DHS drops anti-terror funding to 30 cities

[Paslode]

The wild fire's and now this.....Texas ain't too happy.

30 cities dropped from U.S. anti-terror grants
By ALICIA A. CALDWELL Associated Press
May 19, 2011, 2:40PM

WASHINGTON — The Department of Homeland Security has notified more than 30 cities across the country that they are losing anti-terror funding from the federal government.

The department said Thursday that money for the Urban Areas Security Initiative grants has been cut by about $170 million as part of a larger budget cut that eliminated more than $780 million in grant money from the latest federal budget. The budget cuts mean that only 31 high-threat urban areas, including New York and Washington, will still receive grants this year.

Texas is taking the largest hit, with Austin, El Paso, and San Antonio no longer eligible to receive millions in funding through the Department of Homeland Security’s Urban Areas Security Initiative grant program. Combined, the cities received more than $14.5 million in federal funding last year.

Rep. Peter King, chair of the Homeland Security Committee, praised the department for continuing to fund the New York City region at the same level — about $151.5 million — as in years past.

He said in a statement that the allocations “in this difficult fiscal climate” reflect his and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s “recognition that New York and Long Island remain the top target of al Qaida and its affiliates and need continued federal funding.”

New York and Washington were targets of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and have traditionally received the most attention, and money, from the federal government.

In other cities and regions, including in upstate New York, the news that millions of dollar would be lost was met Thursday with a vocal opposition.

“This is a glaring example of the real world impact on western New York of the extreme cuts the new House majority is focused on,” said Rep. Brian Higgins, a New York Democrat who serves on the Border and Maritime Security and Counterterrorism and Intelligence subcommittees. “The budget is a statement of our national priorities. Keeping our border safe, protecting a region with a history of terrorist cell activities should top the list. Yet, we have people protecting big oil at the expense of national security and that is costing this community and could cost this nation dearly.”

And the cuts come at a worrisome time for law enforcement. After the killing of Osama bin Laden, U.S. authorities have recovered evidence from his compound in Pakistan that the terror leader was encouraging his followers to target smaller U.S. cities in future attacks.

The grant program was launched in 2003 in response to security threats in the wake of the terrorist attacks. Initially the money was available only to New York City, Washington, Los Angeles, Seattle, Chicago, San Francisco, and Houston. But since 2008 more than 60 cities have been awarded the risk-based grants.

In Fiscal Year 2010, 54 smaller cities were eligible to split almost $310 million in funding. Ten larger, higher-risk cities, like New York and Washington, vied for about $525 million. Thirty cities in 23 states and Washington will now share more than $662 million dollars. The lion’s share, about $540 million, will be split by the 10 largest cities.

Also included in the cities losing money are Providence, R.I., Baton Rouge and New Orleans, La., Tucson, Ariz., and Honolulu.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut independent and chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said Connecticut stands to lose about half of the Homeland Security money its cities have received in recent years.

He said Bridgeport and Hartford, which received a combined $5.5 million last year, are among the cities being cut from the program.

“I understand that everyone must sacrifice to bring our federal deficit under control,” Lieberman said in a statement issued Wednesday. “But I do not support cutting the budget on the back of our national security, particularly since foreign and homegrown terrorists will continue to strike us at home.”

Read more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...#ixzz1MqpQlpn8

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/7571683.html

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Paslode

The wild fire and now this...

It's fires...and there are still a number of them burning.

http://txforestservice.tamu.edu/main....aspx?id=12888

Richard

[incarcerated]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110519...20110519225141

F-35 now 'unaffordable': Defense official

Thu May 19, 6:51 pm ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) – The cost of building the F-35 fighter jet, set to replace a large part of the US warplane fleet, is "unaffordable" in its current version and must be reviewed, the Pentagon's top acquisition official said Thursday....

Sorry, we can’t afford the F-35 (project overruns) or DHS: we’re giving the money to the Arab Spring rebels!

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/05/19/363...t-tunisia.html

Obama to Seek Aid For Egypt, Tunisia

Published: Thursday, May. 19, 2011 - 12:00 am | Page 6A
Last Modified: Thursday, May. 19, 2011 - 8:15 am
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama will use his speech to the Arab world today to call for billions of dollars in financial assistance to Egypt and Tunisia as part of a comprehensive approach to the Arab Spring movement that he hopes will boost democratic reforms and America's reputation in the region....

[Ret10Echo]

Multiple homeland security and public safety grant programs took serious hits in the 2011 budget.

This is just one of several

[Pete]

The US does not have the money to put a cop on every corner and a HAZMAT response team with truck in every Firehouse of the USA.

As with all Federal money HS money is used to reward and punish based on politician's views.

Once you get your lips on the government teat the Feds sew them in place.

Look at Education funding.

[Richard]

How much of that DHS $$ was used as originally intended?

Richard

[Ret10Echo]

Originally Posted by Richard

How much of that DHS $$ was used as originally intended?

Richard

Good question Richard. I think that the delta between intent and actual execution could be seen as significant. Grant dollars intended to increase certain capabilities were (IMHO) not coordinated and resulted in some "good" at the local level but did not improve the overall H.S. landscape at the national level. This will be exasperated by the fact that systems and personnel that were funded through these programs are unsustainable in the current fiscal climate.

Back to Pete's point...that pork-chop that DHS had around it's neck is getting rotten and spoiled. Without it there will be little interest in pursuing certain goals simplly because the only thing that was moving the cheese were $$$. Less those, the States can go the way they want to go or will not be able to do anything even if they wanted to.

Take a look out there on the Federal dollars being thrown at Broadband...and what is proposed. The numbers are significant. As always the money will go to those who can write a good Grant Proposal. That's just the way it is.

[perdurabo]

To be honest, I'm pretty happy with this. I don't have a good grasp on the national picture, but locally our LEOs have been using this funding to militarize, and even as a law-abiding-even-tries-not-to-speed citizen that makes me uncomfortable.

[Ret10Echo]

Originally Posted by perdurabo

To be honest, I'm pretty happy with this. I don't have a good grasp on the national picture, but locally our LEOs have been using this funding to militarize, and even as a law-abiding-even-tries-not-to-speed citizen that makes me uncomfortable.

Again, that speaks to intent versus actual use. If you have the ability to write quality grant proposals (quality being defined by the ability to win awards) then why not apply for EVERYTHING.

Then when you get the money (many are surprised they won) you have to spend it...and usually under a ticking clock, so you blow it on "stuff" just because you can. (This is not to specifically ding what these individual jurisdications are doing or being challenged with. Just a gross generalization.)

There is a serious lack of an overall plan...but this IS a republic and the States should so the Feds should not be providing that plan...really...

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."