Thunder and lightning are barreling over New York City as I write - a fitting backdrop to the storm of criticism which has greeted the Department of Homeland Security's 40% cut in anti-terror funds to New York City and Washington DC, the victim cities of 9/11.
The front page of The Daily News has called for DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff's resignation. According to Rep. Peter King (R-NY), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, the Bush administration has "declared war on New York." Michael Bloomberg, the city's outspoken Republican mayor and a major Bush fundraiser, pointed out "when you stop a terrorist, they have a map of New York City in their pocket. They don't have a map of any of the other 45 places [on the DHS list]."
Rupert Murdoch's right-wing New York Post called it "shocking" that "New York City will get its vital anti-terror funding chain-sawed from $208 million this year to $124 million next year - even though security experts agree it is vastly more threatened than any other city in the country."
DHS claims that cities with "shoddy or poorly articulated plans" had their grants cut. In fact, according to 60 Minutes:
No American city has done more to defend itself against a terrorist attack than New York. Its police department, 37,000 strong and larger than the standing armies of 84 countries, has transformed itself from a traditional crime-fighting organization into one that places a strong emphasis on fighting terrorism. A thousand cops have been assigned to work exclusively on a new "terrorism beat." And, in an unprecedented move, New York has even stationed its own cops overseas.
Police overtime and security equipment are equally important expenses for which federal help is needed, yet Homeland Security's grants are intended to be used only for infrastructure. Yet even infrastructure takes years to develop. It can't be planned and built when there's extreme budget uncertainty.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - chantal stone
According to a NYTimes article Mayor Bloomberg has questioned the fact that more money is being sent to cities which have less of a terrorist threat, but rather close elections this year.
The DHS claims that certain programs implemented in NY were less than adequate, which is why they cut the funding, but it's difficult to take seriously the concerns of a gov't agency that claims there are no national monuments or icons in New York City.
huh? Did the DHS just crawl out from under a rock and miss the past 100 yrs or so?
What an insult, not only to New Yorkers, but to all Americans who hold one of our nations greatest cities in high esteem.
2 - Bliffle
As usual, a government program will be plundered in order to hand out political patronage. Something that democrats and republicans are both guilty of, and if there were another viable political party they'd do it too. But this administration has set a new standard of ruthlessness in favoring their allies and sponsors.
3 - mschannon
I'm shocked, Jon, shocked that you'd allege that our beloved president would allow political considerations to influence protecting the millions of people who wouldn't vote for him if he were running for skunk catcher in the Louisiana Bayou.
Wait a minute. I live in the D.C. area. Why that no good, sleezy, manipulative, lame brain president! I'm shocked that he would allow political considerations to influence his solemn duty to protect me.
(Great article, by the way.)
In decaf Veritas
4 - Bliffle
Does someone have a list of the beneficiaries of this money, populations, etc.?
5 - Jon Sobel
There's a lot of new detail at Making Light.
6 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Jon,
Don't feel too bad. This isn't the first time the feds have told New York City to drop dead. I remember their attitude when NYC was on the verge of bankruptcy.
It would be kind of nice if the City, the rest of Long Island, the two counties north of the City seceded from the USA and told the rest of the Amricans who liked them so much to go take a flying fuck. When I lived in New York, that was always how I felt...