Push For More Anti-Terror Funds
BY JOHN TOSCANO

Continuing the fight for more dollars for New York City and state to build an effective anti-terror defense and to assure a fairer distribution of funds for these purposes, local lawmakers have introduced bipartisan legislation to establish that the city receive sufficient funding.

Both bills are aimed at reforming the Urban Areas Security Initiatives (UASI) grants program to avoid future reductions in anti-terror funding to high-threat cities such as New York.

The bipartisan bill filed by Congressmember Joseph Crowley (D) and Vito Fossella (R- C) would require the UASI grants to be distributed based only on risk, defined as threat, vulnerability and consequences, and eliminate all needs-based variables.

The legislation introduced by Congressmember Anthony Weiner (D) would limit eligibility for high-threat grants to the 15 cities most at risk of a terror attack, Weiner said.

"While UASI grants are supposed to be reserved for the highest-threat cities (such as New York City), they have become pork barrel funds doled out to 'urban areas' covering 54 percent of the country, including 14 areas with populations smaller than Staten Island," Weiner (Queens/Brooklyn) pointed out.

His bill would reduce from 46 to 15 the number of cities eligible for anti-terror funds under the UASI program, he said. By doing this, Weiner added, "The funding mix will free up more funds for large, high-risk cities, reducing the possibility of drastic cuts such as the $83 million or 40 percent cut in New York City's funding last year."

Weiner said his office estimated that if the standard he proposes was in place last year, New York City would have received at least $49 million more in 2006.

Crowley (Queens/The Bronx) noted that the UASI initiative was created to ensure American cities with the greatest risk of deadly threat would not be denied resources to protect themselves and for their first responders to have the training and equipment to save more lives.

"Still, last year," he continued, "President [George W.] Bush was prepared to let New York City lose $83 million to secure itself against threats that are all too real."

Fossella (Staten Island) said, "Pork barrel politics has now infected the one and only threat-based anti-terror funding program.

He pointed out that the Crowley- Fossella bill would end leaking of anti-terror dollars to a small city to purchase a hazmat truck even though it does not face the threat of chemical, biological or radiological attack.

The Crowley- Fossella bill would also:

+Expand the use of funding to include construction costs to enhance security at communications facilities, command centers and medical response facilities.

+Expand the use of funding for overtime costs for localities with 100 or more personnel dedicated exclusively to counter-terrorism and intelligence activities.

+Establish a legal basis for UASI programs to set clear guidelines for this administration, which it presently does not have.

+Prevent a repeat of last year's anti-terror reductions to high-threat cities such as New York City, which received a total of $124 million in homeland security grants, a 40 percent cut from levels of the previous year under the UASI grants program.