Failing homeland security
A Times EditorialA report card from the 9/11 commission doesn't instill confidence that Congress and the White House have made homeland security a priority.
Published December 9, 2005
As the threat of another terrorist attack in the United States builds, here is how some local officials have spent their federal dollars to prepare. Newark, N.J., bought air-conditioned garbage trucks, the District of Columbia spent part of one grant on leather jackets, and in Columbus, Ohio, they outfitted fire-department dogs with body armor.
Those wasteful examples were used by 9/11 commission leaders Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton to dramatize shortcomings in homeland security. In its final report, the commission issued a letter grade for every preparedness category - a report card that should shame both Congress and the White House.
Of the 41 categories analyzed, only one got an unqualified A grade (an A-minus for disrupting terrorist financing), while 17 were rated D or F. Airline passenger prescreening got an F because of a delayed terrorist watch list, and cargo screening got a D because it "has not been made a priority by the Congress or the administration."
Another major shortcoming is also one of the simplest to fix: creation of a risk-based formula for security funding. With limited resources, money should go to the places most in danger of a terrorist attack. Instead, Congress and the Department of Homeland Security have doled it out like so much pork.
So Houston got $35.5-million for port security while New York and New Jersey got only $6.6-million. Yet New York has already been the target of two attacks and is considered a likely target for another.
A House bill would require states to submit detailed security plans to a federal panel, which would approve grants based on actual need. Inexplicably, Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., and others from small states looking for their cut have stalled Senate action. Those lawmakers should be told that self-dealing has no place in decisions of such national importance.
Simply by passing that House bill, Congress could change security funding from an F to an A. Another shortcoming that should have been simple to fix is the incompatibility of emergency radio communications among first responders. Congress would turn over more of the broadcast spectrum to public safety agencies but has delayed action until 2009. They should move that date up to 2007.
Another concern is lack of cooperation inside Homeland Security's vast bureaucracy. The agencies fail to share information because "they need resources, active presidential backing (and) policies and procedure in place that compel sharing," the report concluded.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan promised that "this is the president's highest responsibility." But is it Bush's highest priority? Dogged by setbacks in Iraq, he has let homeland security slip.
Most Americans believe another attack on home soil is likely. If Congress and the White House refuse to respond to the problems laid out by the 9/11 commission, then it is time for the people to insist that they do so.