Bill would bring increased Homeland Security money

Alicia Robinson

Local police and firefighters will get more federal funding with less

red tape if a bill written by Rep. Chris Cox makes it through all the

hoops.

The Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act would

scrap the current funding formula for the Department of Homeland

Security’s terrorism preparedness money in favor of a subjective

method in which funding would be based on an area’s risk level. A

community with a nuclear plant or major sea port, for example, would

get more money than a rural area with no likely terrorist targets.

“We spend billions of dollars each year on intelligence,” Cox

said. “What this bill will do is use what we learn about terrorist

capabilities and intentions and match it with what we are leaning

about domestic vulnerabilities.”

The current formula divides 40% of the available money equally

between all 50 states, and the other 60% is doled out to states based

on population. In 2003, California received $482.5 million, which

worked out to $13.74 per resident, while Rhode Island was given $37.2

million, but with its much smaller population that divided up to

$33.20 per person.

“California has much at stake in this bill, because on a per

capita basis, we receive less funding for homeland security than any

other state,” Cox said.

Cox’s bill also aims to get rid of bureaucratic red tape that

keeps funding from getting to communities. The Department of Homeland

Security would set clear terrorism preparedness standards to

determine what police and fire departments and other agencies would

reasonably need to respond to a terrorist threat.

“Conceptually it sounds like it’s a smarter thing,” Newport Beach

Fire Chief Tim Riley said of the bill. “Any time a congressman talks

about bypassing red tape to get the dollars down to the local level

we support that.”

Riley said his department and other Orange County agencies have

developed a fairly cooperative system to apply for homeland security

dollars, so he thinks they’ve been getting their fair share. He hoped

that Cox’s bill would mean fewer strings attached to money that is

doled out, however.

“It makes it pretty frustrating when someone tries to come in and

tell you what your needs are and how to spend your money,” he said.

While the current formula means a windfall for small states while

big states go begging, Cox said, his bill doesn’t simply reverse

that. If California gets more money under the new bill, it will be

because it has high-risk terrorist targets and large vulnerable

population centers, he said.

The next step in the bill’s progress is approval by the House

judiciary committee, which could happen as soon as next week. Cox

said it could come to the House floor for a vote before congress’

July 4 recess, and it could reach President Bush’s desk later this

year.