White House seeks to slash anti-terror funds

Some grants criticized as wasteful
The White House plan calls for massive cuts in areas where Homeland Security officials had sought increases. The department requested $900 million for grants to U.S. cities at greatest risk of attack. But the White House only wants to provide $400 million for that program, to be divided among no more than 45 urban areas.

In 2007, Congress gave New York City $134 million — about a third of the total amount the White House would give to the highest risk areas in the country in 2009.

While very popular in the states and among lawmakers who take credit for getting counterterrorism dollars to their districts, some of the Homeland Security grants have been criticized as wasteful or excessive:

• $345,000 for crashproof barriers and 60 closed-circuit cameras to monitor the University of Arkansas Razorback stadium, which local officials think could be a terrorist target.
• $5 million for the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology to buy a nearly deserted town to use for counterterrorism training.
• $70,000 for Huntsville, Ala. to create a fallout shelter in an abandoned mine where 20,000 people could take cover underground.
• Several South Florida fire departments have used Homeland Security grants to beef up their gyms. Pompano Beach, Fla., spent $220,000 on fitness equipment for a wellness program, training and physical exams. While the White House would eliminate at least seven current Homeland Security grant programs, it would create two new grants:
• Targeted investment grants, which would fund administration priorities such as the requirement that states create more secure driver’s licenses, secure credentials for transportation employees and state and local planning for catastrophic disasters. The White House would provide $450 million for that.
• A $300 million discretionary grant program for terrorism preparedness, prevention and response, which would fund specific projects instead of sending a set amount to each state.

These grants have long been debated in Congress, particularly whether a certain amount should be guaranteed to each state regardless of its risk of being attacked by terrorists. Rural lawmakers have not wanted the money to be distributed based on risk alone because it would mean their states and districts would see cuts.

In a joint statement, Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman, I-Conn., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman and ranking Republican on the Homeland Security Committee, said they “urge the administration to reconsider this wrong-headed strategy.”

More from msnbc.com Black workers' crisis may linger after upturn Afghan scouts learn to ‘be prepared!’ First Read: Obama faces 'historic week' Scoop: White House crashers know rules of fame Share pics of your decorated Christmas tree On Twitter: Breaking news updates | Weird and wild

MORE FROM SECURITY

Security Section Front

Tracking smugglers along the Mexican border 570,000 9/11 pager messages released U.S. offers $5 million reward for 'Bomb Man' New charges in Somali terror case Lawyer: Sept. 11 defendants want to air views Security Section Front   Add Security headlines to your news reader: