Throwing money at technology
Published: 19 Oct 2004 16:15 BST
Rather than this type of "target-based" approach, as it is known, many security and anti-terrorism experts advocate a strategy that can be used in a variety of emergency situations. This means strategies should be based on building certain capabilities instead of on defending against attacks on specific areas.
For instance, homeland security officials could decide that all local communities in the US must be able to survive independently for the first 24 hours after a biochemical attack, until federal help can arrive. Their directive could outline requirements for everything from food and shelter to inoculations and medical care, using formulas based on population.
Similarly, a goal for national preparedness could be set for the first full day after a power grid is shut down. Every state could be required to restore power to a certain level that would allow hospitals and other critical facilities to operate at minimum capacity. Such direction, based on case studies of successful systems around the country, would give local authorities a better idea of how to make technology-purchasing decisions.
"In terms of capabilities, we are the best in the world in a lot of ways -- people already have monitors and sensors and vaccines," said a staff member of one House committee that deals with homeland security issues. "The challenge is to wade through the soup where everyone's gadget is a homeland security gadget."
Critics say lawmakers have little incentive to change the target-based approach because it provides benefits that they might not otherwise get. The current budgeting process ensures that all states will get significant grants and government contracts, even though their vulnerability may differ widely.
The US Department of Homeland Security guarantees that each state will get at least 0.75 percent of the funds available for grant programmes, according to a May report by The Heritage Foundation, a self-described conservative think thank. This system automatically takes up 40 percent of all grants and leaves 60 percent for specific projects identified by the department.
"The formulas that drive the grant process are turning homeland security initiatives into state entitlement programmes," the report said. "In this manner, California, clearly a 'target-rich environment,' received only 7.95 percent of general grand monies, even though the state accounts for 12 percent of the nation's population. Wyoming, receiving 0.85 percent, accounts for only 0.17 percent of the population. This translates to $5.03 per capita in California and $37.94 per capita in Wyoming."
Previous
Did you find this article useful?
330 out of 617 people found this useful
Digg
Slashdot
Del.ici.ous
Stumble
Reddit
