Senate OKs $28B For Homeland Sec.

[David]

The Senate easily approved its first bill financing the Homeland Security Department, though lawmakers traded sharp words and a Republican Party leader contended that Democrats are taking a passive approach to fighting terrorism.

The 93-1 roll call on Thursday night illustrated lawmakers' reluctance to vote against a bill for domestic security. Only Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., who said the measure lacked sufficient funds for ports, voted "nay."

With the two parties vying for the political offensive, Democrats offered a parade of amendments to add millions to the bill, which was to provide $28.5 billion next year for the new agency. Majority Republicans fended them off, citing budget constraints and saying the measure was sufficient.

"I do hope members will start thinking about the concept of affordability," said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska.

The back and forth underscored how domestic security, which won bipartisan consensus after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has become a hotly partisan issue. That has only intensified with the approach of next year's presidential and congressional elections.

Senate Democrats said the GOP-written Homeland Security bill ? and President Bush's plans for the department ? would shortchange emergency responders, security at chemical plants and other areas.

"Is this administration serious, or is it not serious about homeland security," said Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., sponsor of a defeated amendment to shift $292 million to local fire departments and help protect chemical plants and ports. "The American people think they're being secured. They are not."

After the Senate rejected his proposal to add $15 billion for emergency workers ? which nonbinding language suggested should come from reducing recent tax cuts for millionaires ? Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said GOP leaders had "put out the word" to oppose Democratic amendments.

"They're making the calculation that the political risk of rolling back the tax cut exceeds the risk of something else happening in this country," Dodd told reporters.

At the same time, Republicans released a memo from the incoming GOP chairman accusing Democrats of playing politics.

The Democratic amendments "are an effort to convince voters their party really is strong on security," wrote Ed Gillespie, who becomes Republican Party chairman on Friday. He said Democrats "increasingly drift toward opposing pre-emptive self-defense," citing criticisms of the failure to locate Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

"It is a passive, reactive approach that fails to connect the dots and would put America's fate in the hands of the people who seek to destroy us," he wrote.

The department began in January, combining 22 agencies and 170,000 workers. Included are the Coast Guard and border patrol, but not the FBI or CIA.

The bill ? about the same as this year's total ? provides $380 million for an administration plan to check databases for information on foreigners entering the country.

The measure lacks $5.6 billion over the coming decade, including $890 million for 2004, that the House approved for Mr. Bush's proposal for government acquisition of antidotes and other steps to counter bioterrorism.
The Senate legislation includes nearly $2.9 billion for state and local governments, with $750 million for cities thought to face high threats of terror attacks. In two votes that split senators from rural and urban states, the Senate refused to bolster the funds for high-threat areas.

The House approved its version of the bill last month.

[BLUEHAWK]

Does anyone know what the original appropriation was for Homeland Security, and/or how much has actually been spent to date?

[williams919]

Don't know the original budget. But I work for one of the agencies that comes under Homeland Security. Trust me with the changes that are coming, the organization will need all they can get. Some of the minor things are uniform changes (3 one in 10 years for Customs), firearms for all armed agency employees and training for the combined agencies (Customs, INS and APHIS). You talk about mysteries, most of us are wondering what will come next. But as usual, the government snail is traveling slow and saying nothing.
Glad to see a thread on the Homeland scene. I think things to come will be very interesting in discussion.
God Bless
williams919

[BLUEHAWK]

Willie -
I welcomed Homeland Security as a department... in fact, felt/thought it long long long overdue.

It would be interesting to trace the expenditures from post-9/11 up to now, and any projections,

Also, having some detail about innovations, such as you have posted, is helpful to comprehending. Wish the media would, if I may say so, stop talking 800 time about Janet Jackson's breast level of "news" and start telling us some information we can actually use.

[williams919]

David,
I agree, that breast was just a little much. Besides when you seen one or maybe a pair, then you have seen them all anyway. I guess my age is showing, takes me all night to do one time, what I used to do all night!!!!
If the media was really interested they would discover that it isn't cheap to protect the Border of the US. And like all other law enforcement related things, "YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR". Think back a few years when the local sheriff was a big guy that could whip the local bully, the sheriff was usually a local and had lots of friends (especially the local money people) and now we have some of the same but many now have law enforcement training and can justify the arrests. But thats a whole nuther story.
I will be around here reading and learning and offering my 2 cents when I think it has value.
Take care and God Bless
willie