On October 9, Chairman of the House Special Committee on Homeland Security, Representative Christopher Cox (R-California) introduced “The Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act” (HR 3266). Cox’s bill would completely reshape the way in which ‘first responder’ grants are distributed. The bill would authorize no new funding, but would alter the formula currently used by the Department of Homeland to determine how much each state receives in homeland security grants. DHS currently bases their allocation of funds on threat assessments and populations levels of respective states, which guarantees every state at least some level of funding.

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge is on record as favoring the use of threat assessments rather than population levels as a basis for creating an allotment formula for homeland security grants. The Bush Administration wants to consolidate all state and local assistance in the Office of Domestic Preparedness in the Homeland Security Department. However, the new grant program in H.R. 3266 would not include Assistance to Firefighter Grants and other programs intended for states and regions which originated before 9/11. The new State and Regional First Responder Grant Program would combine the State Homeland Security Grant Program with the Urban Area Security Initiative Grant Program. These two programs distributed about $2.8 billion in fiscal 2003.

Under the Cox proposal, Secretary Ridge would administer the grants through the Office for State and Local Government Coordination. Grants would go to states and regions with demonstrated threats to their people and critical infrastructure. The Undersecretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection will provide the Secretary will insight and analysis on which states and regions meet this threshold. When the Undersecretary evaluates and prioritizes grant applications, the bill asks the Undersecretary to first consider states and regions with:

• large military and tourist populations
• specific economic sectors or private sector facilities
• major communication nodes
• specific elements of the nation’s food supply water systems
• power plants
• civic infrastructure
• emergency response capabilities
• specific national monuments with numerous tourists
• significant natural resources on which economic sectors or population centers depend
• major transportation systems or nodes

Recipients of grants may use funds for: purchasing or upgrading equipment; exercises to strengthen emergency response; training in the use of equipment; and training for prevention of, preparedness for, or response to attacks involving weapons of mass destruction.

When states or multi-state entities receive grants, they must distribute at least 80% of the money to local governments, first responders or other local groups whom will carry out the homeland security plan called for in the grant application. Each recipient of a grant award will have to submit an annual report to the Secretary documenting the dates such funds were received, the dates such funds were disbursed and how the funds were utilized by the ultimate beneficiary.

H.R. 3266 would also establish an ‘Advisory Council on First Responders’, which will be responsible for providing advice to the Secretary on the need to implement federal standards for first responder equipment and training. The council will report to the head of the Office of State and Local Government Coordination.

Besides consolidating first responder grants, the bill would also update the heavily criticized Homeland Security Advisory System. H.R. 3266 would require that any designation of a threat level be accompanied by a designation of the geographic regions and economic sectors to which the designation applies.

Cox acknowledges that his bill will be politically difficult to pass because some regions like New York and Washington will likely receive more money than rural states like Vermont, Wyoming, Iowa and Vermont. In a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing last month, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) told Secretary Ridge that each state should be guaranteed a minimum amount of funding.

Cox recently argued that the system is too politicized and that funds are often bogged down in the bureaucracy and by the states. He wants to make sure the money actually goes to the cities and regions with actual threats . “the threat analysis will permit us to allocate the funds by need, not by political formula , ” he said.

Chairman Cox mentioned that the administration supports most of his bill, but has some issues with other provisions in the bill, which they are communicating to the committee.

Cox wants to hold hearings on his bill and have a committee markup by the end of the month. The Chairman will most likely also seek input from committee Ranking Member Jim Turner (D-Texas), who introduced his own first responder bill, the “Prepare Act” (H.R. 3158). Turner’s bill, which is cosponsored by every democrat on the committee, would establish a national anti-terrorism preparedness standard as the basis for allotting federal dollars for first responder training and equipment.

Also, Christopher Shays (R-Connecticut), Chairman of the Government Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations has his own bill (H.R. 3227), which would also establish a national standard for first responders, and would set a deadline for that standard to be in place.