security mandates.

EFFECTIVE SECURITY and readiness carry a mammoth price tag, a burden that many localities claim they can’t afford to pay. In the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the White House promised cash-strapped state and local jurisdictions some $7 billion to help defray costs related to increased security mandates. Washington hasn’t delivered on that promise, and it’s weighing heavily on the nation’s local elected officials.

The National Conference of State Legislators figures that homeland security mandates from Washington cost states $4 billion last year. “Our nation cannot fund America’s homeland security on the back of local property taxes and fire hall bingo proceeds,” argues Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley.

Administration officials blame Congress for the shortfall, saying national lawmakers stripped out most of the president’s request of $3.5 billion in new funds earmarked for homeland security, leaving only $1.3 billion for new anti-terrorism initiatives.

Meanwhile, Bush’s proposed 2004 budget is also drawing criticism from the nation’s mayors.

“While we are pleased that the budget proposes a second installment of $3.5 billion for local homeland security investments, cities continue to wait for the first round of this funding, which was promised more than one year ago,” said Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

Such shortfalls have an immediate and devastating impact on the ability of America’s cities to protect citizens from potential terrorist acts. A survey of 122 mayors by the U.S. Conference of Mayors reported that while three-quarters of those surveyed thought their plans for reacting to a terrorist act were satisfactory, fewer than a third had confidence in their ability to detect a threat in the first place, equip emergency workers to handle the threat or even communicate effectively with residents, businesses or health workers in the event of a terrorist strike.

A POLITICAL FOOTBALL
Complicating the picture, as always, is politics. When it became clear late last year that Bush’s pledge for local and state aid would fall short of the actual need, potential Democratic presidential candidates seized on the issue. From Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle to Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, there has been scathing criticism aimed at Bush, alleging that the administration is short-changing local security efforts.

But it’s not just Democrats. When Bush met the National Governors Association at the White House last week, Republicans joined the chorus criticizing Washington.

“Generally speaking, we’re saying, ‘No more unfunded mandates” said Republican Gov. John Rowland of Connecticut.

Rowland knows all too well what the funding crunch has done to his budget, already in deficit because of the sluggish economy. Across the country, city, state and county governments have adopted a kind of triage system to meet federal mandates and other requirements related to homeland security while also attending to basic municipal services. In many cases, changes ordered by Washington — like the recent hike in the national terrorist alert status to threat level “orange,” can force police overtime and other spending by cities and localities that destroy fiscal planning.

In Los Angeles, city and county leaders asked Washington last month for an immediate cash infusion of $100 million to help prevent and respond to possible terrorist attacks. City Councilman Jack Weiss wrote Washington officials a letter stating that security improvements are “urgently” needed to protect the Los Angeles airport, its harbors and other crucial infrastructure. Weiss’ letter followed a simulated terrorist attack on Los Angeles, dubbed “Operation Nighthawk,” which revealed gaping holes in the city’s ability to respond to a terrorist event.

One in four cities across the nation is being forced to cut police ranks or will shortly, according to a survey of 322 cities by the National League of Cities.

“These numbers underscore the very real threat to hometown America posed by the federal, state and local budget crises,” said John DeStefano, NLC president and mayor of New Haven, Conn. The lack of funding from Washington and state legislators’ cutting funding to cities “are leaving America’s hometowns to carry the burden alone,” he said.

NEVER ENOUGH
Beyond the financial shortfall issue, homeland security experts concede that the possibility of some breach in security cannot be entirely avoided.

“If your readiness aim is zero events, zero casualties, never have a problem, then no human being can succeed,” said David McIntyre, deputy director for the Anser Institute for Homeland Security. “If you’re after flexibility and responsiveness and coordination so that people aren’t caught flatfooted in a crisis, well then I’d say we are far more ready than in the past,” he said. However, there’s a “big but” to attach to that statement, McIntyre said.

“No one has enough resources to do everything. And that’s especially a problem given that we face multiple threats,” McIntyre said. Responses and preparations for a chemical attack are very different from a radiological attack, which differs from a nuclear attack or a terrorist bombing, he said. Cities and states “can’t do them all, so you have to prioritize,” he said. And that inevitably means there are going to be compromises that affect security.

TRAINING DAYS LACKING
One of the big compromises so far has been training. Security experts and local officials say that no response plan is worth the paper its printed on unless some form of training — possibly including large-scale drills — is undertaken.

John Kane, a retired 20-year veteran of the Sacramento, Calif., police department, runs a three-day-long program called “terrorism for first responders.” He says city officials who claim their town is ready for anything are most likely just shading the truth so they won’t get in trouble with state or federal officials or with constituents.

‘If these guys haven’t actually trained on the exercises, no one is going to stop to read a book when the building blows up.’ — JOHN KANE, Anti-terrorism trainer

“Having a plan is only the first step,” Kane said. “I just don’t want to see some cookie-cutter piece of crap that you put up on the wall, I want to see the actual training you’ve done with the men and women of day watch, the men and women of swing shift, the men and women on the graveyard,” he said. “And if you can’t show me that, then you’re not ready.”

Kane’s seminar — attended by police, fire and rescue teams from all over the nation — helps teach “the grunts on the street,” as he puts it, to make the right choices if they are the scene of a terrorist incident. The state of California and several federal agencies are clients.

Kane says that, across the board, he is finding that there is a dangerously low amount of training.

Most cities “have done no coordinated drills to get the bulk of [first responders] prepared to work together as a team,” Kane said, “to have them become a unified group of responders.”

Kane said first responders are men and women of a special breed. “Driving 100 miles per hour to a gunfight, these people do not read plans; these people run to the guns,” Kane said. “If these guys haven’t actually trained on the exercises, no one is going to stop to read a book when the building blows up.”

MONEY, MONEY, MONEY
The estimated cost of the needed training is huge. The Hart-Rudman report on homeland defense undertaken by the Council on Foreign Relations projected that some 9 million first responders require training, yet there is only one federal training facility, the Center for Domestic Preparedness in Anniston, Ala., with the capability to train these teams to handle chemical attacks. Now running at peak capacity, the center can train only 10,000 people a year.

“Nearly every fire department across this nation lacks specialized training and the appropriate equipment … to effectively respond to the aftermath of a terrorist attack involving chemical, biological, radioactive or nuclear agents,” said Harold Schaitberger, general president of the International Association of Fire Fighters.

In the end, the ability of cities to handle potential terrorist threats may rest with its residents.

“What we haven’t come to grips with is that this is a long-term, expensive problem, and we’re going to have to sort out where it fits on our personal priority,” said McIntyre of the Anser Institute for Homeland Security.

“So are we more ready today to handle a terrorist threat? Yes. Are we ready enough? I think not,” McIntyre said. “That means we’ll suffer casualties, and if we haven’t demanded better [of our local officials] and been willing to pay for it, then we have nowhere to look but ourselves.”

http://www.msnbc.com/news/879030.asp?0bl=-0