NYC, Washington lose terror funds

[Balta1701]

So, according to press reports this morning, the Department of Homeland Security has decided to enact significant cuts in the amount of anti-terror funds going to New York and Washington, the cities actually hit by the last set of terror attacks.

 

After vowing to steer a greater share of anti-terrorism money to the nation's highest-risk cities, Homeland Security officials today announced grants to New York City and Washington that would be slashed by 40 percent, while dollars headed to spots including Omaha and Louisville, Ky., would surge.

 

...

Homeland Security officials said a more sophisticated grant evaluation process—combined with a smaller overall allocation of funds from Congress—were responsible for the unexpected results.

 

For the first time, they also said, teams of law enforcement officials from around the nation evaluated the effectiveness of the proposed spending plans submitted by the 46 eligible urban areas, cutting grants for cities that had shoddy or poorly articulated plans.

 

"We want to make sure we are not simply pushing dollars out of Washington," said Tracy Henke, assistant secretary for grants and training. "The reality is you have to understand that there is risk throughout the nation."

 

The net effect was that the grant to New York City, which was $207.6 million last year, will drop to $124.5 million this year, while Washington will see its grant dollars drop a similar 40 percent, to $46.5 million this year.

 

Meanwhile, grants for cities like Louisville, Omaha and Charlotte, N.C., each jumped by about 40 percent, to about $8.5 million each. Newark and Jersey City, which received a combined grant, also saw a large increase, rising 44 percent to $34 million.

 

Representative Peter King, Republican of New York, who is chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, said the allocation formula is obviously flawed.

 

"This is indefensible," he said. "It's a knife in the back to New York and I'm going to do everything I can to make them very sorry they made this decision."

See, now normally, I might not be as annoyed by this one, because it may very well be a sign that the folks in washington and NY were spending the money carelessly in earlier years. But Here's the one that got me.

New York has no national monuments or icons, according to the Department of Homeland Security form obtained by ABC News. (Click here for the actual document.) That was a key factor used to determine that New York City should have its anti-terror funds slashed by 40 percent--from $207.5 million in 2005 to $124.4 million in 2006.

 

The formula did not consider as landmarks or icons: The Empire State Building, The United Nations, The Statue of Liberty and others found on several terror target hit lists. It also left off notable landmarks, such as the New York Public Library, Times Square, City Hall and at least three of the nation's most renowned museums: The Guggenheim, The Metropolitan and The Museum of Natural History.

 

The form ignored that New York City is the capital of the world financial markets and merely stated the city had four significant bank assets.

So we're cutting funds to NYC because it has no national landmarks or icons, while Omaha and Louisville do. Heckuva Job, DHS.

[Rex Kickass]

Alltel Stadium in Jacksonville - National Icon.

 

Shea Stadium, Yankee Stadium, Giants Stadium, Madison Square Garden..... nothing worth mentioning apparently.

 

It's kinda funny actually.

[jackie hayes]

It's a no-brainer. Why attack the S of L or the heart of international diplomacy, when Omaha still has gondolas?

[Gregory Pratt]

It's a no-brainer. Why attack the S of L or the heart of international diplomacy, when Omaha still has gondolas?

 

You've got it.

[southsider2k5]

Brilliant. Now we have politics introduced into terror funding... Kinda makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Hopefully Michigan City at least got something to protect the world-reknowed William J Clinton Bandstand from the people who hate our freedoms.

[Texsox]

We can't protect every target. Who would have thought that the Federal Building in Oklahoma was a target? Are we erecting defense shields? Big cities already have plenty of police protection. New York has FBI out their butts, etc. It's the smaller communities that don't have the resources that really need the help. Possibly the results aren't as stupid as it sounds, althought the reasoning is dumb.

[EvilMonkey]

We can't protect every target. Who would have thought that the Federal Building in Oklahoma was a target? Are we erecting defense shields? Big cities already have plenty of police protection. New York has FBI out their butts, etc. It's the smaller communities that don't have the resources that really need the help. Possibly the results aren't as stupid as it sounds, althought the reasoning is dumb.

You know, I think hell might be freezing over or something. Tex, I agree with what you just wrote! While the reasoning he gave for lowering NY's was pretty bad, he should have just said "Hey NY, quit hogging all the dough, other places need a bit also!"

[Texsox]

You know, I think hell might be freezing over or something. Tex, I agree with what you just wrote! While the reasoning he gave for lowering NY's was pretty bad, he should have just said "Hey NY, quit hogging all the dough, other places need a bit also!"

 

We can make fun of our country all we want, but we rarely do something unbelievably stupid. Stupid, yes. But not on that scale and in such a high profile project.

[Rex Kickass]

A big reason that NYC got its funding cut apparently? Overtime.

 

The way NYPD does its training is by training an entire city shift at a time, forcing a lot of overtime to do it. Although, its a costly method of doing it, it's said to be a very effective method of getting this kind of training to stick.