|
MARCH 2003
|
|
Regional News and Events
|
|
OPINION: Homeland Security: As War Looms, What Now?
|
| By Neal R. Peirce |
(NOTE: This editorial was prepared prior to the commencement of hostilities in Iraq on March 20, 2003.)
The federal government has trained and equipped our troops for Iraq. But we haven't done the same thing for our first responders at homeour police and fire and emergency personnel. If the country goes to war, we are not prepared. Im concerned about bio-terrorism, about chemical warfare. Or lone terrorists. Its a scary set of circumstances.
This somber warning, at the National League of Cities annual Congressional City Conference in Washington, came from Karen Anderson, the groups immediate-past president and mayor of Minnetonka, Minn.
Cities, as a practical matter, provide local defenseagainst fire, crime, storms. Naturally, were the people who show up, said New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr., the current NLC president. But, he added, If we have to buy bio-terror suits, provide special training, deal with risks coming from [outside our] borders like materials entering my port from foreign flag vessels, thats a different issue.
The bottom line, says DeStefano: I will deal with the drug dealers. But its difficult for me to deal with Osama bin Laden. Thats not a fair expectation of local government.
The federal government is walking away from its partnership with us, charges DeStefano, by failing to compensate the billions of dollars that cities are spendingor should be spendingon homeland security.
The cities are bitter that their homeland security needs received just $1.2 billion in Congress 2003 budget. Theyre urging an immediate $4 billion supplemental appropriation. And they see a kind of fiscal shell game in the administrations fiscal year 2004 budget, which purports to spend $3.5 billion for homeland defense but actually reduces overall federal law-enforcement and disaster-relief recovery funds very sharply.
The countrys municipal officials are, to put it mildly, feeling on the outs and very unhappy about it.
Just consider what they propose. To pull the country out of its economic slump, they favor $75 billion in short-term stimulus measures, including $10 billion in extended jobless benefits and a $65 billion one-time tax rebate helpful mostly to low- and middle-income families. Theyd have Washington shell out $20 billion for first responder training and special infrastructure projectswater systems, law enforcement and transportation.
And in outreach to the states, many of which are now forced to cut back on local government aid, the mayors endorse $50 billion in unrestricted federal grants to state governments for every area from school repairs to Medicaid.
All brave and thoughtful (and expensive) ideas. Yet its obvious the Bush administration is marching off in a diametrically opposed direction, showing about as much consideration for the countrys own states and cities as the historic allies its scorning in U.N. Security Council debates over Iraq.
Instead of broad, targeted anti-recession aid, the administration would favor the already-wealthy with gargantuan tax cuts (eliminating taxes on dividends and making mega-savings accounts tax-free). And its intent on an array of cuts in state-local aid, including shifting Medicaid burdens to the states, cutbacks in housing assistance, reductions in child-care and after-school programs, cuts in vocational education and job training, and tightening of requirements for the earned-income tax credit thats critically important to poor families.
Its nothing more, charges DeStefano, than thinly disguised attempts to eliminate access to programs, so that the nations social safety net comes apart.
And what about administration arguments that the mega-tax cuts will spark economic growth? No economist believes in it, bristles DeStefano. The fact is, were bleeding jobs left and right in America right now.
Americas cities and towns, he argues, are energized to fight for their cause. Unlike the heavily gerrymandered, incumbent-protected and campaign-finance dominated Congress, DeStefano asserts, We represent the foundations of health and democracy in our country. Were really the place where ideas and values are contested without being defined by party label, and the focus on incumbency that plays out in districting and how campaign money gets raised.
Yet as braveand at least partially crediblethat claim may be, the cities face a tough challenge right now. Should they go beyond fighting for an even break in federal appropriations? Should they pinpoint the threats to their future, leaping into foreign policy issues, starting with Iraq?
The mayors and council members meeting in Washington, D.C. drew back from a formal anti-war resolution. But informal soundings suggest large numbers of them are deeply worried. Over 100 city councils have already adopted anti-war resolutions. From homeland security to national funding priorities, the legitimate urban concerns are huge.
My guess: soon it will become apparent that foreign and domestic policy cant be separated, especially with a polarizing president whos indifferent to a reasoned, bipartisan foreign policy. Americas hometowns, deeply threatened, will need to join the debate on how Superpower America conducts itself, how it treats the worldand its own communitiesin the 21st century.
Copyright © Washington Post Writers Group
Publications and Media
|
|
