Homeland Security Grants Wasted
Suppose you had a choice between one of two options:
(1) Restrict homeland security grant money to major metropolitan centers (e.g. New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington D.C., San Francisco, etc.).
(2) Spread homeland security grant money across the entire country, with every county of the nation getting funds.
Clearly (2) is the correct answer. It's a question of fairness (and getting reelected). The Des Moines Register explains:
A new congressional report on homeland security grants says states and local governments have spent billions of dollars "without any real assessment of risk or need," and some police and fire departments have used the grants to purchase equipment of "only marginal utility" in the fight against terrorism.
The report, released Tuesday by the House Select Committee on Homeland Security, mirrors findings of a Des Moines Sunday Register investigation that detailed the way Iowa is spreading its share of the anti-terrorism grants throughout the state, with some grants being used for questionable purchases.
A state-by-state analysis included in the report shows Iowa is among a minority of 21 states that consider the terrorist risk before parceling out federal grants to cities and counties. But Iowa is also one of 25 states that give a base level of money to every county, regardless of the risk.
"The ramifications of these funding decisions are profound," the House committee's report stated. "The system has provided small counties across the country with relatively large awards of terrorism-preparedness money, while major cities . . . struggle to address their needs in a near-constant heightened alert environment."
Although Des Moines (no doubt a high priority al-Qaeda target) is more populous than any of Iowa's 98 outlying counties, 10 of those counties received more money than Des Moines.
You'll also be happy to note that, according to the article, Missouri has purchased a chemical and biological warfare suit for every full-time law enforcement officer in the state.
The fundamental fairness of the federal government's distribution of funds is only matched by its remarkable efficiency. Although $2.7 billion was approved last March, only $1 in $6 has been spent.
Postscript: Perhaps they think, along with Wittgenstein's wood-sellers, that the country will be more secure the larger the surface area covered by funding (just as Republicans believe they have more support because red states cover more territory).
And perhaps, along the lines of Wittgenstein's moral, the fact that we need to point out this is not, in fact, the case shows that communication has broken down between us and them.
11:27:59 AM 
|
