WASHINGTON REPORT

Battle for Security Funding Will Get Tougher As Election Nears

In the upcoming election year, homeland security is likely to be at the forefront of congressional debate, but balancing the necessity for homeland security funding with election campaign priorities will be critical for House and Senate members. Issues beyond defense, such as health care, the economy, energy reform, and tax cuts, are key concerns for American voters.

One of the biggest bills in the next session of Congress is likely to be the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), which is up for re-authorization. This legislation typically is laden with earmarked funds, also called "congressional pork," inserted in the bill to benefit the districts of various members of Congress. This $375 billion legislation, which would extend the nation's transportation spending law an additional six years, should be on the floor in early 2004. This bill is sure to be controversial and pose a big challenge to budget hawks who will have to decide between pet pork projects and fiscal responsibility, which becomes even more difficult in an election year. Add this to the ongoing debate over needed increases in funding for homeland security and port security, and it becomes less clear whether Congress will get much accomplished aside from the constitutionally mandated appropriations.

A Big Win for Sea Services

Sea services advocates earned a major coup this year on the urgent requirement to rebalance national security and environmental needs. For years, over-zealous environmentalists had used vaguely written regulations to reduce the size of military training areas and delay key weapon development programs. Congress, with strong support from the Navy League, this year adopted a far more reasonable approach to environmental protections on military lands. The Defense Authorization Act for 2004 (HR 1588) redefines the meaning of critical habitat, or restrictions dealing with endangered species on military bases and training grounds. This enables military authorities to adopt a balanced approach to the management of ranges that play host to endangered species. Additionally, the Navy and Coast Guard were successful in redefining what constitutes the "harassment" of animals under provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). Before this redefinition, courts had restricted the use of a new low-frequency active sonar system, Surveillance Towed-Array Sensor System (SURTASS) Low-Frequency Active (LFA), which was developed to counter the threat of quiet diesel submarines deployed against U.S. forces. Before passage of HR 1588, the courts considered any use of LFA sonar as "harassment" of endangered species. Under the new regulations, "harassment" is considered "as an action that has significant impact on behavior critical to marine mammal survival and reproduction" thus allowing the usage of SURTASS LFA. Also included in H.R. 1588 is a re-authorization of the Marine Security Act of 1996. Under the Maritime Security Program, the government will contract with owners and operators of U.S.-flag commercial ships employing U.S. citizen crews. The vessels must be militarily useful, and will be available to carry sustainment supplies and other military equipment to troops in areas of conflict. Additionally, $36 million is provided to the Maritime Administration for the vessel construction loan guarantee program and $18.4 million for the disposal of obsolete ships in the National Defense Reserve Fleet--all key programs that the Navy League has been supporting.

Port Security Still Underfunded

Port security is perhaps the biggest issue at stake for the Department of Homeland Security in the next session of Congress. There is a general consensus on Capitol Hill that port security is important, but discordance arises regarding the source and allocation of port security funds. According to Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a leading advocate for increased port security, "since September 11th, we need to realign our port system around efficiency and security. The United States receives some $750 billion worth of cargo at 360 seaports every year. A terrorist attack on ports or cargo would have a major economic impact on tens of thousands of working families." Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Ranking Member Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.) also have been outspoken advocates for increased port security. Hollings expressed his dismay over the current administration's "apparent reluctance to aggressively enhance security at our nation's seaports," stating in a letter in May to President George W. Bush, "I implore you to focus attention on seaport security and match that attention with the requisite funding commitment and the appropriate sense of urgency."

Rep. Doug Ose (R-Calif.) and Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.) introduced the bi-partisan Port Security Improvements Act of 2003 (H.R. 2193) to provide substantial federal funding to secure U.S. ports. Ose said, "The security of our nation's ports is essential for America's homeland security and vital for its commerce." Ose maintains that insufficient funds have been made available for port security relative to funding for safety. Coast Guard Port Security Units (PSUs) are tasked with waterborne and limited land-based protection for shipping at critical port facilities within the U.S. The Coast Guard suggests it will take more than $6.6 billion over the next 10 years for private port facilities alone to meet the baseline mandates in the Maritime Transportation Safety Act, which was signed into law last year and created the nation's first maritime security guidelines. Given that less than $500 million has been appropriated for this over the last two years, the Department of Homeland Security and the Coast Guard will need significant funding increases to achieve their goals.