Indeed, the Iraq occupation, the cost of which is $275 million per day, or $3,749 per Iraqi, in FY 2006, also has opportunity costs. Unfortunately, protecting the U.S. homeland seems to be one of them.
Strong criticism over proposed homeland security cuts
By Andrew Strickler
December 2, 2007 | Newsday.com
State and city leaders lined up yesterday to bash a White House proposal that would gouge federal homeland security grants in New York and nationally and provide no money to protect the city's ports, subways, and bus terminals.
"You scratch your head and wonder, is the White House on the same planet as the rest of us? Homeland security doesn't matter?" New York Sen. Charles Schumer said to reporters at his Manhattan office yesterday.
According to budget documents obtained by The Associated Press, the Bush administration is not convinced that the money has been well spent and thinks the nation's highest-risk cities have largely satisfied their emergency need to boost security.
The plan, which was first leaked in a memo Friday, would reduce grant money for states and cities from $3.4 billion in fiscal year 2007 to $1.4 billion in 2009. In its present form, the plan calls for a radical restructuring of how such grant money is doled out and would force local and state governments to shoulder a much larger share of expenses.
The proposal would also provide no funding specifically for port and transit security, a provision that drew particular ire from Schumer. "To say no port security, no transit security, when we know that our ports and our transits are targets for terrorists ... makes no sense if you want to protect America," he said.
White House Office of Management and Budget officials said the president's budget proposals have yet to be finalized.
"Protecting the homeland continues to remain a top priority for the administration and although no final budget decisions have been made, we are confident future funding levels will appropriately reflect our dedication to homeland security," White House spokesman Trey Bohn said.
In a letter sent to President George W. Bush, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton called the proposed cuts "unconscionable."
"Securing our homeland requires constant vigilance, and we must do everything within our power to improve our level of preparedness. These reported cuts undermine those efforts," the letter states.
State and city officials also balked at the idea yesterday.
The proposal "represents a 'bean counter' approach to protecting our homeland when sound policy is what's required," said Paul Larrabee, spokesman for Gov. Eliot Spitzer. "The president must act to ensure that those on the front lines in states like New York have the resources they desperately need."
John Gallagher, a spokesman for Mayor Michael Bloomberg, said, "It's stunning that the federal government would consider cutting New York City's homeland security funds from the already inadequate level that currently exists."
Schumer addressed a statement in the memo that questioned how well $23 billion in federal money earmarked for homeland security since Sept. 11, 2001, has been spent by state and local governments.
"I haven't found a single legitimate question about how the money is being spent in New York and I haven't heard of one instance in which people can say, 'This money is being wasted,'" he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment