The chairman of the Senate panel that oversees funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) yesterday criticized the House’s version of the bill to fund the department in FY ’12 for near “reckless” cuts in science and technology and deep cuts in grant programs.
“I want to strongly object to the 35 percent cut” to the DHS Science and Technology Directorate because clearly this is an effort where we need more science and not less and better technology not mediocre or the same technology,” said Sen. Mary Landrieu, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee. “We have to stay ahead of the terrorists, not behind them. And I think cutting a research and development budget borders on reckless.”
Landrieu spoke at a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing that examined rail security, particularly in light of intelligence gained during the recent operation that killed Osama Bin Laden that showed the former leader of Al Qaeda wanted to attack the rail sector in the United States.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I/D-Conn.), chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, pointed out that the House version of the FY ’12 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill also eliminates the request by DHS for transit security grants as well as a request for 12 additional VIPER law enforcement teams provide random, and at times a surge force, security for various transportation sectors although they seem to be most visible in the mass transit environment.
Lieberman agreed with Landrieu’s concerns over cutting spending for the DHS S&T branch, calling the cuts “foolish at this moment,” adding that spending here “are investments in our future.” He added that he is “confident” that Landrieu’s willingness to battle for additional funds for DHS will ultimately result in more support for the department than is contained in the House budget.
The Obama administration is seeking just over $1 billion for research and development activities within DHS S&T in FY ’12 but the House bill cuts the request by 57 percent to $398.2 million, an amount that is 42 percent less than in FY ’11. The bill also cuts the management account for S&T in FY ’12 by 6 percent to $140.1 million.
In gouging the request, House appropriators said they want the S&T branch to focus on projects that can provide “substantive gains” for near-term operations. They also said that the cuts had to be made because the overall DHS budget request assumes funding obtained from aviation security and customs fees that haven’t been authorized by Congress.
The appropriators also said that “S&T has not fully justified the billions of taxpayer dollars that it has spent on R&D,” adding that Congress, the rest of DHS, which is who S&T serves, and the general public are barely aware of what the directorate is going in “tangible” ways to “improve the homeland security mission.”
Landrieu also criticized proposed funding cuts by the House to homeland security grants that are administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency within DHS. She pegged the cuts at more than 60 percent. DHS is seeking $3.8 billion for various homeland security grants in FY ’12 while the House is recommending only $1 billion.
“This cannot be done in thin air,” Landrieu said of meeting the needs of state and local transit agencies. “It has to be well resourced and well focused.”
Lieberman called the elimination of the transit security grants “bad policy” that he hopes the Senate overturns.
Congressional Republicans are in the midst of chopping the administration’s budget request to help reduce the nation’s debt load. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the ranking member on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said the problem with grant funding is that “many of her colleagues see” there is a tremendous backlog in unspent funds.
However, Peter Boynton, the commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Emergency Management and Homeland Security, said that with more grant funding being funneled directly to major cities and away from adjacent areas, it is hard to immediately fund projects. He pointed out that Connecticut’s mass transit system, which directly feeds commuter rail lines into New York City, has been saving its grant funding until it can actually afford to make the security-related upgrades it is planning.
“We can’t afford the project in any one year,” Boynton said. He said that Connecticut has saved about half of what it needs.
Boynton also said that many grants have a three-year performance period. Meantime, Boynton is working out various plans with the 169 municipalities, dozens of state agencies and two tribes in conjunction with a state-wide homeland security strategy that lists goals and objectives.
“It’s coming as a little bit of a surprise to us now that we’re being challenged, ‘Why haven’t you spent this money?’ We haven’t spent it because we were told we have three years to spend it and we’re using that time wisely.”
Collins, citing her colleagues in the Senate looking for ways to save money, see the unspent funds as meaning either a program is overfunded or poorly managed and probably unneeded.
“The desire around here to sweep up unobligated, or unspent, funds is enormous given the budget constraints and the irony is that it penalizes projects and good planning and communities who are actually spending the way you would want them to spend,” Collins said. “They’re formulating a careful plan so that they don’t waste the money.”
Collins said that there will be a “battle” over the grant funding given the predominant views that because so much hasn’t been spent, it must not be needed.
Landrieu said that she and Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.), the ranking member on the Senate Homeland Security Appropriations panel, are currently writing their version of the FY ’12 DHS bill.