Department of Homeland Security Approriations Act, 2006--Conference Reprot

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006--CONFERENCE REPORT -- (Senate - October 07, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to the fiscal year 2006 Homeland Security appropriations bill. I oppose this conference report for three main reasons. First, the funding levels for first responder grants has been slashed to the lowest levels in the post-9/11 era despite the evident need for resources. Second, the bill adopts a formula for the distribution of first responder grants that is unpredictable, lacking in basic fiscal safeguards and will leave many parts of this country vulnerable. Third, this conference report underfunds mass transit security.

This conference report cuts the funding allocation for State and local first responder grants from $1.1 billion enacted in fiscal year 2005 to only $550 million for fiscal year 2006, an unacceptable and unwise reduction. Moreover, the level contained in the conference report is a full $270 million less than the amount requested in the administration's budget request. Unfortunately, these reductions continue a downward trend. The overall amount of homeland security funding for first responders and state and local needs has declined by $1.2 billion in just the past 2 years.

This is not the time to slash funding levels of these critical preparedness grants. These Draconian cuts are particularly remarkable given the recent failures in the response to Hurricane Katrina. That disaster clearly indicated that this Nation is not as prepared as it must be and that Federal, State, and local first responders and emergency managers are lacking critical equipment, especially communications gear and training resources. This is not the time to be cutting the resources available for these vital preparedness programs.

The second reason I voted against the conference report was because it adopts a formula to distribute these funds that is unbalanced, unpredictable and lacks accountability measures that are needed to ensure funds are spent wisely. Indeed, this conference report underscores the need for the bill Senator LIEBERMAN and I have developed, and the Senate overwhelmingly endorsed, to ensure a stable level of funding for all States. The approach taken in our bill would establish a formula that provides a predictable level of funding--scaled to reflect the different needs of states--that will allow all States to achieve essential preparedness and prevention capabilities.

We don't know where the next terrorist attack will take place. There is no way to predict where the next hurricane, tornado, or outbreak of pandemic influenza will occur. Therefore, we must raise the preparedness of all States to a minimum level of preparedness.

Unfortunately, the approach taken by the conference report does not provide an adequate base level to help States and localities establish minimum levels of preparedness. Nor does it recognize, as our bill does, that some States, because of larger or more dense populations, need more funding than others to establish essential preparedness capabilities.

Additionally, under the ad hoc approach taken in this conference report, States cannot count on a predictable stream of funding, which makes it impossible to implement the long-range plans the DHS requires of them. We need a fair formula, in statute, that does not jump from year to year as is currently the case.

Additionally, accountability measures--like independent audits, robust reporting requirements, and tying spending to standards--are simply not in place. We need to adopt authorizing legislation to ensure this funding is being properly spent.

It is disappointing that the appropriators largely adopted the House position on how to distribute this funding. This is particularly the case given that the bill Senator LIEBERMAN and I put together received the support of more than 70 Senators just this past July.

Finally, this conference report is flawed because it shortchanges vulnerable areas, in particular, transit security. The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs recently held hearings on this important topic which revealed vulnerabilities in our transit systems. The attacks in Madrid and London demonstrate that terrorists are willing and able to attack transit systems; it is unconscionable that we are not doing more to secure our domestic transit systems.

Our Nation must make more progress in improving its ability to respond to catastrophic disasters, whether natural or from a terrorist attack. Congress owes it to our constituents and to our first responders to be more thoughtful in how we provide the resources necessary to improve our ability to deter, detect, and respond to threats facing our Nation.

http://thomas.loc.gov