| Home | Information Sharing & Analysis | Prevention & Protection | Preparedness & Response | Research | Commerce & Trade | Travel Security | Immigration |
The threat level in the airline sector is High or Orange. Read more.
Release Date: 06/17/04 00:00:00
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact 202-282-8010
Washington, D.C.
June 17, 2004
Secretary Ridge: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. First of all I want to recognize and publicly acknowledge and thank the leader of the Homeland Security Grant Task Force. We've had two extremely capable leaders, the governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney, and the mayor of Akron, Ohio, Mayor Donald Plusquellic.
Don and Mitt have done a phenomenal job. They'd be the first one to tell you that much of the credit goes to the considerable support they received from other elected officials, first responders and their staff. But it's with a great deal of pleasure that I join them in making the announcement today with regard to the Homeland Security Funding Task Force.
I've had a chance to meet with the men and women of the Homeland Security Advisory Council to discuss many of our ongoing security priorities. The Council has been and continues to be a valuable partner in our work to make our nation stronger and more secure.
In March, I asked the Council to put together a task force to investigate the distribution of homeland security funds and to develop recommendations to make the process more efficient. As you know, for the past three years, with bipartisan support in Congress, there's been well in excess of $8 billion that's been appropriated for distribution to the state and locals, and if the Congress approves the President's budget, at least another $3.5 billion more this year, and yet there have been concerns that some of the dollars are not getting to the states and to the locals and effectively being used for training exercises and equipment, prevention and response.
So we needed to take a look at the reason for the problems with the distribution system. An unprecedented amount of funding had been awarded, and yet it wasn't enough just to allocate funding; we must ensure that these dollars are getting down to where they can do the most good.
We have learned that in some cases, the current system of distribution has not moved these funds as quickly as it must be moved. We are a new department, and we understand that we must be flexible enough to adapt to new circumstances and facts as we continue to build the national enterprise we called Homeland Security, and it is a national effort. It's not just about a single department. We want to always look for ways to improve how we distribute dollars and make America safer.
So we solicited the Council's help, and led by the governor and the mayor, a bipartisan task force moved quickly to develop a report with recommendations for improving the flow of Homeland Security funds to the emergency managers, first responders, and law enforcement officials on the ground.
During today's meeting, we've had the opportunity to discuss their findings. And I know Mitt and Don are going to share those specifics with you. The work that they have accomplished in such a short period of time, less than three months, is a testament to the commitment that all felt at all levels of government to make sure we get this right.
There's a lot of money out there that needs to be distributed both quickly and effectively, and I have no doubt that this report will not only aid us in that effort, but will also prove to be an invaluable tool as we move forward to improve and streamline this process.
No one is more important to homeland security than our first preventers and our first responders. And in the event of an attack or tragedy, they are the first on the scene, often the last to leave, and it's absolutely critical that they have the necessary tools to do their jobs. And with this report, we are once again affirming our commitment to ensure that these dedicated men and women with the right equipment, the right training, and the right amount of support to continue to their jobs well.
In Homeland Security, we look forward to continuing our work with the members of this task force, as well as with all of our partners at the state and local level to ensure the utmost safety and security to the many communities across America that it is both our honor as well as our duty to protect.
Let me just say personally why I think this is such an extraordinary effort and accomplishment in such a brief period of time. These two public leaders, accompanied by other public leaders, were driven to find a consensus around both workable and reasonable solutions to several problems associated with the distribution and use of dollars. They found them at the local level. They found them at the state level. They made recommendations for the federal level.
They could have glossed it over and sought a least common denominator, or they could have sought just compromise. They raised the bar. The consensus and its unanimous recommendation around a series of serious, workable, practical and important recommendations. Obviously, we'll get a chance to look at them in the next several weeks and determine which ones are the most viable and which ones we can move the most quickly on. But I want now to introduce Governor Mitt Romney. He'll introduce his colleague after his remarks, and then we'll open it up to questions and answers.
Mitt? Governor?
Governor Romney: Thank you. Very briefly, I'm not going to give you a full report on the recommendations from the task force but give you just a headline and you can review the report at your leisure.
Clearly, this is not a time for business as usual in our nation. America is under attack. Our attackers are not satisfied with small or symbolic acts. They're intent on toppling the United States of America and killing our people and impoverishing our nation.
Unfortunately, this isn't over. This is a fact which we'll probably have to deal with for many years to come.
Accordingly, we have to be prepared on an immediate basis, to be prepared to respond to attack, and we also have to put in place long-term plans that will put us in a position where we can be prepared over an extended period of time.
Our task force, therefore, sought to understand why it is that money that's coming from the federal government designed to go to the localities has had difficulty getting there in some circumstances. And the task force brought together people from both parties and from all levels of government. We put aside our differences in order to reach a consensus, as the Secretary said, with regards to the causes for the slowdown and some recommended solutions.
Here's what we found. The standard grant process and purchasing procedures that exist in our country at all levels of government don't work terribly well if your objective is speed. These procedures and processes have been put in place over decades, designed to provide for avoiding fraud and waste and abuse. They have inherent within them a slow, methodical process, and as a result when Congress says here's some money, it takes a long time for the money actually to get spent.
You have states that oversee the money, counties, and localities, all with purchasing and grant procedures that take a good deal of time. Those procedures and policies we believe are not appropriate or adequate in an emergency setting such as the one which we face in homeland security. And, therefore, we made a number of recommendations.
One is to exempt Department of Homeland Security grants from the Federal Cash Management Act, an essential element to move quickly.
Two is to require and to request states and localities to modify their purchasing procedures for Department of Homeland Security grants to adopt emergency procedures with regards to these grants. That will require a great deal of care and caution. Because, again, these procedures and policies have been put in place to avoid fraud and abuse, so we have to move very, very carefully here.
Three, the Department of Homeland Security should establish national standards and tracking systems for managing the grant funding process.
The second area. We also recognize that cities, counties and states should be allowed to use funds which are coming from the Department of Homeland Security and Congress for incremental operational costs, not just for equipment. This is true for events, for critical infrastructure, and for immediate threats.
And finally, one other important observation of our task force is that we noted that the great majority of the funds, indeed almost all of the funds that have been appropriated by Congress, are being used by localities for response purposes and protection of asset purchases. Very little funding, if any, that goes to the states and localities is being used for what I would call prevention: Intelligence, surveying and so forth. And that's an area which we believe needs to be brought into the mix as a place where appropriate funds would be expended.
We intend to make these recommendations powerfully spoken by not only the National Governors Association but the U.S. Conference of Mayors and others to make sure that our message is heard on Capitol Hill. Congress is today debating and considering the appropriation process as it relates to homeland security funds. We hope that they'll give care and consideration to the recommendations of this task force, and we're going to go to work to make sure that they hear this message loud and clear.
With that, I'd like to turn the microphone over to Mayor Plusquellic of Akron, Ohio, who is the incoming president of the United States Conference of Mayors. Mayor Plusquellic.
Mayor Plusquellic: Thank you, Governor. Thank you for your leadership as well, and thank all of the task force members. It really was what I have described in Akron as one of the most rewarding experiences in my 31 years in local government,
First of all, the task before us was great and very important to the whole country. And the group put together to serve on this task force is one of the best groups of people that I've ever worked with.
And I think lastly, I say that it was rewarding because I'm proud of the product that we produced. The effort from the beginning was a commitment to do as the Secretary suggested, to reach a consensus, but not on the lowest common denominator. Not on just something that wasn't going to make a difference, but something truly to change and improve a system that, quite frankly, we all recognize was put together with some speed after the tragic events of September 11th in 2001.
And so this document I think reflects the hard work in a very short period of time of a number of people who have various experiences, backgrounds at different levels of government.
For mayors, speaking for the U.S. Conference of Mayors, we did not get everything we would like to have had in here. There are a lot of things that mayors look at the world from a different perspective, and we have our needs.
But I will tell you that much of what our concern, which is basically the prevention and deterrence aspect, the guarding if you will, of various locations and facilities, the important critical structures and locations in our communities, I think will be addressed with the recommendations that the governor spoke about, especially as it relates to the additional incremental costs that we have been incurring after September 11th in our local communities, although I must say, there are state and county responsibility as well for some of those facilities.
We think this will address the vast majority of our needs that we have been talking about as the U.S. Conference of Mayors and individual mayors, to try to explain to federal officials why we truly are the front line responders, the front line defenders in this homeland security structure, and that our police and fire departments in particular need that immediate support.
So I think the issues that we were concerned with have been addressed in this report, and I join the governor in committing here today to do everything I can as incoming president of the Conference of Mayors to make certain in less than two weeks when we start our meeting that we'll have a resolution before us that we can adopt to recommend to Congress that they immediately and with some urgency, I might add, look at these recommendations and help us implement those that are important to us so that we can get this money out to where we really need it, and those primarily are the front line responders that are doing the job and have been doing the job and need to get a great deal of credit for the job they've done out of our own budgets. And this will only enhance their opportunity to serve our citizens in a way that is appropriate for the threat that exists.
I think the last few weeks we have heard different recommendations, different statements. In Columbus, Ohio, a nearby neighbor of Akron, an arrest was made, thanks to the activity that was going on and information being shared, and it's the kind of example that I think will only be enhanced by getting this money out to those local levels of government.
So I appreciate all of the task force members, and I really appreciate the opportunity I've had to serve and make hopefully a difference in the homeland security of our country.
Thank you, Governor. Thank you, Secretary.
Governor Romney: I think I have to run. Thank you. I apologize. Thank you.
Question: Secretary Ridge?
Secretary Ridge: Yes?
Question: Mayor Plusquellic downstairs during the meeting mentioned how last night Akron didn't need a fire department because there weren't any fires, but didn't know that until today.
Secretary Ridge: Right.
Question: You've already said that you spent a lot of this money on equipment. Does that have deterrent factor, and can you be confident we're not going to have another 9/11?
Secretary Ridge: The only thing I can be confident of is that every single day, working with our partners at the state and local level, we're doing everything we can to prevent another 9/11. As I try to remind everyone, homeland security is not simply a federal department. It is the effort that we've undertaken to coordinate basically a national effort to prevent and deter another attack, and if one occurs to respond to it.
Unfortunately, when it comes to homeland security, as I also think that the mayor pointed out by his comment, one of the few measurement matrix in this business is that something didn't happen. But the bottom line is, we know that we've done -- there's been a great deal of leadership at the local level, the state level, in the private sector, in the academic community. So the nation has responded in very, very meaningful ways since 9/11.
But every single day, we act on the assumption that we remain Al-Qaeda's number one target. We cannot afford to act as if they are not within our midst. We do not have the luxury of guessing the nature or form of attack. If we ever get specific intelligence that's that tactical, we can respond to it. And every single day we have to consider all eventualities and do our best with our partners to prevent that attack. But there are no guarantees that we can.
Question: I don't want to bear down too hard on this --
Secretary Ridge: That's all right.
Question: The 9/11 Commission today, a public hearing on the Hill, and we've got -- brought to light that a lot of this money has been spent on equipment, while Governor Romney said we need more on prevention --
Secretary Ridge: I think -- I misunderstood your question then --
Question: -- view?
Secretary Ridge: No, no. It's not. I mean, I happen to believe not only as the Secretary of Homeland Security but as a former governor there's enormous benefit, number one, with recognizing that it's not just a federal responsibility. It's the integration of a country. And that in time, as we develop information-sharing capabilities, I am firmly convinced that our state and local law enforcement community and first responders in the private sectors will probably help identify and then potentially interdict a terrorist attack.
At the heart of all this, the first responsibility, the first objective is to prevent an attack. There's nothing more important in the duties assigned to the Department or to any level of government as to prevent a fire or prevent an attack. We can't prevent natural disasters, but there's certain things we can work real hard to try to prevent.
That's a number-one priority and I believe that their recommendation, their ability to use some of these dollars not just from a response side, but to develop, where appropriate, some preventive capability -- it's unanimously endorsed by Republican and Democrat, governors and mayors who also believe, when you got six to seven hundred thousand men and women on the streets around this country, they might help you prevent an attack.
If you can share some information, if there's intelligence analysts within the region, they could help him direct their efforts. Mayor, I'll let you respond.
Mayor Plusquellic: I think there is another part of their question, that you may assume that this was a free-flowing, just -- the money's flowing freely just to buy equipment and that was fine. It's a compliment, in one way, to DHS to assume that. That's not exactly the case.
There were log jams, if you will, along the way. I'll use the President's terminology. The money was stuck. It wasn't just stuck for one particular. It was stuck for a variety of reasons and they have -- they are listed here in our report. But we went about this not trying to find blame or pointing fingers, but to say, "How do we correct whatever it is that's out there sticking this money?"
And so, it is somewhat incorrect to think that it was -- that it flowed freely. The overtime issue and these additional incremental costs, though, were not included in the original bill and the allocation of funds, except for Orange Alert for reimbursement.
And so, it is really two questions. If I think, personally -- this is just my own personal opinion -- that if the overtime issue would have been dealt with in the original bill, let's just say as an example, I think we may find -- may have found that there's still problems here that the Task Force needed to come together to be able to address that really are addressed in some of the other recommendations.
And I, by no means, want to downplay the importance of that recommendation to mayors about the overtime and the incremental operational cost, because that, to us, is vitally important.
This report -- again, I'm just talking for myself here. This report is, in total, a way to deal with the problems that we face, the reason -- the very reason for the Task Force to come forward. But it is a total picture and each part has -- or each level and each recommendation has a part to play in solving this problem.
Question: Mr. Secretary, you've been hearing for months from the mayors that they need money for those incremental costs and for that overtime for the controls.
So, I'm hearing today it's not just the mayors; it's the governors, it's the Task Force. And it's not just for overtime, it's not just for Orange Alert. They want that money -- they need that money all the time. What is the Department going to do about that?
Secretary Ridge: First of all, what we've been hearing from mayors first is that there is a lot of money to which they had not had access because of the maze of reimbursement rules. That is the primary message and the primary challenge within -- for the Task Force.
When we're sitting on a couple of billion dollars that were appropriated well over a year, and some of it, two years ago, and yet those billions of dollars have not been distributed for training, exercises, equipment -- I mean, we'll get into that next category, but let's first deal with the primary reason for putting the Task Force together.
They've come up with some very sound, solid, workable, reasonable ways to go about doing that. There is a second concern that the governors and mayors, by virtue of this Task Force, have reflected in their report, is that -- and I guess the gist of it is, when we go to Orange at your direction and when we go to securing different facilities, shouldn't you help defray some of the expense?
That is a legitimate public policy concern that has been reflected in their recommendation. It's one of a series of recommendations. We will certainly take it up within the Executive Branch. They're certainly going to take it up within the Legislative Branch.
But let's also not lose sight of the fact that there also needs to be some changes affected at the state and local level in order to get reimbursement out under any set of circumstances where it -- whether it's for training, exercises, equipment, or the additional preventive measures that these mayors and governors would like to take.
At the heart of all this, the first issue is reimbursement, how do we get it out the door, and then the second, very important issue is, what are the range of allocable, eligible expenses that the federal government should be obliged to reimburse.
Both are pivotal and both have been addressed in this report. Sir?
Question: We heard a lot this morning about bureaucracy.
Secretary Ridge: About?
Question: About bureaucracy and you've talked about it here. The money has not been getting out for a variety of reasons.
But at the same time, we hear from you and from the President and from Governor Romney today about America being at war. It's a war against an enemy -- I think the governor said who wants to topple our government.
Does it go beyond just bureaucracy? I mean, it seems to me -- and other people will say there seems to be a lack of -- not, perhaps, political will, but public will to fully address this problem, to fully bring up the level of security at home.
I mean -- I guess I'm trying to understand whether -- I mean, is it really just bureaucracy? I mean, it seems if you're at war --
Secretary Ridge: No. I think it has more to do with the nature of federal government than it does with the collective will of either the public servants behind me or the American public to deal with the global terrorism.
And I mean that as someone who has served at different levels of government, but what the Task Force uncovered and why they have done such an extraordinary job in such a short period of time -- and I wish Gov. Romney was here. He laid the template out.
But over the past decades, because the public has always been concerned about the expenditure of public dollars, they've put into place systems that were designed to move slowly so that the scrutiny of not only the public, but the solicitors and everybody else would make sure that there was -- the contracts were competitively bid, that there was no waste, fraud, or abuse.
So, you take that mindset, then build that approach around thousands of municipalities, including cities and counties, the 50 states and territories, and suddenly, within the federal governing system, you have a series of, literally, hundreds and hundreds of protocols designed to slow the process down.
Suddenly, with the bipartisan support of Congress, you have an unprecedented level of funding just to go to the states and locals for reimbursement. Part of the discussion of the Task Force is to expand the list of reimbursable expenses, but at least to now, they would even like to get access to reimburse what had been eligible.
And they discovered that well-intentioned people, over the time, have built up this maze of devices designed to slow it down rather than speed it up. And so, that's why I think the Task Force says two things.
One, for the time being, use your emergency acquisition powers. Two, let's get a break from the reimbursement requirements of the federal government for a year so that the federal government doesn't just have to reimburse us within three or five days, because a lot of the cities and towns and states are cash -- a little cash-short right now.
And give us, in that year, time to work out -- you know, it's like the Gordian knot, to cut through that Gordian knot and make sure that we streamline the process and I think that's what the governor and mayor are trying to highlight in their report.
I'm going to let you amplify on that if you would, Mayor.
Mayor Plusquellic: I think -- again, I'm going to go back to the fact that we all agreed, in the first initial meeting, that we weren't going to dwell on pointing fingers.
And without trying to do that and not saying anything -- meaning anything negative to add to this, I think what happened is, September 11th, 2001 came at a period in time when our whole country was trying to figure out, what's the proper role of the federal government in our everyday business of governing our cities and our counties, our localities across this country?
And right or wrong and no matter where you fall on that continuum -- and I think it's a constant argument that's probably been going on for 200 years -- there is times when the federal government tells us we have to do something that I say, "Stay the hell out of our business." And then they --
Secretary Ridge: Governor, I didn't like unfunded mandates either.
Mayor Plusquellic: That's right. I knew you would get it. That's right. But there's times when we have a need out there that we recognize and we come to the federal government and say, "Give us some money."
And, you know, at any point in time, one can have a different opinion on when the federal government should come in and to play and to be involved in an issue and when they shouldn't. And I think that's the overlay here, maybe, for all of this, that there is some disagreement here in Washington as to what the proper federal role is in the Homeland Security.
Is it -- and I used the example yesterday -- I think that a mayor could easily make the argument -- pick a number, but I'm going to say 10 percent of our police force in Akron -- about 500 police officers -- that 10 percent of their time is now spent looking and observing and watching for terrorist activities.
Why? Because we're all knowledgeable about what happens and what they should be doing as part of the network of gathering information. That means that I should actually be able to say to Mr. Secretary, "You should be paying for 10 percent of our police officers' time, about 50 officers you ought to be paying for."
I don't think any of us believe that that's an argument that's going to go very far, whether it's legitimate or not. And so, we have not, as the Conference of Mayors, pushed that issue. Not that I wouldn't like to continue to do that and we still don't think it's a legitimate issue, but we haven't done that in this document.
What we've said is, for that incremental additional cost, that you have almost defined as the national threat, because the FBI calls my police chief and says, "Hey, we've got chatter," and you have to protect water treatment facilities, because we hear this stuff. And so, we put three extra cops out there.
That's pretty clearly defined, in my book, at least, as activity directly related to protecting our homeland security that's different now than it was September 10th, 2001.
So, I think that's the other thing that's gone on. We're still trying to figure out, what is the proper role, and I don't know that there's any absolute answer. Whatever I agree to and believe is appropriate today, two years from now, because of circumstances changing, we might realize that there's another role, lesser or greater, of the federal government to play.
And I think that's the only additional thing that I would add that's entered into this. And I think it's a legitimate -- I believe, that on both sides of the aisle, that there are people who have a sincere belief that this is an issue to be discussed and debated and they're trying to figure that out.
I don't know that all of it's legitimate. I don't know all of it. I don't want to put a rubber stamp on everything that Congress does, but I think there are people on both sides that have tried to deal with that issue over the years.
And we, as mayors, are still struggling with that. We want your help when you have money and we sure as hell don't want you in our business when you don't.”
###
This page was last reviewed/modified on 06/17/04 00:00:00.