GovernmentExecutive.com

Senior members of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday said the Homeland Security Department's $42.7 billion proposed budget for next year is too low and is misdirected in some areas.

Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, told Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff during a hearing she was particularly concerned the budget does not provide enough money for the Coast Guard or for grants to state and local governments.

Committee ranking member Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., called the budget "shortsighted and shortfunded, given the dangers -- both natural and terrorist -- that this department was created to confront."

Lieberman said he will send a letter to Senate Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman Judd Gregg, R-N.H., requesting an additional $8 billion in homeland security funding.

He said the request will seek an additional $1.2 billion for first responder grants, $1.7 billion for critical infrastructure, $465 million for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, $1.1 billion for the Coast Guard, $158 million for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and $752 million for aviation security.

Lieberman made a similar request last year that was not enacted.

"There is no cheap way to be better prepared," Lieberman said. "It takes money -- more money than this budget offers."

Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, agreed. "We're asking this man to do an almost impossible job because we're not giving him the [necessary] resources," the senator said, referring to Chertoff. "I think we need to get real here."

Collins and Lieberman said they also are upset that the department again has proposed to consolidate separate funding streams for grants to secure disparate infrastructure, such as ports, chemical plants, rail and transit systems and public utilities, into one program.

Homeland Security wants to create a $600 million Targeted Infrastructure Protection program, through which states can compete for such grants. The department proposed the consolidated program last year, but Congress rejected it.

Chertoff defended the budget request, saying the department cannot fund everything and is focused on "risk-based, outcome-driven priorities."

COMMENTS

• I just found out that as vacancies are occurring in my office, due to retirements, etc., those positions are not only not being filled, but are being taken off the office's T/O entirely! I don't know where they are going (maybe to the border?). In addition to the many other problems facing this agency, now ICE is losing special agent positions just when the demands placed upon this agency are increasing, especially in the immigration enforcement arena. What say you, Ms. Myers and Mr. Chertoff? GovExec.com reader Posted March 16, 2006 12:13 PM
• Welcome to the club Homeland and Coasties. I read all of these budget articles about millions and billions every day in hopes that I will see some type of sign that my agency might see any amount of funding sometime soon. We are 6 months into fiscal 2006 and right now I don't have funding to buy a box of printing paper. I am fully aware that bullets and beans have priority in wartime but we don't have anything to print the bullet and bean requisitions on. Maybe the money went into the NSPS pool?? I am thinking of writing to Halliburton to see if they have an extra box of paper I can borrow. ORF GovExec.com reader Posted March 2, 2006 12:09 AM
• It might be said that funding for DHS falls short, but let's look at facts: An almost $900 million increase for ICE has been proposed for fiscal 2007. Of that money, almost $600 million is slated for DRO operations (Why? When it's OI that needs the money); of the remaining $300 million allocated to OI, it is reported, on good authority, that about $250 million isn't even allocated to current operations and future growth (e.g. new agents, new cars, new office space, office supplies, investigative travel, money for informants, etc. etc. etc.), but to pay prior year invoices! So, we take 1 step forward, and get kicked 10 backward. Does anyone in Washington see the insanity in this??? Instead of Sen. Lieberman asking for more money to throw at the problem, perhaps he might be better served seeking an investigation and hearings as to why all the money thrown at ICE, and DHS, generally, seems to have fallen into a "black hole." I'd be interested to learn the answers, because, in my line of work, if I couldn't account for so much as one thin dime, you can bet your next year's GS-13 salary plus LEAP that I'd be "on the beach" at a minimum, and maybe seeking legal counsel for possible criminal charges. Some say that the current situation shouldn't be called pathetic, shameful and disgraceful. I'll refrain from using those words, but, in these times, a good examination of conscience by Congress and senior managers might go a long way in establishing credibility with an increasingly weary cadre of field agents who see little hope in the future mission and direction of ICE. GovExec.com reader Posted March 2, 2006 8:21 AM