JoseCuervo
New member
I guess the "War on Terrorism" is only important if it involves invading other countries. Protecting the Homeland just doesn't seem that important....
BUSH SAID HE WOULD PROTECT OUR CITIES
Bush’s FY05 budget slashes $1 billion in funding for homeland security and bioterrorism grants. The Bush budget cuts $937 million from homeland security formula grants nationwide. These grants provide police, firefighters and emergency management teams with the training and equipment they need to keep communities safe. It also cuts $105 million from the Centers on Disease Control’s state and local capacity bioterrorism grants, which fund needed improvements in public health and medical infrastructure statewide. [FFIS, 2/04]
Bush is Letting Many Homeland Security Needs Fall Through the Cracks. More than two years after the 9/11 attacks, serious gaps exist in the Bush administration’s attempts to defend America against terrorism:
· Emergency Response to Public Health Threats: The Department of Homeland Security is cutting by 80 percent ($40 million) funds for its program to ready local emergency responses to public health crises. The program, the Metropolitan Medical Response System run by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, plays a “significant role in [federal] mass casualty planning.” [CQ, 1/2/04]
· Cargo Containers: Only 2% of the 7 million cargo containers arriving at the nation’s 361 commercial ports each year are screened. [Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 7/10/03; Portland Press Herald, 7/5/03]
· Airline Screeners: The Transportation Security Administration’s airport screening force will be cut by 6,000 screeners, about 11%, because GOP says TSA “over hired.” [AP, 4/30/03]
· Chemical Plants: The Government Accounting Office report found that even though US chemical facilities were “attractive targets for terrorists,” there was no government oversight to assure that plants are safe from terrorist attack. In addition, Bush has declined to push for accountability from chemical companies. According to the Richmond Times Dispatch, the EPA “backed down” from using its regulatory power to oversee plant security “after the industry balked.” [GAO, Voluntary Initiatives Are Under Way at Chemical Facilities, but the Extent of Security Preparedness Is Unknown, March 2003]
· Police Equipment: The non-partisan Council on Foreign Relations criticized homeland security preparedness in a 2003 report, stating, “Many police departments lack adequate detection and personal protective equipment and training for responding to chemical, biological, or radiological incidents.” [Independent Task Force, Council on Foreign Relations, 7/29/03]