5.19.2005
Risk vs. Pork (WashingtonPost.com)
Tuesday, May 17, 2005; Page A20
WHAT, EXACTLY, are federal "first responder" grants supposed to do? Are they intended to give extra financial help to firefighters and police officers who work in places where the risk of a terrorist attack is highest? Or are they meant to spread federal pork evenly around the country? The former answer is obviously the right one, but over the past three years, Congress hasn't always behaved as if that were so. On the contrary, thanks to rules that have mandated a minimum amount of spending in each state, Wyoming has so far enjoyed the highest per capita homeland security funding. That's because the rules, until now, have called for every state -- no matter what its location, population, size or significance to terrorists -- to receive 0.75 percent of the funding. This has meant that more than a third of homeland security funds were distributed automatically, before any risk analysis was done.
(More ... Risk vs. Pork) ¶ 13:10
WHAT, EXACTLY, are federal "first responder" grants supposed to do? Are they intended to give extra financial help to firefighters and police officers who work in places where the risk of a terrorist attack is highest? Or are they meant to spread federal pork evenly around the country? The former answer is obviously the right one, but over the past three years, Congress hasn't always behaved as if that were so. On the contrary, thanks to rules that have mandated a minimum amount of spending in each state, Wyoming has so far enjoyed the highest per capita homeland security funding. That's because the rules, until now, have called for every state -- no matter what its location, population, size or significance to terrorists -- to receive 0.75 percent of the funding. This has meant that more than a third of homeland security funds were distributed automatically, before any risk analysis was done.
(More ... Risk vs. Pork) ¶ 13:10
