[Senate Hearing 108-82]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 108-82
INVESTING IN HOMELAND SECURITY, CHALLENGES ON THE FRONT LINE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 9, 2003
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs
87-739 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CARL LEVIN, Michigan
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
Michael D. Bopp, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Tim Raducha-Grace, Professional Staff Member
Joyce Rechtschaffen, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Michael A. Alexander, Minority Professional Staff Member
Darla D. Cassell, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Collins.............................................. 1
Senator Carper............................................... 3
Senator Lautenberg........................................... 9
Senator Durbin............................................... 14
Senator Pryor................................................ 29
Prepared statement:
Senator Lieberman............................................ 41
WITNESSES
Wednesday, April 9, 2003
Michael J. Chitwood, Chief of Police, Portland, Maine Police
Department..................................................... 7
Jeffrey Horvath, Police Chief, Dover, Delaware Police Department. 11
Edward P. Plaugher, Fire Chief and September 11 Incident
Commander at the Pentagon, Arlington County Fire Department,
Virginia....................................................... 13
Captain Chauncey Bowers, Firefighter-EMT-Paramedic, Prince
George's County Fire Department, Maryland on behalf of the
International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF).............. 15
Alphabetical List of Witnesses
Bowers, Captain Chauncey:
Testimony.................................................... 15
Prepared Statement........................................... 53
Chitwood, Chief Michael J.:
Testimony.................................................... 7
Prepared Statement........................................... 43
Horvath, Chief Jeffrey:
Testimony.................................................... 11
Prepared Statement........................................... 47
Plaugher, Chief Edward P.:
Testimony.................................................... 13
Prepared Statement........................................... 50
Appendix
Chart entitled ``Federal Allocation of FY03 Homeland Security
Funds, One Size Formula Doesn't Fit All'' submitted by Senator
Collins........................................................ 63
Chart entitled ``ODP State Homeland Security Grant Program Fiscal
Year 2003 Funding Allocations'' submitted by Senator Collins... 64
Chart entitled ``Illinois Community Homeland Security Needs''
submitted by Senator Durbin.................................... 65
Chart entitled ``Tangled Web of Federal Homeland Security Grant
Programs'' submitted by Senator Collins........................ 68
Public Safety Wireless Network Program, ``The Report Card on
Funding Mechanisms for Public Safety Radio Communications,''
Final, August 2001, submitted by Mr. Plaugher.................. 69
Responses to Post-Hearing Questions submitted by Senator
Lautenberg for the Record from:
Mr. Chitwood................................................. 111
Mr. Horvath.................................................. 114
Mr. Plaugher................................................. 116
Mr. Bowers................................................... 118
INVESTING IN HOMELAND SECURITY, CHALLENGES ON THE FRONT LINE
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 2003
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m., in
room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Susan M.
Collins, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Collins, Carper, Lautenberg, Durbin, and
Pryor.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN COLLINS
Chairman Collins. The Committee will come to order.
Today, the Committee begins a series of hearings on how the
Federal Government can best help our States, communities, and
first responders protect our homeland. Last year, the Senate
spent nearly 3 months on the Homeland Security Act, yet the law
contains virtually no guidance on how the Department is to
assist State and local governments and first responders with
their homeland security needs.
In fact, the 187-page Homeland Security Act mentions the
issue of grants to first responders in but a single paragraph.
There is no guidance on how Federal dollars should be spent or
how much money should be allocated or to whom it should be
allocated. Those decisions were left to another day, and today
is that day.
As we embark on this effort to improve homeland security
grant programs, there is no more important group to hear from
than our first responders who serve on the front lines
protecting our communities. After all, when disaster strikes,
it is our police officers, our firefighters, and our emergency
medical personnel who answer the calls for help.
We must invest in additional homeland security resources
for our first responders. Just as our first responders stand by
to protect our communities, they deserve a Federal Government
that stands by them.
The current structure of ``one-size-fits-all'' homeland
security programs, however, is not doing the job.\1\ The needs
of our States and first responders vary widely and are as
diverse as the people who live there. We must make sure that
Federal assistance is sufficiently flexible to meet these
differing needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The chart entitled ``Federal Allocation of FY03 Homeland
Security Funds, One Size Formula Doesn't Fit All'' appears in the
Appendix on page 63.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I met with Maine's emergency management officials a
few weeks ago, they told me that the structure of many homeland
security grant programs hinders their efforts to help first
responders secure communities across our State. As you can see
from this chart, the current Homeland Security Grant Program,
administered by the Office for Domestic Preparedness--or ODP--
is part of the problem.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The chart entitled ``ODP State Homeland Security Grant Program
Fiscal Year 2003 Funding Allocations'' appears in the Appendix on page
64.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ODP provides funding for training, equipment, exercises,
and planning based on a uniform, predetermined formula for
every State. That may sound good, but let us look at the impact
of this formula.
The exact same percentage of each State's funds is
allocated for training, equipment, exercises, and planning,
thus, leaving no room to accommodate different priorities. In
each and every State, for example, 70 percent of the Federal
funds must be spent for equipment, 7 percent must be spent for
planning, 5 percent must be spent for training. In allocating
funds in this manner, the Federal Government is effectively
saying that Maine must spend exactly the same portion of its
homeland security dollars on training as Hawaii or Delaware.
Moreover, States cannot transfer surplus funds from one
category to another to meet their needs.
Maine's officials, for example, told me that they need more
funding to train first responders to use the equipment
purchased under the ODP grant program. The regulations,
however, prohibited Maine from transferring surplus exercise
dollars to train first responders in using the new equipment.
Thus, in some cases, we may see communities with up-to-date,
complex equipment, but lacking the training to use it most
effectively. This defies common sense.
I believe States should have the flexibility to spend
homeland security dollars where they are most needed. To allow
flexibility in homeland security funds that have already been
appropriated, but remain unspent, I will introduce legislation
later today that authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security
to grant waivers to allow States to use funds from one
category, such as training, for another purpose, such as
purchasing equipment, or whatever the need may be.
I have also introduced legislation that would move the
Office for Domestic Preparedness from the Border and
Transportation Security Directorate to Secretary Ridge's office
where it belongs. By elevating ODP's stature, I hope to begin
the process of establishing a centralized location to help
support our first responders.
Let me take this opportunity to commend Secretary Ridge for
his efforts to promote flexibility as he has worked to
incorporate nearly two dozen agencies into the new Department
of Homeland Security. But Secretary Ridge can only play the
hand that Congress has dealt him, and we have left him a couple
cards short.
These hearings are intended to provide this Committee with
the information to assess whether the current structure of
grant programs is getting the right resources to the right
people. The witnesses will address many of the roadblocks in
our grant programs, including the lack of flexibility I have
described, difficulties in communication and coordination. The
hearings will also focus on what some have referred to as a
tangled web of existing programs that is very difficult for
States and local communities to penetrate.
In the omnibus funding bill, as well as the supplemental
appropriations legislation passed just last week, we put a down
payment on the needs of our communities. The increased funding
of programs such as the FIRE Act and the State Homeland
Security Grants are important steps forward in providing
adequate resources to our communities.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today. We have
a very distinguished panel of first responders, and it is my
hope that they will work with us so that we can build a
stronger and better homeland security partnership to better
serve our Nation in the months and years ahead.
It is now my great pleasure to call upon Senator Carper,
from Delaware, for any opening remarks that he might have, and
I am pleased that he could join us today.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER
Senator Carper. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I am delighted
to be with you, as always. I like that, ``a couple of cards
short.'' That is pretty good.
I used to say that to him when he was governor of
Pennsylvania. ``You are a couple of cards short, my friend.'' I
will not tell you what he said in response. [Laughter.]
I am delighted to be here with you, and the legislation
that you will be introducing later today, I believe I get to
have the pleasure of being your lead--your token Democrat.
Chairman Collins. The lead and most important co-sponsor,
and I thank you for that.
Senator Carper. I am pleased to be a part of your team
again.
To our witnesses, thanks for joining us and welcome. We are
especially pleased that Chief Jeff Horvath is here from Dover,
and sitting back there on our right, the audience's left, is
the Mayor of Dover, Jim Hutchinson, whom we affectionately call
Hutch. He knows a thing or two about policing himself, having
been a police chief in his youth, which was not too long ago.
Hutch, it is great to have you here.
I have a longer statement I would like to ask unanimous
consent be entered into the record, and I would like to just
give you a shorter statement now.
Chairman Collins. Without objection.
Senator Carper. I will be mercifully brief for our
witnesses so we can hear what you have to say.
I want to, again, welcome Chief Horvath today and to ask
you to extend to the men and women you lead at the Dover Police
Department, give them our very best.
Dover is our capital city. Some people say it is the third-
largest city in Delaware. I do not know. Dover and Newark,
which is the home of the University of Delaware, are about the
same size. Our largest city is Wilmington, which only has about
75,000 people, so we are not a State with a large population.
We have got a lot of smaller towns, and Dover is right in the
middle of our State, and it is a really neat place.
Chief Horvath brings a tremendous amount of real-world
experience that I think can be valuable as this Committee
considers the Federal Government's relationship to first
responders, and Chief we are glad you are here and grateful for
the work that you and your men and women do every day, not just
the people of Dover, but really for our State and all of the
folks who visit our State capital.
When this Committee worked last year under the previous
Chairman--what was his name? [Laughter.]
Chairman Collins. The movie star?
Senator Carper. Joe Lieberman, that was his name. We
created the Department of Homeland Security, and I think all of
my colleagues hoped that what we were setting up would help the
Federal Government to be better able to prevent and to respond
to terrorist attacks.
As of March 1, last month, we have in place the skeleton of
an organization that should be able to pull together under one
roof information on threats and vulnerabilities, and to use
that information to improve security and to prepare first
responders like those that are arrayed before us today.
I look forward to working with my old colleague, Governor
Ridge, now Secretary Ridge, and all of our colleagues here on
this Committee to making sure that the Department of Homeland
Security works the way it was meant to work.
No matter how well Secretary Ridge does his work on the
Federal level, we will not be much safer than we were on
September 10, 2001, unless our first responders are better
prepared to do their work on the local level. And while
homeland security should certainly be a shared responsibility,
it is vitally important that the Federal Government does its
part to provide each State with enough first-responder aid to
ensure that its citizens are adequately protected.
I would like to see the Federal Government's financial
commitment to homeland security increase overall, but as the
Senator from the first State, from Delaware, I would especially
like to see us fulfill our obligation to less-populous States.
How many people live in Maine these days? We have about
800,000.
Chairman Collins. One point two million.
Senator Carper. OK.
Chairman Collins. Was that a quiz just to see if I knew my
State well? [Laughter.]
Senator Carper. I understand the need to give larger
States, especially those with densely populated urban areas,
enough money to protect their larger populations, but no State,
including our States, should be less safe than our neighbors
because we happen to have a smaller population.
The Federal Government should be working to bring every
State and locality to the point where they are capable of
responding effectively to any potential threat. By distributing
first-responder aid to States based largely on population,
however, I fear that we may fail to do just that.
The current formula for distributing first-responder aid
ignores the fact that Delaware, small in population, though it
is, is located in the Northeast corridor between New York and
Washington, it ignores the fact that Delaware is home to a
major port, to a major oil refinery, to a number of chemical
plants, and that every day scores of ships make their way up
and down the Delaware River, which is part of Delaware, by the
way, and a lot of them come into the Port of Wilmington. We
have scores of trains that ply their way up and down the
Northeast corridor, trucks that make their way throughout I-95
to destinations up and down the East Coast.
The formula currently used also ignores the fact that Chief
Horvath here, and the officers he leads, work every day to
protect a major asset for our country, and that is the Dover
Air Force Base facility that is playing a crucial role in the
War in Iraq, as we help provide part of the air bridge between
the United States and the Middle East.
I look forward, Madam Chairman, to working with you. I
especially am pleased with the new legislation that you will be
introducing.
Governors like to get Federal money, but we also like to
get that Federal money with a reasonable amount of flexibility
to use it in ways that make sense for our States. Just as Maine
is different from Delaware is different from Arizona, we want
to make sure that the monies that come to our first responders
come in a way that allows us to use those dollars most
effectively and appreciates the different challenges that each
of our States represents.
So, Madam Chairman, I am delighted that we are having this
hearing. I am honored to be with you and pleased especially
with our friends that have taken the time to be with us today.
Welcome.
Thank you
[The prepared statement of Senator Carper follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'd like to begin by welcoming Chief
Jeffrey Horvath to the Committee. He is Chief of Police for the City of
Dover, Delaware's capitol city and also its third largest. He brings a
tremendous amount of real world experience to this hearing that can be
invaluable as this Committee considers the Federal Government's
relationship to first responders. Thank you, Chief, for the work you do
every day to protect the citizens of Dover and for your contribution to
our work today.
When this Committee worked last year under Senator Lieberman's
leadership to create the Department of Homeland, I think all of my
colleagues hoped that what we were setting up would help the Federal
Government be better able to prevent and respond to terrorist attack.
As of March 1, we have in place the skeleton of an organization that
should be able to pull together under one roof information on threats
and vulnerabilities and use that information to improve security and
prepare first responders. I look forward to working with Secretary
Ridge and all of my colleagues on this Committee in making sure the
Department of Homeland Security works the way it was meant to.
No matter how well Secretary Ridge does his work on the Federal
level, however, we will not be much safer than we were on September 10,
2001 unless our first responders are better prepared to do their work
on the local level. While homeland security should certainly be a
shared priority, it is vitally important that the Federal Government
does its part to provide each State with enough first responder aid to
ensure that its citizens are adequately protected. I'd like to see the
Federal Government's financial commitment to homeland security increase
overall but, as a Senator from Delaware, I'd especially like to see us
fulfill our obligations to less populous States.
I understand the need to give larger States, especially those with
densely populated urban areas, enough money to protect their larger
populations. No state, however, should be less safe than its neighbors
simply because it has a smaller population. The Federal Government
should be working to bring every State and locality to the point where
they are capable of responding effectively to any potential threat. By
distributing first responder aid to States based largely on population,
however, I fear we will fail to do this.
The current formula for distributing first responder aid ignores
the fact that Delaware, small in population though it is, is located in
the Northeast midway between New York and Washington. It ignores the
fact that Delaware is home to a major port, oil refineries and chemical
plants. It ignores the fact that Delaware everyday hosts scores of
ships, trains and trucks on their way to destination up and down the
East Coast. It also ignores the fact that Chief Horvath and his
officers work everyday to help protect the Dover Air Force Base, a
facility that is now playing a crucial role in the war in Iraq.
In a story in today's Wahsington Post, Secretary Ridge calls on
Congress to create a new formula for distributing first responder aid
that gives grater weight to risk and the presence of critical
infrastructure and national icons. I applaud him for his efforts and
hope that this Committee can work with him to draft a better formula. I
also hope we can work with him to expand on the small-state minimum now
used.
A small-state minimum may mean that States like Maine and Delaware
receive more first responder aid per-capita than more populous States
like New York and California. When it comes to homeland security
spending, however, per capita allocation is not a very meaningful
measure of the effectiveness of the Federal aid program. Every state,
big and small, must take certain steps and make certain expenditures in
order to be even minimally prepared for a major attack.
I look forward to working with Senator Collins and the rest of this
Committee to ensure that the Federal first responder aid program takes
risk into account without ignoring the needs of less populous States.
Chairman Collins. Thank you, Senator.
The Committee will now proceed to hearing from our
witnesses.
We are very pleased today to have an outstanding panel of
dedicated public servants who are first responders, including
police chiefs, firefighters and emergency medical technicians
and, in one case, a firefighter who plays both roles, which is
common throughout our country.
First, I would like to welcome my friend, Michael Chitwood,
who is the police chief in Maine's largest City of Portland,
Maine. He has some 38 years of law enforcement experience, and
I rely on him often in talking about the security challenges
facing our country. I have no doubt that his advice will be
very helpful to this Committee as we seek to craft legislation.
Again, Chief, I want to thank you for all of the help that
you have provided, for the outstanding leadership that you give
the City of Portland's police force and for taking the time to
be here with us today.
Mr. Chitwood. Thank you.
Chairman Collins. Our second witness is going to be Jeffrey
Horvath, who as Senator Carper has pointed out, serves as Dover
Delaware's police chief. He has moved steadily up the ranks, I
understand, since joining the City of Dover in 1984 as a
patrolman. His range of law enforcement experiences will help
him to bring valuable perspectives to this hearing. And like
Senator Carper, I am particularly interested in the
relationship between the police force and Dover Air Base. That
does add a whole new dimension to the threat facing Delaware,
and I will be interested to hear from the witness on that
issue.
Our next witness that we will hear from is Chief Ed
Plaugher--right? Have I got it wrong?
Mr. Plaugher. It is OK.
Chairman Collins [continuing]. The fire chief of Arlington
County, Virginia. He also offers the Committee a wealth of the
knowledge in discussing homeland security programs. His 36
years of service began in February 1966. It is my understanding
that the President has recently appointed the Chief as a Senior
Advisory Committee Member to the Homeland Security Council.
I would also point out that the chief served as the
incident commander at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. So he
certainly brings firsthand experience of the role of first
responders when a terrorist attack occurs.
Finally, it is a great pleasure to welcome this morning
Captain Chauncey Bowers, from Prince George's County Fire and
Rescue. Captain Bowers brings to the Committee a dual
perspective as both an EMT and a firefighter, and I think that
is very important. I always want to make sure we hear from the
EMT community as well when we hear from first responders. So I
thank you for being here as well.
I would like to start with Chief Chitwood if you would
proceed with your testimony, Chief. Thank you for being here.
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL J. CHITWOOD,\1\ CHIEF OF POLICE, PORTLAND,
MAINE POLICE DEPARTMENT
Mr. Chitwood. Good morning, again, to both you and Senator
Carper.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Chitwood appears in the Appendix
on page 43.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Collins, from our many conversations, I know you
understand many of Portland's concerns, and I appreciate the
opportunity to help you and other Members of the Committee
understand the challenges facing our police department in the
post-September 11 world.
In the City of Portland, we employ 164 men and women, with
18 unfilled positions at any one time due to vacancies or long-
term leave. The effect that these unfilled slots have on my
police department's manpower, however, is minuscule when
compared to the effect that the lack of coordination and
information sharing by Federal agencies has on our policing
efforts.
The post-September 11 environment calls for new Federal-
State-local partnerships. The Federal Government cannot, and
should not, write a blank check to pay for round-the-clock
surveillance of every possible terrorist target, but it should
maximize Federal resources to coordinate Homeland Security's
information and manpower with those local governments.
Based on our experiences in Portland, Maine, I am certain
that improved coordination and cooperation by Federal agencies
could off-set the increased local expenditures that have
followed the tragic events of September 11.
In Portland, policing imperatives of a post-September 11
world have caused taxpayers close to a million dollars in
police staffing and overtime. Without a more thoughtful and
significant Federal partnership, taxpayers will continue to pay
more than their fair share, and the Federal Government will not
get the most for its Federal dollars.
Perhaps the best example of the need for better
coordination is the joint Federal, State and local effort to
protect the Portland International Jetport. Portland's Jetport
is a very busy traveling point, connecting travelers to most of
the hub airports on the Eastern seaboard.
In 2002, over 120,000 flights carried more than 1 million
people through Portland, and as everyone knows, Portland played
an unwilling and a most unwelcome role to the September 11
terrorist when two of the hijackers, Mohammad Atta and Abdul
Alomari, used our airport to start their tragic journey.
Prior to September 11, my department provided the Jetport
with three officers from 5 a.m. until 10 p.m. Since September
11, the Federal Aviation Administration and the Transportation
Security Administration, have significantly increased the
police presence at the airport and now require that I provide
12 officers around the clock 24 hours a day. This represents
approximately 2,270 8-hour shifts per year at a cost of about
$1.2 million. We are willing and eager to provide manpower and
resources to protect our community, but some of the requests by
the FAA and the TSA just do not make sense.
It has cost approximately, up to this day, $800,000 to meet
the increased staffing needs at the airport, including the
supplemental overtime requested by the FAA and the mandated TSA
coverage, but the cost does not stop there. The extra hours
Portland police officers spend at the airport often requires
that the police department pay them overtime for their regular
shifts, which is an additional $75,000, and these additional
expenses do not account for the physical, emotional, and
psychological toll taken on the officers.
Excessive overtime takes its toll not only on the officers,
but also on their spouses, their children, and their community.
Excessive overtime can lead to increased risk for accidents and
injuries, chronic fatigue, stress, and diminished
decisionmaking ability.
At the same time that I am required to increase my staffing
at the Jetport by 600 percent, the Transportation Security
Administration has hired over 160 new employees in Portland and
has given them excellent training, and I think that they do a
great job in protecting our airport.
While the TSA monitors the Jetport with 160 employees, I
have the responsibility for policing the Jetport, the
waterfront, and the entire City of Portland with 164 people. If
the TSA employees were given additional training, we could work
with them to coordinate our efforts to secure the airport,
decreasing police staffing needs and prevent additional costs.
The point is that the Federal Government does not need to write
more checks and spend more tax dollars if we work together in a
coordinated fashion to force these agencies to be more
proactive in partnering with us at a local level.
Portland is home to a multi-use waterfront that serves as a
gateway for cruise ships, oil tankers, fishing vessels, cargo
carriers, and a pipeline. If these agencies fail to coordinate
their effort, what will happen when my officers are asked to
take an increased role in protecting Portland's port or the
tank farms? If the Coast Guard and the TSA took steps to
coordinate their efforts, we would be able to provide
additional protections with our existing manpower and with a
minimal cost to both local and Federal Government.
We should consider the following:
One, utilizing TSA resources to supplement airport security
and reduce the need for uniform officers;
Two, enhance communication between Federal, State and local
law enforcement agencies to pool information and eliminate
duplication of effort;
Three, increasing local participation in determining
policing needs and identifying potential terrorist threats;
Four, employing the National Guard units to assist with
short-term security needs in response to specific threats.
Finally, with regard to new Federal resources for homeland
security, we must make sure that they actually get to the local
level in some coordinated fashion. So far we have received
minimal additional resources to offset our increased
expenditures. But, again, writing a check without any increased
coordination of information or manpower makes little sense. It
is doomed to fail.
In your effort to revise the various homeland security
programs, I urge you to look at the structure to make sure that
you target resources in a flexible fashion to the local level
and at the same time coordinate them with other Federal
demands, such as increased staffing.
I want to thank you again for the opportunity to testify
before the Committee, and I look forward to answering any
questions you may have.
Chairman Collins. Thank you very much, Chief.
I would like to stop our witness testimony right now and
first see if the distinguished Senator from New Jersey, who has
joined us, has any opening remarks that he would like to make.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LAUTENBERG
Senator Lautenberg. I appreciate that, Madam Chairman, and
just listening to the testimony of the police chief from
Portland, outlines the problem in absolutely stark and clear
terms, and all of our witnesses here, I am sure, would share
similar stories.
But I commend you, Madam Chairman, for holding this hearing
on homeland security and the challenges our first responders
face. It seems that is the area that is most obvious to
community leadership, first responders, police, fire, emergency
service personnel, and in some cases hazardous laboratory
people. It has a direct effect. And I notice that the chief
said, also, that he had openings, vacancies, that were not
filled to begin with, and I thought that presented a clear
picture.
But a significant amount of responsibility authority for
public security is delegated to State and local governments,
but across the country State and local governments are facing
their biggest budget crises in over 50 years. Consequently,
police, firefighters, and other first responders to the
problems are stretched to the limit trying to protect our
communities.
The cost of bolstering security, especially when the U.S.
Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security raised
the national terrorist threat level, it can be enormous.
I have often talked to the Secretary of Homeland Security
and asked why release this data? Why send out these alarms if
there is no solution to the problem? Do you want people to just
sit home? That is hardly the answer. Should they carry on their
normal activity? Well, yes, but also looking over their
shoulders at the same time to make sure that if they see
anything suspicious they help out. We ask them to do that in
case of a kidnapping, in the case of a threat by an escaped
prisoner, or a felon in the area. So there is no reason not to
call for that.
And when you see the task that we have and the amount of
funding that is required, 170,000 people in the Homeland
Security Department, $33 billion in budgets, stretching across
22 departments of government, it is a significant task in just
shaping the process. And then allocating the funds and getting
the communities to cooperate is a very difficult thing, but we
have to do it.
So when we have these alerts, I am told, and this is no
military secret or intelligence secret, that the reason that is
done, the reason they send out the amber, the yellow or
whatever, is to alert the local folk--the governors, the police
chiefs, those who are heads of departments of emergency
response.
Well, I would have hoped they could have done it neater and
not scared everybody because, again, there is nothing we can
do. We have to conduct our lives normally, and that is the
objective.
Last week, I met with the people from the New Jersey State
Association of Chiefs of Police to discuss the tremendous
pressure on local police and fire departments. After nearly 2
years of excessive overtime, growing State deficits, limited
Federal budgets, we need to bring relief to the communities
that have sent first responders to the wars. Their costs can
mean large holes in their security, as well as the financial
costs, which are very tough to recover in periods of
significant deficits in States and communities across the
country.
Another problem, which I am attempting to address through
legislation, it arises when a jurisdiction's first responders
serve in the National Guard or the Reserve and they get called
to active duty for 6 or more months, and that is happening with
more and more frequency, now that the war with Iraq is
underway.
According to the Police Executive Research Forum, nearly
one-half of all law enforcement agencies surveyed have lost
personnel to military call-ups. Reserves are a crucial
component of our armed forces, but call-ups should not
undermine our ability to respond to the need to protect
communities against terrorist acts, national disasters and
other emergencies at home.
The bottom line is that protecting our country in the wake
of September 11 will take people, equipment and other
resources, and we cannot boost homeland security on the cheap.
Unfortunately, since September 11, there has been a lot of talk
about homeland security, but at every single turn, it has taken
the effort of both Democrat and Republican Senators to try to
provide additional funding to offset State and local
governments' increased homeland security expenditures.
So thank you, again, Madam Chairman, for your command of
this Committee and for your diligence in dealing with the
subjects that are in front of us, and I appreciate the fact
that I am serving with you here and have the opportunity to
participate this morning.
Chairman Collins. Thank you, Senator. We will now turn to
Chief Horvath for his statement.
TESTIMONY OF JEFFREY HORVATH,\1\ POLICE CHIEF, DOVER, DELAWARE
POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Mr. Horvath. Madam Chairman Collins, Senator Carper, and
Senator Lautenberg, thank you for inviting me to appear before
you today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Horvath appears in the Appendix
on page 47.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I commend you for calling this important hearing. Today,
the challenges on the front line are great. Investments are
needed more than ever before.
I believe that Delaware has one distinct advantage over
most other States in that it is very small. Due to Delaware's
small size, the law enforcement community is able to form a
very close relationship, and we are able to communicate with
each other on a regular basis. The Dover Police Department
currently hosts monthly meetings for the Delaware Police
Chief's Council and each police agency in the State is usually
represented at the meetings by either the Agency's chief or by
a chief's representative.
I only provide this information to let you know that while
I cannot speak for all of the agencies in the State of
Delaware, I know that the concerns that I will express in this
statement are shared by many other agencies in Delaware.
Delaware's governor, Ruth Ann Minner, is the lead
Democratic governor for homeland security and delivered a
nationwide weekly radio address on Saturday, April 5. In her
address, Governor Minner stated, ``Here at home, Senator Ridge,
the President's head of the Homeland Security Department, tells
us there is risk of another terrorist attack. We do not know
when or where the next attack will come, but we do know who
will protect us when it does: Our police, firefighters, public
health and emergency medical personnel. They are our neighbors,
our family, our friends, and like our troops, they are ready to
risk their lives for us. They are our hometown security.''
I could not agree with this statement more, and I think it
indicates how important it is for the Federal Government to
work with the State and local agencies across this country to
achieve our homeland security goals.
Since September 11, police departments have been asked to
do more for their communities than ever before; walk the beat,
be on guard against terrorists, secure critical
infrastructures. Despite all the good works of the new
Department of Homeland Security, the burdens of security for
the hometown fall heaviest on local police departments.
There are more than 700,000 police officers and sheriffs in
this country, compared with nearly 11,000 FBI agents. Police
chiefs and sheriffs are called upon more and more to protect us
against the new threats from abroad.
Local budgets are incredibly tight, and I could truly state
that the Dover Police Department is in a position that we may
have to cut certain programs and services to our citizens if
the city is unable to find other revenue sources in the future.
All of this is occurring while we are tasked with new homeland
security demands. All of this is happening while the FBI has
been told to necessarily refocus its resources.
Recently, it was reported that the FBI has plans to
mobilize as many as 5,000 agents to guard against terrorist
attacks during hostilities with Iraq. The FBI's criminal
surveillance operations would be temporarily suspended. Local
police will be called upon to pick up the slack once the FBI is
forced to pull almost half of its agents out of traditional
crime-fighting work.
One of the top concerns for law enforcement in Delaware is
that we are not receiving funds in a timely fashion. I have met
with James E. Turner, III, the director of the Delaware
Emergency Management Agency. He advised me that DEMA just
recently received fiscal year 2002 funding in December 2002,
and they are currently finishing up an application for fiscal
year 2003 funding.
Once again, I will state that Delaware is in an
advantageous position due to its small size. DEMA is receiving
$3.6 million in fiscal year 2003 for homeland security, which
will be used for Delaware's police, fire, EMS, and HAZMAT
agencies. The Delaware Police Chief's Council is currently
working to provide DEMA with a comprehensive plan on how the
funding that it designated for law enforcement should be spent.
This will hopefully ensure that all police agencies in
Delaware will receive their fair share of the funding, but you
need to know that resources do not go directly to local police
departments. They cannot be used to hire new police, they
cannot be used to pay overtime expenses that we incur each and
every time Secretary Ridge changes the alert level. They can be
used to purchase equipment, but not by me. I have to wait for a
statewide plan to be developed, and then I have to hope that a
fair share of those funds will filter to my department.
I feel it is also important to point out that many police
departments serve in jurisdictions that are unique to the area
and may place differing demands on that department. For
instance, the Dover Air Force Base is located within the city
limits of Dover. The Dover Air Force Base is an asset to the
State of Delaware and to the City of Dover, but there are
increased homeland security demands placed on the Dover Police
Department due to its location.
Dover is also home to the Dover Downs International
Speedway. The event at the speedway brings in approximately
$150,000 additional civilians into Dover two times a year.
Federal assistance should be provided to local law
enforcement for training needs, equipment needs and personnel
costs. I also agree with the position of the International
Association of Chiefs of Police in that it is important to
distinguish between the assistance funds that will be provided
to State or local law enforcement from programs administered by
the Department of Homeland Security and those provided from the
existing programs at the Department of Justice.
Both programs provide funds to law enforcement agencies,
but they address different, but equally important, areas of
need. In other words, there is a concern in the law enforcement
community that new assistance programs are being funded at the
expense of traditional law enforcement assistance programs,
such as the COPS program, the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant
program and the Byrne Grant program. Homeland security programs
are not duplicative programs, they are complementary programs.
Effective anti-crime programs are effective anti-terrorism
programs.
This year, for the second budget cycle in a row, it has
been proposed to eliminate the COPS hiring program. COPS is the
only initiative in the entire Federal Government that targets
its resources directly towards police. There is no middle man.
Dover has added several police officers to its authorized
strength in the past, and we will be adding four more in July
2003 using COPS funding. This is a tremendous resource to the
City of Dover and its citizens.
I also feel that communications between Federal, State and
local governments need to improve. There have been many times,
since September 11, that I have learned that State and local
law enforcement have been put on a higher alert status by
watching the news. We were never given a call and never
received a written notice of the increased threat level. I know
that this is true for many law enforcement agencies in the
State of Delaware. I will state, however, that communications
seem to be slowly improving in this area.
Communications also need to improve in regards to funding
for homeland security. Law enforcement needs to be made aware
of new and additional funding without actually having to search
for it. Many times the demands of police work and the needs of
our jurisdictions do not allow the necessary time required to
stay on top of this very important aspect of homeland security.
In closing, I would like to thank everyone for inviting me
to this hearing and allowing me to speak. It has been an honor
and a privilege. I would be pleased to try to answer any
questions at the appropriate time.
Thank you.
Chairman Collins. Thank you, Chief.
We will now turn to Chief Plaugher.
TESTIMONY OF EDWARD P. PLAUGHER,\1\ FIRE CHIEF AND SEPTEMBER 11
INCIDENT COMMANDER AT THE PENTAGON, ARLINGTON COUNTY FIRE
DEPARTMENT, VIRGINIA
Mr. Plaugher. Good morning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Plaugher appears in the Appendix
on page 50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairman Collins. Good morning.
Mr. Plaugher. Madam Chairman and Members of the Committee,
I am Edward Plaugher, Chief of the Arlington County, Virginia,
Fire Department, and begin by thanking you for having me here
today.
I have submitted for the record a statement which I will
not read, but at this time would like to bring to the
Committee's attention several key points.
First, I appear today on behalf of front-line service
providers across our Nation. First responders have, and will
continue to be, on the front lines for homeland security.
Assuring that each citizen is protected, to the highest degree
possible, is the responsibility of today's first responders.
Congress, because of this need, has designed, over recent
years, a multi-layer, multi-department funding stream.
Utilizing this approach has led to total confusion and, in most
cases, a total lack of action. We, as a Nation, cannot afford
this confusion and, most importantly, we cannot afford this
lack of action.
I ask that a streamlined, direct approach be undertaken.
The system that I envision would recognize that the effects of
terrorism attacks occur locally and that we must maximize our
collective efforts to prevent terrorism, reduce risk and design
preparations that respond effectively, that the programs are
locally focused and are designed to build upon existing
resources.
Key to this effort is citizen participation and
preparedness. I request that at least 10 percent of all Federal
funding be utilized to encourage our citizens to participate in
our protection efforts. We need to strengthen our citizen-based
preparedness.
In addition, the private sector capability in this Nation
is enormous. We must find a way that the private sector
resources, and in particular those in the construction
industry, are utilized in an effective and efficient manner.
They can, and will, and are usually willing to assist the
responders.
However, we need to provide a structure that folds the
public and private resources into an incident command structure
that will enable every community to leverage its resources into
an effective homeland security program.
Regional preparedness, however, holds the key. Federal
funding needs to leverage its effectiveness by using a regional
approach. Local governments must build a baseline of capacity
and should not be forced to have redundant basic resources. As
an example, each region must assure that adequate hospital surg
beds are available and that surg medical support staff are also
available. This lends itself to a regional resource-sharing
solution.
Federal programs that mandate target goals for
preparedness, however, are the key. Just like the real issue is
not homeland security, but how to be secure in an open society,
preparedness is not about buying protective suits, but about
developing systems that are needed to support the first
responders.
In summation, I would like to ask that Congress simplify,
to the extent possible, make sure that we have a national
standard of preparedness, a national strategy, and that the
private and citizen sector of our community be folded into the
process. Assuring the Nation is ready to respond to homeland
security needs must be simple, straightforward and accomplished
without delay.
I look forward to your questions at the appropriate time.
Chairman Collins. Thank you very much, Chief.
Before turning to Captain Bowers, I want to call on Senator
Durbin to see if he has any opening comments that he would like
to make.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DURBIN
Senator Durbin. Madam Chairman, thank you for this hearing,
and I am sorry I stepped in a few moments late, but I wanted to
come. I think this is critically important, and I think we face
two challenges:
First, how to respond to the reality of terrorism when we
know that the world is more likely to call 911 than their
Senator's office if something happens; and, second, how do we
do it in a context where we are dealing with the largest
Federal deficit in the Nation's history and most State and
local governments are facing the largest deficits they have
seen in recent memory?
It is an extraordinary challenge. I am glad you are having
this hearing, and I think that your goal of more flexibility in
transferring these funds is something that will be important to
my State and many others.
Thank you.
Chairman Collins. Thank you very much, Senator.
Captain Bowers, thank you for being here. You may proceed.
TESTIMONY OF CAPTAIN CHAUNCEY BOWERS,\1\ FIREFIGHTER-EMT-
PARAMEDIC, PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT, MARYLAND, ON
BEHALF OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS (IAFF)
Mr. Bowers. Good morning, Chairman Collins and Members of
the Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Bowers appears in the Appendix on
page 53.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My name is Chauncey Bowers, and I am a firefighter-EMT-
paramedic with the rank of Captain in the Prince George's
County Fire Emergency Medical Services Department. I am here
representing the Nation's 260,000 professional firefighters and
EMS personnel who are members of the International Association
of Firefighters.
To those of us in the fire service, September 11 changed
the world. It is in the memory of the 343 firefighters lost on
September 11 that we are committed to ensuring that
firefighters have the resources to protect our communities and
our Nation.
In the current environment, fire departments are facing the
dual pressures of homeland security and reduced resources
caused by local budget deficits. This is a recipe for disaster.
We need a national commitment to homeland security
preparedness. We must work to ensure that every fire department
in America has the resources to protect our citizens.
While much of this work needs to focus on the unique
challenges posed by weapons of mass destruction, we cannot
overlook other dangers. The worst terrorist attacks on our
Nation, including the tragedies of September 11 and the
Oklahoma City bombing, were carried out with conventional
weapons.
The first and foremost need of the fire service is adequate
personnel. Both OSHA and the National Fire Protection
Association, the consensus standards-making body of the fire
service, have issued standards for safe fire ground staffing.
Unfortunately, most fire departments do not comply with these
safety regulations, often leading to tragic consequences.
Even after September 11, short staffing is common in every
part of the country. In Maine, for example, not a single fire
department complies with the NFPA standards. Portland and Old
Orchard Beach are among the communities considering laying off
firefighters. While this staffing crisis must ultimately be
addressed at the local level, there is much that the Federal
Government can do, and I must take a moment to commend both
Chairman Collins and Ranking Member Lieberman for helping to
point the way.
Your leadership in working to create a Federal grant
program to aid firefighters is deeply appreciated by every
firefighter in this Nation. It is on their behalf that I thank
you. The SAFER Act, as this grant proposal is known, provides
grants to local fire departments to fund the hiring of 75,000
additional firefighters.
Fire departments would apply for 4-year grants that would
contribute towards the cost of hiring these new firefighters.
Local jurisdictions would then be required to retain the
firefighter position for at least one additional year.
The second need of the fire service is equipment. An IAFF
study found shortage of personnel protective equipment,
respirators, and communications equipment. A FEMA study had
similar findings. Approximately, 57,000 firefighters lack
personal protective clothing. One-third of firefighters are not
equipped with self-contained breathing apparatus and many fire
departments do not have enough portable radios to equip more
than half of the firefighters on shift.
To address these concerns, the International Association of
Firefighters endorses full funding of both the FIRE Act and the
First Responder program. The FIRE Act provides grants directly
to local fire departments for basic needs. The First Responder
program provides grants to States and localities for the
purchase of specialized terrorism equipment.
Training is the third major need. Firefighters need
training in fire suppression, emergency medical services,
rescue, hazardous materials and weapons of mass destruction
response. A FEMA study found that 27 percent of fire department
personnel involved in providing emergency medical services
lacked any formal training in those duties. Incredibly, 73
percent of fire departments failed to meet Federal regulations
for hazardous materials response training.
One of the obstacles to training that has arisen over the
past year is that many jurisdictions lack the funds to back-
fill positions of firefighters assigned to training. Even in
places where funds are available, many fire departments do not
take advantage of these opportunities because they cannot
afford the overtime pay for the firefighter who is filling in
for their colleague while at training.
To address the need for training, we urge Congress to fully
fund both the FIRE Act and the programs run by the Office for
Domestic Preparedness. The FIRE Act can be used for most basic
training, including emergency medical services, and the Office
for Domestic Preparedness programs provides some of the world's
best weapons of mass destruction response training.
Fire departments provide 80 percent of emergency medical
services in the United States, and we are the largest provider
of pre-hospital emergency care. Fire-based emergency medical
services featuring cross-trained, multi-role firefighters is
the most effective delivery system for emergency medical
services.
When we talk about the fire service, you are talking about
emergency medical services. As a firefighter and paramedic, I
can tell you firsthand that virtually all of the needs of the
fire department apply to the emergency medical services arena.
Fire-based EMS providers need additional personnel, equipment,
and training, and like the fire service, terrorism poses new
challenges for EMS.
EMS providers need training in detecting the telltale signs
of biological and chemical exposure and identifying the
symptoms of specific pathogens or agents while protecting
themselves from these hazards. Fire-based EMS providers also
need training and equipment to decontaminate and treat large
numbers of victims that may result from these incidents.
Finally, on the issue of program structure, the
International Association of Firefighters sees no conflict
between the FIRE Act and the First Responder program. The FIRE
Act, again, funds the basic needs of the fire departments
locally. The First Responder program is for terrorism response.
It is imperative that both programs are fully funded and remain
separate and distinct.
As Congress evaluates these programs, the International
Association of Firefighters offers the following comments:
Many of our fire service colleagues feel that FEMA must
continue to operate the FIRE Act. We share those concerns.
However, if the decision is made to move the program to the
Office for Domestic Preparedness, we strongly urge Congress to
require ODP to administer the program in the current manner and
retain the following three key principles:
First, enhance homeland security by addressing basic fire
department needs;
Second, the grants must be provided directly to local fire
departments, where they will translate into equipment,
training, and personnel;
Finally, continue the peer-review process, utilizing
firefighters and determining where this money can best be
spent.
We also urge adequate funding for the First Responder
program, however, we feel that grants should either be provided
directly to local agencies or local communities or the States
should be required to send 90 percent of the funding to
localities within 30 days.
Further, the definition of a first responder is overly
broad. In a community's emergency response plan, the funding to
train and equip first responders must be targeted to fire,
police, and EMS.
In conclusion, firefighters are the linchpin to an
effective homeland security. We will respond when the next
alarm rings, but our ranks are thin. The Federal Government
must provide the resources to ensure that another September 11
does not happen. Firefighters need sufficient staffing, the
right equipment and the proper training to do our job safely
and effectively.
Thank you for this opportunity to present the view of the
International Association of Firefighters, and I will be happy
to take questions at the appropriate time.
Chairman Collins. Thank you very much, Captain.
Chief Chitwood, I want to start my questions with you. You
mentioned in your testimony that the City of Portland has
incurred costs of some $800,000 since September 11 for
increased staffing at the airport, and as I understand it, that
increased staffing is federally mandated by the requests you
are getting from FAA and TSA; is that correct? That this was
not an action taken by the city on its own, but rather in
response to Federal requests?
Mr. Chitwood. Correct, Senator.
Chairman Collins. Has the city and your police department
received any funding from the Federal Government to help cope
with that enormous hit on the city's budget?
Mr. Chitwood. With respect to the monies that are spent at
the airport, through the Jetport Enterprise Fund and through
the mandate of TSA for personnel, we have been reimbursed for
those particular monies.
For the flip side of that, for all monies that are spent to
fill the shifts that are left open because we are at the
Jetport, no.
Chairman Collins. And that is your point about the
increased overtime that the department is incurring because its
officers are at the airport, rather than perhaps controlling
the streets of Portland?
Mr. Chitwood. That is correct.
Chairman Collins. That cost is being borne by the city
without any reimbursement from the Federal Government?
Mr. Chitwood. That is correct.
Chairman Collins. I am interested in the comments that all
of you have made about whether the funding that we are
providing for homeland security actually makes it down to the
local police department, the local fire department, to EMTs
because that is our intent. We have appropriated literally
billions of dollars for homeland security, but is it making its
way down to the local level?
Chief Plaugher.
Mr. Plaugher. Absolutely not. As I talk to my colleagues
around the Nation, the frustrations just continue to mount. The
bureaucracy is just consuming the energy, consuming the monies,
and at the end of the stream is very little, if any, monies.
In my community, for the years--and I hope I get the right
years because it has taken so long I am actually forgetting
what years we are involved with--I think the first set of
monies, through some of the State and local assistance programs
was in Federal year 1999, and then 2000, 2001, 2002.
We just recently got a block of monies from I think it was
2000, 2001, 2002. By the time it got to us, it was such small
monies that we could only use it for one purpose, and that was
to buy regulators for our firefighters because our current
regulators failed to pass the test and were not effective
against chemical and biological agents. So we were forced to
then buy regulators for that purpose because of our needs and
the subway system in the Washington metropolitan area.
So, again, when it did come to us, it was in such small
amount that it only could go for one purpose and one purpose
only. And because it was a regulated program, we could only use
it to buy equipment. Now, we did have a need, but if, in fact,
we did not have a need for that, we would have been forced to
have said back to the State that we were unable to use this
money because it was very specifically regulated for one
purpose and one purpose only.
So there is not flexibility, and the amount that comes out
at the end of the stream is very small.
Chairman Collins. I think the lack of flexibility is an
excellent point because you know best what your needs are, and
I think it is one reason we are seeing these unspent balances,
also, in the monies that the States have received.
Mr. Plaugher. In the Commonwealth of Virginia, we
participated, as mandated by the Department of Justice program,
we participated in the assessment, a risk assessment and risk
hazard. We were not, as we participated in that, we did not
particularly agree with the outcome, but had no choice but to
accept the State's outcome. As a matter of fact, in the State's
list of hazards, in the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Pentagon
was at the bottom of the third page, and each page had about 75
to 80 target hazard properties on it. So it was not even rated
high on the list of target hazards. And so that would have
meant we would have, using that formula, we would have received
no Federal funding for an obvious national symbol, national
hazard.
So, again, these programs have been very convoluted, they
are difficult to follow, they are difficult to work with in the
State systems, and so where they are intended for the first
responders, it usually is not getting there.
The last study that was done, by a private institute, found
that less than 2 cents actually ended up in the first
responders' hands, 2 cents on the dollar.
Chairman Collins. That is a major disappointment and a
major problem and one reason that I wanted to convene this
hearing.
Captain Bowers, aside from fire grants which, as you
pointed out, was a preexisting program and goes directly to
fire departments, are you receiving homeland security money as
a result of these billions of dollars that we are
appropriating?
Mr. Bowers. Well, I would have to echo the chief's
comments, that process is very slow and cumbersome, and the
money is a long time coming in the end. When you opened this
hearing, you made some comments about restrictions on use of
the money and restructuring to put this in a central location.
I think your efforts in that area are 100 percent on target.
Some of the problems that we have experienced is when a
grant is applied for, we may identify Item A, but by the time
that is approved and we are ready to purchase equipment, there
may be a new item, Item B, that is now available, but in order
to switch from Item A, which we specified in the application,
to Item B, there is an entire bureaucratic process to get that
approved. That, again, delays the amount of time it takes us to
have the equipment.
Having these programs in a central office will also
eliminate the problems that we face now, where sometimes it
goes through the State, sometimes it goes directly to a Federal
agency, and the guidelines and the management of these grants
are different for each and every program.
Chairman Collins. Thank you. My time has expired, but I
just want to give Captain Horvath a chance to respond to the
same question of whether the money is getting down to the local
police department in Dover.
Mr. Horvath. I will quote him when he said, ``Absolutely
not,'' because my police department has not seen any of it, and
that is the quick answer. We keep hearing of this money, and no
one can tell us when it is coming, when we are going to get it.
And then it has to go through DEMA, which for part of the
process I think is a good thing because, Delaware being small,
again, I keep harping on that, but we are putting together a
plan to give to them on what equipment first responders should
have in their cars with them so all police officers in the
State will have the same equipment. It will work together. We
can go and help another jurisdiction out and actually share
equipment if we have to. That part of it is a plus.
But there are other needs that each police department
needs, and each police department may have different things in
their jurisdiction, as I mentioned. They may have different
needs. It would be nice if the money was more flexible and if
some of the money could directly come to the police departments
themselves and not through a middle man, so to speak.
Chairman Collins. And, finally, Chief Chitwood, you
mentioned some reimbursement for the airport costs, but
obviously we have a major port in Portland. Are you receiving
Federal funding directly to the police department to assist
with those costs?
Mr. Chitwood. No, we are not. In fact, to answer that
question, if I could expand on my answer, over the years,
starting in 1994, any time we needed money for a policing
program, we always had to apply to the State, who received the
grants directly from the Federal Government. And any time we
made a request, our request was either filled partially or not
filled at all.
Subsequently, I think the Federal Government did one of the
best things for law enforcement that I have ever seen in my 38
years, and that was allow the local police departments to
articulate a particular need directly to the Federal
Government, and the following programs that I am talking about
were the Universal Hiring Grant, which supplied police
departments across the country, with the COPS program, the
Officers in Schools program.
You fill out an application, you articulate your need, the
Federal Government sends you the money, you hire the officers.
There is no bureaucracy, there is no breakdown. We look at
other block grants that we can apply directly to the Federal
Government to enhance technology in our organization. For the
last 7 years, we apply for these grants once a year. After we
articulate a need, we get those monies, no middle man. We do
not have to deal with the State bureaucracy, directly with the
Federal Government.
And I truly believe that when you look at homeland
security, if the departments who could articulate the greatest
threat risk could apply directly to the Federal Government and
receive those monies, whether they are any one of our four
organizations or across the country, and like it has been said,
each community has a different need. And I think once you
articulate that need to the Federal Government, then those
monies could be supplanted directly to the department.
For example, in Maine, Portland has a much more need than
Bethel would have, but yet, under the formula, everybody would
be getting the same amount of money vis-a-vis the State
guideline. And I think that having the ability to apply
directly, articulate the need, look at the threat-risk
assessment, and then those monies go directly to the
department, I believe that the needs of the localities could be
filled in a very quick and professional way where they could be
spent to protect our communities.
Chairman Collins. Thank you. Senator Carper.
Senator Carper. Thanks, Madam Chairman.
I have some specific questions I want to ask a bit later of
Chief Horvath, as it relates to the Dover Air Force Base and
the relationship that you have with the folks that are
providing the security at the base and how that affects your
responsibilities and those of your department.
Before I do that, let me ask a general, broader question. A
lot of times when we have a hearing like this, it is helpful to
me, and I hope to our Committee Members, to hear where you
agree, and sometimes we hear different messages from different
parts of the country. It will be very helpful to know the major
points, as you listened to the testimonies of your colleagues
at the desk, where do you agree in terms of what steps we
should be taking in the Congress, Legislative and Executive
Branches? Where do you see a consensus and major priority
points of agreement?
Captain Bowers, we have a beach in Delaware named after
you, Bowers Beach. That is the home of the Heartbreak Hotel, a
legendary place. [Laughter.]
If you ever come to Delaware, visit your beach.
Mr. Bowers. I will.
Senator Carper. Go to the Heartbreak Hotel.
But the major areas that you are agreeing, as to how they
relate to an action agenda for us.
Mr. Bowers. Well, the first has got to be that the money is
not making it to the local level. That is foremost. I think we
also agree that the process needs to be streamlined, and Chief
Chitwood just hit it right on the nail. We need to streamline
that process so that the need can be articulated and funded.
And, finally, I think another major area that we all agree
is if we can get those things done, then the first responders
at the local level will have the equipment, the training, and
the personnel that they need to respond to these threats in a
coordinated fashion. That is also key, that it be coordinated.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Is it Mr. Plaugher?
Mr. Plaugher. Plaugher, yes, sir.
Senator Carper. We will learn that name before this hearing
is over.
Mr. Plaugher. Thank you, sir. [Laughter.]
I think the captain is absolutely on target. When we go
through the State process, what comes out the end was not what
was intended, oftentimes. And it needs to be, as the chief at
the end of the table was talking about earlier, it needs to be
a straight direct to the local governments. That is where the
protection is going to occur. That is where the response is
going to occur.
The States, however, have needs, and I cannot dismiss that.
We work in a Nation that is the United States, and the States
have a key role in this process, as I am sure you are very
aware. And so I am not trying to dismiss the absolute needs of
the various States, and the State resources and the State
coordination effort that is absolutely critical in homeland
security.
But for the Federal Government, through its programs, to
tie the hands of the State officials, when I asked the State
coordinators, How come this system is the way it is? They say,
We have no option. This is the mandate. This is the program,
and if you want the little bit that comes out at the end, you
have got to do X, Y and Z.
And so, again, Senator, there is no flexibility in the
program, and the poor State coordinators, they feel very
frustrated. As a matter of fact, yesterday, I received a letter
from the commonwealth security coordinator, the former
lieutenant governor, John Hager. He sent a letter back to the
Northern Virginia Regional Planning Commission--it is now
called the Northern Virginia Commission--that is trying to
undertake a regional effort.
Because of the complexities of the D.C. region, the three
States' involvement, we prefer to use a regional effort. And we
had requested that our Federal funds come to a regional program
for preparedness. We are actually trying to create a system
called a MIST, which is a Mobile Incident Support Team, to
bolster the communities' resources from the 3-hour to 6-hour,
3-hour to 12-hour response window because most local
governments can do 2 to 3 hours. After that, they need
additional resources, very specific resources for a
catastrophic incident, and so we have requested this MIST, and
we wanted to do it regionally.
The bottom line of the letter that came back from the
former lieutenant governor was we do not have that latitude. We
do not have that flexibility, and so again we feel like we are
constrained. You ask us to come up with solutions, we come up
with solutions. We think they are straightforward and make good
sense for our particular needs, but the program does not allow
it. So, again, frustrations prevail.
Senator Carper. Thank you. Chief Horvath.
Mr. Horvath. I agree with what both of them have said. I
think some of the money from the Federal Government has to be
earmarked to come directly to the Agency. I also agree with
what the chief just said, some of it has to go to the State. I
tried to say that in my statement where the money is going to
DEMA, and it is going to be spread out equally among the police
departments, and I think that is a good thing the way that is
being used because we will all be on the same page when we are
responding to these incidents.
I also agree that the money has to be flexible in how it
can be spent, but we also have to justify how we spend it. We
have to be held accountable. And one of the big things, I
think, the money has to get to us quicker. I mean, September 11
was 2001, and my department and his department, we have not
received any money, and we are getting ready to come up on
September 2003.
Senator Carper. Two wars will have intervened.
Mr. Horvath. Excuse me?
Senator Carper. Two wars will have occurred during the time
from those events of September 11. All right. Thank you.
Mr. Chitwood.
Mr. Chitwood. I agree. I mean, it is funny. I have not had
the opportunity to even speak to these gentlemen, and it is
like we each wrote a piece of what we were going to write. So
there are commonalities across the board.
I just would emphasize once again that the Federal
Government, through the Department of Justice and their
programs, have already established, in my opinion, from a law
enforcement perspective, a way to get the monies to the local
departments across the country and responsibility for spending
those monies in a way that protects each community.
You do not have to rewrite the process. It is here. It is
there, and I think that if that would continue, as we face a
new world of terrorism, I believe that will work that way. I
really do.
Senator Carper. Thanks.
Madam Chairman, will there be a second round of questions?
Chairman Collins. Yes, there will be.
Senator Carper. I will be back. Thanks very much.
Chairman Collins. Senator Lautenberg.
Senator Lautenberg. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
You have presented us with several problems as we listened
to the testimony. It has been very enlightening, and I thank
each one of you for your contribution.
One thing stands out pretty sharply, and tell me if I am
misinterpreting what has been said or intimated here, and that
is if you are requested, as in the case of your department,
Chief Chitwood, to put people at the airport, is that a
mandate? Forget about whether or not it is a good idea. I mean,
we are assuming it is a good idea. Is that a mandate that you
put 12 officers out there to cover the responsibility they want
you to cover? And do you pay for it out of your regular budget?
Mr. Chitwood. The officers that are assigned to the airport
are paid out of two funds. One is what they call Jetport
Enterprise Fund, which basically is monies that the airline
carriers and other vendors in the airport, that use the
airport, put into a pool, and then the other monies, a portion
is paid for by the Federal Government, either TSA and/or FAA.
Senator Lautenberg. So that does not cost you anything,
realistically.
Mr. Chitwood. No, sir.
Senator Lautenberg. And in every case, Chief Horvath, or
our fire department people, if you are asked to put people at
the airport or another sensitive place, do you always get
compensated for that?
Mr. Horvath. No, sir. I can speak for the Dover Police
Department. We have increased security, obviously, around Dover
Air Force Base. It is part of the request, and part of it you
hit on. It is a good idea, and I think we have a responsibility
to the people we protect to act on our good ideas. That is
absolutely a good idea.
The Federal Government, the base does not offer us
financial assistance, and quite frankly we have not expected
them to. They are a good neighbor, and we try to serve. It is
an increased burden on the police department, and it would be
nice if there were funds available to provide overtime for that
protection, for the perimeter checks, and the other things that
we do.
Senator Lautenberg. Well, is it fair to say that even
discounting that obligation or that cooperation, that your
costs have gone up just generally significantly since we have
been on the alert, we will call it?
Mr. Horvath. A lot of times, speaking for myself, if you
looked at the budget, you probably could not see it, but what
we have done is taken officers from other units and put them
out doing security checks at various times. So now you are
taking away services that you normally would offer.
Senator Lautenberg. Would render.
Mr. Horvath. Just to give you an example of an impact we
have had, we use our Speed Enforcement Unit to do a lot of the
checks while they are working. We do not do speed enforcement
in Dover to raise revenues. We do it to enforce compliance to
the law.
We have this year, in 2002, seen a decrease in traffic
tickets issued and a substantial increase in traffic accidents
within the city limits. Now, I think there is some connection
there. Maybe it is not all due to the perimeter checks, but I
know our guys are doing less enforcement, and it is showing.
Senator Lautenberg. There is a cost whether it is just in
dollar amounts or reduced coverage that otherwise would be
afforded. I called my hometown in New Jersey and spoke to the
chief there, whom I know, and they, out of about 100 officers,
they only had 2, and I am now talking about first responders
because I have introduced a bill to reimburse those communities
that lose first responders to the military who are away for
more than 6 months because it is very tough in communities, I
do not care what State you are in, to simply go to the
taxpayers and say, ``Hey, you know, we need another $200,000.
Your share is $200 a year'' or something of that nature.
So I introduced a bill that says if someone is away 6
months, and the community is not able to recover the costs for
paying them--now, some communities, and I think, Madam
Chairman, this was mentioned here at one meeting, and it
surprised me, and I have been around for a couple of wars, and
one I fought in myself, but let us not have a guessing game.
[Laughter.]
It was not too recent. Anyway, the fact of the matter is
that I always thought that in law, when people were Reservists
and called up, that there was an automatic requirement that the
employer, whomever it was, was required to pay some
compensation, and that is not the case at all. Many companies
do not do it, and many communities do not do it. And that is a
burden, I think, that ought to be borne nationally by the
taxpayers of the country because it does not matter whether you
come from New Jersey, if you are in Iraq, you are out there
protecting everybody, and so it is with all of your States as
well.
But I was struck by something that I saw, and that is the
differences, and this requires a lot of review. In Baltimore
City, Maryland, more than 150 members of the police department
have been called up to serve in the military. It is almost 15
percent of the total force. Well, I think that we ought to make
sure that they have enough people to take care of their basic
requirements, their everyday requirements. A city like
Baltimore is a complicated city, a big city.
But, also, Madam Chairman, I noted something else in the
distribution here that talks about Homeland Security Grants,
and it shows each of the States, and it shows the per-capita
contribution that is made. And, of course, I looked to New
Jersey, and Chief Horvath said there is some advantage to being
small. Well, we are small, but we are crowded and small, and we
have almost 8.5 million people now in the State, and we get
$1.69, and without picking on any other States present, there
is quite a difference in the size of the distribution. So it is
pretty obvious that we have to look at the formula and make
sure that we are doing the right thing.
So, Madam Chairman, you are doing the right thing here. We
have to make sure that the protection we afford our citizens
from enemies abroad is not any greater than the protection we
afford our citizens from enemies within our borders or our
communities.
We cannot ask the cities and towns across America to give
up a part of what they have to do normally to send people
overseas. And I want to support the war effort. I mean, there
is no doubt about that, but we have to make sure that these
communities get compensated for the extra costs they incur.
Thank you very much, to all of the witnesses.
Chairman Collins. Thank you, Senator. Senator Durbin.
Senator Durbin. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and
thank you for this hearing.
I would like to ask consent that a survey that has been
assembled by my staff of Illinois communities and the
experience that they have had be made part of the record of
this Committee hearing.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Illinois community survey appears in the Appendix on page
65.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairman Collins. Without objection.
Senator Durbin. It shows much of what has been said by the
witnesses today: Clear need unmet by Federal funds and also
some complications, which I would like to get into in just a
moment.
It strikes me that if you step back from where we are and
assess, as Chief Horvath and others have, 2 years after
September 11, that you have to put it in the context, and the
context that I see facing you as firefighters, and police and
other first responders I alluded to in my opening remarks.
Unless you are an unusual community in America, you are
facing a budget crunch. That probably is an annual occurrence
for most of you, but made even worse by the recession, which
has reduced local revenues and State revenues, and so you are
being forced to deal with deficit situations, a hiring freeze,
cutbacks in the context of this conversation.
It is also quite likely, from the police side, that you are
aware of the fact that the President's new budget eliminates
the COPS program. One of the things brought up to me by most of
these police departments in Illinois is how valuable that
program has been--direct assistance from the Federal Government
for hiring the men and women we need on the street.
Not coincidentally, incidently, in the 44 cities recently
surveyed by one group, we found that as the Federal investment
in law enforcement has gone down, crime rates are going up
again, which we certainly do not want to see.
But here you are facing State and local budget deficits,
cutbacks and elimination of the Federal COPS program, cutbacks
in the Byrne grant program, which a lot of law enforcement
agencies have used as part of President Bush's proposed budget.
Now, a new factor, the activation of the Guard and Reserve.
And in many of your communities, thank goodness, the local
units of government have said we are going to make certain that
this family is not going to face an economic hardship. We are
going to make up the difference in salary.
So now you have a new expense. The person is no longer
there to provide firefighting services in law enforcement, but
their salary, at least the difference in salary, is coming out
of your budget. Then add on to this, perhaps, hiring freezes
that are creating demands for more overtime pay. So you put all
of that in context, and here is why I wanted to preface my
question.
Now, we are standing back and saying, ``We want to prepare
you to fight terrorism,'' and I would imagine if I were in your
shoes, the first thing you would say to me honestly is, ``I
have got to worry about having enough people in the squad cars,
on the streets, in the fire departments. Certainly, we need gas
masks, we need training, we need to know about bioterrorism,
but I am dealing with the basics. Before you offer me a brand
new computer, I need to put a roof on my house, and the rain is
pouring in.''
How do we parse this out? How can we say to you we want to
give you add-on funds for new needs and requirements at a time
when you are being hollowed out from within by all of the
factors that I just mentioned?
Chief Chitwood.
Mr. Chitwood. That is a very difficult question to answer,
and I will try and tell you what we are doing right now.
As a result of the budget crisis that we are in, we are now
eliminating programs. A foundation of what we do in Portland is
community policing. And what I have had to do is I have had
to--I have five centers--so I had to eliminate an officer in
each center and put those officers on the front line. I had to
reduce my DARE program. I had to reduce my Officer Friendly
program. I took them out of the schools, put them answering 911
calls because that is our priority. People call 911, they
expect somebody to arrive.
Like Chief Horvath said with respect to his traffic, I had
to reduce my Traffic Unit. I had to reduce my Drug Unit to put
those officers on the street. Now, when we have the added
manpower issue of having to follow and police the airport, I
have the greatest percentage of my force working out at the
airport, and I have this big void in what I do on the street.
So that is what we are doing.
With respect to this hearing, as I see the increased
threats, we are in an orange alert, my expectation would be
based on the alerts that soon we could be on a red alert. I
hope not, but there is a strong possibility.
Then, that leaves a tremendous hole on the waterfront, the
pipeline, the cruise ships, and the oil tankers that go through
our community, and I do not have the resources to do it. I just
do not have the resources to do it.
Earlier, when I talked about the void that I have with
respect to 18 officers down, 9 are vacant positions due to
vacancies. I have 4 officers out on stress-related incidents,
and when I look at what they made working overtime, they are
the highest paid officers because they are working
consistently. Three of them are out with heart attacks, and
these guys are 41/42 years of age.
Now, I am not a doctor, and I am not saying it is directly
related, but the stress factors that are put on us to have to
fill these slots has had a toll not only financially, but
physically and emotionally.
Senator Durbin. Could I ask you, if I might, because my
time has run out, but if each of the others could just comment
very briefly on this question of whether or not you are seeing
a hollowing out of your basic core of services, in firefighting
and police, at a time when we are discussing add-on funds to
fight terrorism and how you are going to cope with it. If you
could just give me a brief response, I would appreciate that.
Chief Horvath.
Mr. Horvath. The Dover Police Department is pretty lucky.
We have only lost two sworn police officers to call-up duty by
the military. However, we have several officers injured because
it is a dangerous job, and they get injured.
I agree with the chief. I have also had to decrease the
size of two of my--I have lost a DARE officer to the Patrol
Division, and I have lost a community policing officer to the
Drug Unit. I refuse to decrease the size of my Drug Unit
because that is one of our biggest problems in the city.
The problem with it is, when a police officer leaves, and I
have 13 that can retire this calendar year, it takes about a
year-and-a-half to get an officer back on the road and trained
properly, where he is an effective police officer replacing
them. So those are problems that we are looking at in the
future.
But as far as the issue of homeland security, lucky I have
most of my department there, but we are taking away from normal
police duties to cover homeland security issues. A lot of
people will call, one of their concerns is they would like to
see a police officer drive through their neighborhood every
once in a while. Well, that is not happening like it should.
That is not happening like they deserve it to happen because we
have them out doing security checks and checking other things
in the city that I really will not get into for obvious
reasons.
But the issue of homeland security is pulling from the
workforce of traditional police work, and it is taking it to
another area, and it would be nice to be able to supplement
that.
Another issue of the funds that is really bothering us is
we need training and equipment, and we are not getting it, and
those issues need to be taken care of.
Senator Durbin. Chief Plaugher.
Mr. Plaugher. Yes, Senator, you are right on target with
your talking about the hollowing out. Every day I have to
provide basic services of responding to heart attacks, and the
threat of fire. We have requested repeatedly some Federal help
to provide firefighters, the SAFER Act, the Fire Grant Act
program, and that sort of thing.
There is a critical need in every community for first
response resources that has been brought before Congress
repeatedly, and we continue to stress that we need those folks
capable.
Call-ups of the military have impacted. I have four
firefighters, paramedics who are currently serving in the war
effort in various capacities. I have to back-fill their absence
with additional firefighters, and we are a community that does
make up the differences in salaries and benefits to our
employees because of our commitment to them and to the work
that they do, both in the community and abroad.
However, there is also something else that is occurring
that is I think of major importance. The threat of terrorist
attack in our Nation is working on our employees. I am
currently now suffering the highest level of injuries in my
department's history. Yes, we are a community that was attacked
on September 11, but it is starting to work at my fabric. It is
starting to erode away at my capability to provide services
because the stress is enormous, and when I say the stress is
enormous, because they are not seeing Federal support for the
programs that we are asking for.
They see their chief out doing national efforts to make the
resources available, but they are seeing nothing coming out the
end of the stream, and so the frustrations just continue to
mount, from their perspective, and again I am at the highest
injury level ever in the history of my department, and that is
an enormous cost to my community. So it is eroding other basic
services.
When we provide firefighters and paramedics on an overtime
basis, more than likely I am removing resources from a human
services program in the county because, in our community,
public safety gets the highest priority. And so the spill-down
effect is to the people who are most in need.
So I, again, stress to this Committee, let us make this
effort work so that our men and women who serve our communities
as firefighters, and paramedics, and police officers see the
product of the efforts so that, again, these stresses do not
have the impact that it does.
Mr. Bowers. Senator, in response to the personnel part of
your question, the SAFER Act is right on target. That will
allow the communities to hire people and not bear the full
weight of that cost until several years down the line.
In response to the terrorist or weapons of mass destruction
portion of your question, some of the things for the Fire
Service that come under some of the other programs, equipment
and training, those things will also strengthen our ability to
respond to the normal or every-day occurrences that we have to
deal with. So the SAFER Act will help us to bring more people
on board. Strengthening our equipment and training will allow
us to be better across the board.
Also in terms of the personnel, you have heard it mentioned
here by other colleagues, the stress that is related to the
high levels of overtime and trying to make this work without
adequate resources is another factor that we encounter. And we
are different in the sense that if we require a certain number
of people and a location, we have to maintain that. If somebody
is off because they are sick, they have been deployed, we still
have to put another person there. We simply cannot leave that
spot vacant until the next time somebody reports to work.
My final point is, locally, we have approximately eight
people that have been deployed, with the worst case scenario of
approximately 25 that may be deployed, and some of those people
have notified us that they will be deployed for up to 2 years.
Senator Durbin. Thank you. Thanks, Madam Chairman.
Chairman Collins. Senator Pryor.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PRYOR
Senator Pryor. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
I want to thank the witnesses for being here today. I
appreciate what all of you do every day. For the 4 years before
I came here I was the Attorney General of my State, so I felt
very much involved in the law enforcement community back home
and in public safety issues across the board.
Let me ask, just generally, of all four of you, one of the
things we found on September 11 is that our various law
enforcement, first responder organizations could not
communicate with each other very well. It was not
interoperable. My sense is that the Department of Homeland
Security should take a lead in making that happen, but I would
like to hear your thoughts on that. Is the Department of
Homeland Security doing anything about that, and have we made
any improvements in that since September 11?
Mr. Bowers. Yes, Senator. You are absolutely correct.
Communications between agencies is a key factor. Right now we
certainly have difficulties in that area. In fact, I am sitting
next to the Chief from Arlington County, and if we had to go to
the Pentagon today, we do not necessarily have a reliable way
of communicating with his agency. We have to institute
patchwork measures to try to get that to occur, so that is
absolutely a key factor that needs to be addressed, not only in
this area but across the country. Fire, police, emergency
medical services, and your key responders, have to be able to
talk to one another to mitigate these incidents in a quick and
efficient manner.
Senator Pryor. Are you aware of anything the Department of
Homeland Security is doing to bring that into being?
Mr. Bowers. I am aware of some local initiatives that are
being worked on to try to address that issue. I am not aware
today of any issues coming from the Department of Homeland
Security.
Mr. Plaugher. It is interesting, Senator, that you asked
that question because tomorrow I am supposed to receive a brief
from Homeland Security as a member of the Executive Committee
of what is called PSWN, which is Public Safety Wireless Network
program, that has been undertaken, a joint program by the FBI
and Treasury for multiple years to try to address this issue of
interoperability. So I would be better able to answer your
question tomorrow after Homeland Security tells me what they
intend. The word on the street is, is that they are trying to
figure out an approach to something that we think is very
straightforward, and that is that we need interoperability. We
need it now.
Congress, multiple years ago, asked the FCC to dedicate
frequencies for public safety needs. That has not happened. We
still do not have the frequencies necessary. So even if we had
the resources to build a radio system, we do not have the
frequencies available because of the problem with the FCC and
what Congress has tried to do there.
This is again a very complex issue, but at the end of it,
we are still not where we need to be.
Mr. Bowers. As the Captain was saying, I cannot talk to his
firefighters or paramedics in a catastrophic incident.
Senator Pryor. I would like for you, if you could, to give
me a little update after your meeting tomorrow, and kind of
tell us now where you sense that we are.
Mr. Plaugher. I would be glad to. Combing the halls today
are other Executive Committee members, and I am talking about
combing the halls of Congress today because they are very
concerned about what they are hearing is going to happen from
Homeland Security. So we will be back to you, sir.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``The Report Card on Funding Mechanisms for Public Safety Radio
Communications'', August 2001, appears in the Appendix on page 69.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Pryor. Great. Thank you.
Mr. Horvath. Sir, in Delaware, we do have the ability to,
with our 800 megahertz system, due to our size again, to talk
to each other if we all are told through dispatch to go to the
same channel. My understanding is we can also communicate with
all the fire departments in the State also.
The concern there is, however--in most of the scenarios
that we do, when we do tabletop exercises or real exercises,
whether the weapon of mass destruction use, the system will
probably be out, and there is no high-band backup to it any
more. Most departments have gotten rid of their high-band
radios, and if they still had them, we could not talk agency to
agency like we could before.
So, the short answer to your question, is yes, we can
communicate with each other in certain situations. Sometimes it
has to be county to county, whether you are on the repeater or
not, but no, there is no backup system, and I am not aware of
anything that Homeland Security is doing in Delaware in regards
to that issue.
Senator Pryor. A follow up on that. Are you aware in
Delaware whether the Federal Government can access your 800
megahertz system; do you know that?
Mr. Horvath. I am not aware of whether they can or not. I
do not believe so.
Mr. Chitwood. Senator, I will break the communication
question down into two areas. Technology-wise, as a result of
the government, through these grant processes, we have
enhanced, I would say, I would give us an A plus in our
technological communications between different departments,
MED. On September 11 the alleged ringleader of this group of
terrorists, Mohamed Atta, and one of his cohorts, Abdul
Alomari, went through our airport on their way to this massive
destruction that they were involved in. Initially, the
communication issue between the local police department and the
Federal Government was absolutely horrible, and particularly
the FBI. And I have shared that locally and nationally since
that date. I believe that as a result of Homeland Security,
increased participation by administration in the Federal level,
that those types of barriers and those types of communication
levels are much better, certainly much better than anything I
have seen, but they still have a long way to go, as we look at
this new way of policing our country.
Senator Pryor. Thank you.
Chairman Collins. Thank you, Senator Pryor.
I want to follow up on the communication issue that Chief
Chitwood just raised. We are now at a state where we are at the
Orange Alert Level. And I would like to ask each of you two
questions related to that. First, how did you learn that we had
gone to an alert level of orange? And second, does that system
for communicating the increased alert status work better now?
There were terrible problems in the beginning, which, Chief,
you referred to as well. And I would like to just ask all of
you those questions, starting with Chief Chitwood.
Mr. Chitwood. The last level, the Orange Level, I had heard
vis-a-vis TV, radio that we were at Orange, but I never saw
anything vis-a-vis teletype. Probably 8 hours later we got a
teletype, and I learned it from CNN.
Chairman Collins. That is so troubling to me that still
seems to be the source, with all due respect to CNN's good
reporting, but it just is extraordinary to me.
Chief Horvath.
Mr. Horvath. I also learned about the alert from watching
the news. If we did get a teletype 8 hours later, it was never
brought to my desk. I do not think we did. I will say
diagonally across the street from my office is the local FBI
office in Dover, and communications have improved greatly over
the past few months. There is a problem where information
cannot be--it is something I did not bring up earlier, but I
will bring it up now. I get things that cannot be told to me
because it is top secret. And then you hear about it later on
the news and you mention it, and they want to know how you know
it because it is top secret. If the news can know it, I think
the police departments and the fire departments across the
country ought to know it.
Chairman Collins. Well, that is something we can relate to
when we have our classified briefings, and then go back to our
offices and find out on the news what we just learned in the
highly classified briefing.
Chief, how did you find out?
Mr. Plaugher. If my memory is correct, I think I was told
by a friend who has a friend who has a wife that works as a
clerk in a government office, and the government office was
advised that they were going to the Orange Alert. So I went
back to my emergency services coordinator and asked him the
specific question, ``Are we at Orange Alert?'' He did not know.
He was going to have to go check. Then eventually we heard it
on CNN, that we had been raised. As a matter of fact, to this
day, there is no system to notify the fire departments of the
United States about anything that happens on a national scale.
We do not communicate. We do not even have a teletype system to
talk to each other, so there is no communication network for us
to receive alerts or inside information, or I should say
information that we think is critical to our ability to be
prepared.
Chairman Collins. We clearly have a lot of work to do in
that area as well.
Captain, are you aware of how your department found out
that we had moved to an alert status of Orange?
Mr. Bowers. We, too, discovered that by the television
networks, so that seems to be a common thread here among all
agencies, that the notification and change of the status
filters out to us by the network television operations.
Chairman Collins. That is just so troubling to me. I
remember a State trooper telling me that on September 11 he
heard about the attacks on the radio, and radioed in to his
headquarters to try to find out whether any entity in Maine had
been attacked. And he just--no one knew who to ask even. The
communication structure is still very flawed it seems to me.
One final question from me before I go to Senator Carper.
All of you have mentioned the need for improved communication,
and I think the exchange we just had illustrates that. During
the debate on the Homeland Security Act, Senator Carper,
Senator Feingold, and I proposed that there be a Federal
liaison for first responders established in every State, who
worked for the Department of Homeland Security, but would
actually be stationed in each of the 50 States. Unfortunately,
that provision was dropped from the final version of the bill.
Do you think it would be helpful to have a State liaison who
worked for the Department of Homeland Security in each of the
States so there would be a single contact point within your own
States? Would that be helpful to you, Chief?
Mr. Chitwood. I think it would. I think that any time you
can communicate and give people knowledge, it goes a long way
in assisting with whatever assets your particular community
needs. I think that is what is needed, especially Homeland
Security, being the umbrella of what we are going to do in the
future in our country with respect to any type of terrorism
type activity, so absolutely. I think it would be a plus.
Chairman Collins. Thank you. Chief Horvath.
Mr. Horvath. I agree. I think it would be extremely
helpful. It would be someone we could call when we have
questions, someone they can call when they have important
information to pass on, and it would be very helpful if I
forget to watch the news and I could find out we are on a
higher alert status.
Chairman Collins. Thank you. Chief Plaugher.
Mr. Plaugher. This is awkward for me, because in the
Nation's capital area, we do have a coordinator from Homeland
Security for the Washington, DC immediate area. However, the
only thing in the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Commonwealth of
Virginia does not. So it is kind of an awkward situation, and
we find that the coordinator that we have is just fabulous and
is doing a spectacular job for the national capital area. So if
you want to point to an example of how it can work and work
really well, here is an excellent example for you.
Chairman Collins. It is a great example. Thank you for
sharing that. Captain Bowers.
Mr. Bowers. We are in that national capital area also, but
I would also bring up a second part to your question. It is not
only good to have that coordinator, I think, in every State,
but that coordinator also needs to share particular information
about what the threat may be, so that the departments can then
plan and act appropriately to be prepared for that threat. So
the single point of contact is excellent, but then the
information flow needs to be there so that we can take the
appropriate actions once we do receive the information.
Chairman Collins. Thank you. Senator Carper.
Senator Carper. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
To my colleague, Senator Pryor, he was asking questions
earlier about the ability of various first responders to
communicate with one another by radio. When I was governor, we
funded an 800 megahertz program that enables us to have
communication between firefighters, volunteers, and paid
firefighters, between police units, State and local police
units, and also with paramedics and other first time
responders.
The question that you asked, one of the questions you asked
was the ability of the relevant Federal agencies to participate
in that. Brian Bushweller, who is sitting to the right of Dover
Mayor Jim Hutchinson, was the secretary of public safety during
my administration, and he was good enough to come up here to
the dais to remind me that the Federal agencies who work full
time in Delaware, including the FBI and others, do have access
to 800 megahertz. They do have their radios and are able to
participate as full partners in that.
I understand when I was out of the room, meeting in the
next room with some folks from our chemical industry in
Delaware, who are very much involved in raising science
education standards in our schools--and I apologize for sort of
being in and out, but it is important for me to spend time with
them too--but while I was out of the room, I understand that
Senator Lautenberg may have asked questions of Chief Horvath
with respect to Dover Air Force Base, and the nature of the
duties that you have seen. So I am not going to ask about that.
I said earlier that I would, but I think those questions have
already been asked.
Let me instead ask you if you will--and maybe not just
Chief Horvath but others as well--to give us some examples of
the introduction to this whole new set of Homeland Security
responsibilities that have been delivered to you and expected
of you. Just share with us again--some of you have already done
this in your testimonies--but just concrete examples of how
these new responsibilities have affected your department's
budget, do you pay more on overtime? Chief Plaugher was talking
about levels of stress, and absenteeism, and medical leave. I
would be particularly interested in this. A lot of our first
responders are people who serve in the guard and reserves, who
have been activated. We have holes in our units. Some cases you
are paying, making up the difference between their previous pay
and the pay that they receive in the military. How do you do
that and at the same time hire and pay for new employees to
fill the gaps here? Have you had to purchase new equipment?
Some examples of new equipment that you have had to purchase
because of these responsibilities. How do you pay for that? And
those are just sort of the range of questions I have. You can
sort of pick and choose if you want to.
Chief Horvath, you want to take a shot at any of those? And
then I would ask others to join in.
Mr. Horvath. Sure, thank you. First off, I would like to
apologize for not knowing whether or not the Federal agencies
could speak on our system. We have not had a situation where we
have had to do that yet. Sorry about that.
The new responsibilities about Homeland Security that we
have done, as I touched on a little bit earlier, it has taken
away from the traditional police services that we provide. We
have been lucky not to have to increase the overtime by too
much within the past 6 months. Right after September 11,
obviously, overtime was very high. And that is we have had to
transfer money from other line items in the budget to pay the
officers the overtime, so other things that you planned on
buying, other services that you offer have suffered because of
that. We have tried to reduce our overtime by requiring
officers that are regularly scheduled in various units, patrol,
community policing, selective enforcement, that type of work,
that they are actually out doing Homeland Security issues
instead of doing what I mentioned as regular traditional police
work. So I think the community is losing out a little bit in
that area.
I also mentioned earlier I have reduced the number of
officers in the community policing unit and in the DARE unit,
to try to work with that issue.
Answering your question about new equipment, we have not
received any funds for new equipment, and we have not purchased
new equipment other than we now have two bomb dogs that we did
not have prior to September 11. We have--the city has accepted
the cost of that. There was no money available at the time. We
do have two new bomb dogs. I guess I would consider them
equipment at this point, but as far as suits or item protective
equipment, I think I can honestly say other than training for
first responders on what to look for and how to move into a
situation as far as protective equipment, we are no better
prepared today than we were on September 10.
Senator Carper. Thank you, sir.
Others, please, any examples that you would like to cite in
response to my questions?
Mr. Chitwood. From a law enforcement perspective, I have to
mirror what the chief said. I mean I could take it in exactly
the same way. The shifting of personnel to the airport in
particular. We have developed a security plan. Every level of
Homeland Security, we have additional responsibilities in our
community. For example, right now we are in an area where we
are looking at all phone service, gas, electric, water, in the
city of Portland. We have to be specific in those substation
areas, the work on that, something we normally would not do,
but we take those line officers on the street to do these
things. We have had several incidents on our port where the
Coast Guard, through their vigilance, have notified us of
individuals on the waterfront acting suspicious. We had to put
officers down there, in particular cruise ships. In the cruise
ship season, the boat lines that go into our different islands,
delivering people and vehicles. So it has an impact basically
on what we do in the normal traditional policing of answering
9-1-1 calls, policing geographical areas and investigating
crime. Homeland Security needs has dissipated that particular
strength.
With respect to equipment and technology, I hate to be
redundant, but I will. With the ability to apply for the
Federal grants, as we have right now directly to the Department
of Justice in their grant processes, we have been able to
enhance our technology and training issues as they impact our
department.
Senator Carper. Thank you. I am not going to ask our other
two witnesses to respond to that question. I do have one last
question. It is a variation of the first question that I asked.
And what I am going to ask you to do in closing for me, would
be to say if we do nothing else here in Washington, Congress
and the President, if we do nothing else to enable you to do
your jobs better with respect to protecting the homeland; if
you do nothing else, do this and do this next. What would that
one thing be for each of you? If you do nothing else, do this,
and do this next. What would that be?
Mr. Horvath. I will be glad to begin, Senator. Make the
process straightforward and streamlined. It has to happen. We
hear about these billions of dollars that are flowing to the
first responders, and let me assure you, they are not flowing
to the first responders. They are not getting where they are
intended. The process needs to be simple, straightforward, and
needs to be part of a national strategy to prepare our Nation,
our communities, and it needs to be--I mean your own chart
talks about the complexities of how to get the funding and that
sort of thing. It is creating false expectations within our
community. We have a public that thinks now that everything is
going to be OK because the government has allocated billions of
dollars. As you have heard here this morning, the first
responder community has not changed since September 11. If
anything, we are stressed out higher. We are facing higher
demands. But yet no resources have flowed to us. And so,
Senator Carper, please, if you can influence other members,
your other colleagues of Congress to make the process not
convoluted and straightforward.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Mr. Bowers. Senator, I would echo the same comment, that
the process needs to allow the support to get down to the local
level faster than it does today. The only other thing that I
would add is that personnel are a key ingredient in that
process. So any of the efforts that you are working on that
would support the hiring of additional personnel are key,
because that is going to help us reduce some of the overtime,
some of the stress levels that are caused as staffing is
reallocated to address Homeland Security issues. I think most
departments have some level of funding available to provide
basic equipment and other things, but if they have the people,
they can make progress.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Mr. Horvath. Senator Carper, I think if you could just do
one thing, I think it would be what they are saying, is to get
us the funds, make it flexible, and make it so that we can do
our job better and still offer our traditional police services.
I will not try to say better what they just said. I agree with
everything they just said.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Mr. Chitwood. I agree with my cohorts. Let the Federal
Government distribute funds wherever the needs are the
greatest, through the grant programs that are already in place,
that have worked and will continue to work as long as there is
money, and/or create a separate pool of funds for the neediest
cities with the highest threat risk.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
That would seem to again Madam Chairman, that would seem to
argue for the legislation that we will be introducing later
today, providing the flexibility.
Chairman Collins. Yes.
Senator Carper. And it would also seem to argue for the
idea of the proposal that you and Senator Feingold and I worked
on establishing one person in each State as a key point of
contact. That is interesting. Thank you very much. That is all.
Chairman Collins. Thank you, Senator Carper. Senator Pryor.
Senator Pryor. Thank you. Let's follow up on what we were
talking about here just a few moments ago, and I think pretty
much it is unanimous that the one thing we need to try to do is
make sure this money is getting out to first responders.
Chief Chitwood, I believe it was you that said we have in
existence the Department of Justice system that I think most of
you all are familiar with about getting equipment, grants, and
etc. I know in Arkansas we utilize that very heavily for our
first responders.
But let me ask this just generally to everyone. What is the
problem? Why is it not getting through? I mean is it red tape?
Is it just because we have a new department that is getting
started and getting rolling, and it just has not gotten there
yet? I mean, what is the problem?
Mr. Chitwood. I think it is a combination of factors. When
you look at your chart, the Tangled Web of Federal Homeland
Security Grant Programs, that kind of says it all.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The chart entitled ``Tangled Web of Federal Homeland Security
Grant Programs'' appears in the Appendix on page 68.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also believe that--and it has been mentioned here,
especially by the Senators. When we look at the budget crisis,
and with all due respect to Senator Carper, when he was
Governor, my experience shows that when funds go through the
State, there is a bureaucratic nightmare that is created, that
those resources do not get to the most neediest or to the
people who need it right away.
Obviously, the State--and we have a wonderful Governor in
the State of Maine, but he has other priorities, the State
Police, Department of Corrections, and sometimes that money
gets shifted around to different programs that do not impact on
first responders, whether they be fire, police or MED-Q. I
think that is why it is important that we as leaders in our
particular fields or our communities, can reach out to the
point, the source of contact, and that is the Federal
Government, and say, ``Hey, here is a process. This is what we
need, and then you hold us accountable for what we do.''
Senator Pryor. That is how the DOJ system has worked,
right, that you apply directly to DOJ?
Mr. Chitwood. Basically.
Senator Pryor. So in other words, you think that the State
is an unnecessary step?
Mr. Chitwood. No. I think that the State has to be part of
the process. I just believe that there may be too much emphasis
on the State. I know what I need in Portland. If you send money
to the State. Now I have to articulate my need to the State,
and maybe I will get it. But if I apply, based on experience
and past history, directly to the Federal Government, I
articulate the need, I am audited on what I get from them. I
can proceed to go forward, and that process, in my 38 years of
experience and the last 19 years as a police chief, that really
works. It has done more to enhance the quality of
professionalism in policing throughout the country, and I
believe that is how it works, and I am sure it could work just
like with the fire and other first responders.
Senator Pryor. I would like to hear from the other three.
Do you all agree with what he said?
Mr. Bowers. Yes, I agree, Senator, but I also have a couple
other points. The problems that we experience are the
restrictions on the use of the funds. The maze of applications
that are out there for the various grants that are eligible to
apply for, and the fact that there is not one consistent
process to request money from the Federal Government.
So those are some of the major factors that we have to deal
with, and all of those end up with their own version of
bureaucracy or red tape.
Senator Pryor. All that sounds very fixable to me.
Mr. Plaugher. Senator, we have talked about the issue with
Brown Nissal earlier today. But right to the point, there are
several programs that have worked and worked exceptionally
well, the COPS program within law enforcement, the FIRE Act
program within the fire community from the U.S. Fire
Administration. They are simple. They are straightforward. They
go to localities. They have some local matches required to make
sure there is a commitment for follow-through. There are also
audits and that sort of thing. But yet when it comes to
homeland security, protecting our citizens from the threat of
terrorists which we know are real, it is not if but when the
next attack will occur. We are now in a convoluted process that
at the end stream, very little or anything is at the end point
where it needs to be, which is on the front lines to the
firefighters, the paramedics and the law enforcement members of
our community. It seems like somehow we are not learning our
own lessons. We have programs that work well. We have COPS
programs. We have FIRE Act programs, but yet again, we are all
deeply concerned about our safety from threat of homeland
security, from the threat of terrorism. Yet we will not even go
to the successful programs and emulate them, or copy them for
this.
We at the local level, we are absolutely befuddled. We are
sitting here trying to figure out what happened. Where did the
disconnect go? The only thing we can say is, ``It is Washington
politics.'' Wow. That cannot happen here, folks. We are on a
new world, new threats. We have got to stop the Washington
politics. We have got to get the money where it needs to be,
and that is to local communities. Do States have needs?
Absolutely. Our States are in the worst fiscal condition that
they have been in in many decades. Should we address their
emergency management needs? Absolutely.
So I am not saying that a slice of it should not go to the
States to bolster their needs, because States are key to the
process, but let us make it simple, straightforward and
effective. Thank you for the question, sir.
Senator Pryor. You bet.
Mr. Horvath. I agree with most things said. I will say
that, as I said earlier, I think some of the money needs to
come directly to the police department, similar to how the COPS
grant works. I will say in Delaware's defense though, that they
have always done a very good job of administering some grant
monies out there through the criminal justice counsel. I think,
as I mentioned earlier, what they are doing with DEMA,
distributing some of the money through DEMA would be good, but
I do not think all of it. But through that, all the police
departments in Delaware are going to be on the same page with
the same protective equipment, which I think is a good idea.
So I am a little mixed. I think some of the money needs to
come directly to us. Some of it needs to go to the State and
have them deal it out.
Senator Pryor. Yes. I can see a real common sense role the
State can play to provide oversight in the framework. That
would be great.
One last question for you. You mentioned Washington
politics a moment ago, and I know one of the contentious issues
here--I think this was a little bit before my time here. I
think most of this discussion happened late last year, about
homeland security and unions and labor organizations. I am not
trying to put words in people's mouths, but out around the
country I think the question really was, are these law
enforcement unions and other firefighters' unions, etc., would
they be a help or a hindrance when it comes to homeland
security? That was, like I said, a fairly contentious issues
that the Congress dealt with last year. I would like to hear
your thoughts on that. If I could just start with you, because
not only are you on the front line, so to speak, but you are
also administrators and you deal with these personnel issues
all the time.
Mr. Bowers. I think that they would be a help from the
standpoint of unions are basically going to fight for the
appropriate resources in a jurisdiction, and they are also
going to work to keep management honest. The bottom line is, to
respond to any of these conditions that we have talked about
today, in the very beginning of that incident, you need the
appropriate people with the right equipment, with the training
to carry out that mission. What we have today is a situation
where in a lot of jurisdictions we do not have the number of
people that we need. We lack equipment and we lack training to
deal with some of these specific things that we were talking
about related to homeland security. So from that perspective, I
think that the unions could actually be quite a benefit to
helping get this done.
Senator Pryor. OK.
Mr. Plaugher. I think that we have had a new day in our
Nation, as I was talking about deep concern about homeland
security and homeland preparedness. We have had the best
cooperative, collaborative effort between the International
Association of Fire Chiefs and the IAFF, the International
Association of Fire Fighters ever in the history of the two
organizations. It has been a model program that focuses on the
fire fighters' safety, the community's safety. We have passed
new national standards that again encompassed the needs of
community based upon local assessments and local concerns. I
think that there is not a barrier there. I think there is a
joint effort of deep concern about making sure that adequate
resources are within your community, sir.
Mr. Horvath. I agree with both Captain Bowers and Chief
Plaugher, what they have stated, and I really cannot add too
much more to it.
Senator Pryor. OK.
Mr. Chitwood. The union issue has not been a concern in the
city of Portland. I mean my department has two unions, PBA and
SOA--PBA for police officers, SOA for superiors. I know that
the TSA has 160 employees in our city. I have had the
opportunity to see what they do. They are non-union. They do a
great job. They hire the people they want to hire, and I do not
see it as a negative or a positive. They are just doing what
they do best, and they have an excellent presence. More than I
have, but there has been no impact with respect to unionization
or not.
Senator Pryor. Thank you.
Chairman Collins. Thank you, Senator.
I want to thank my colleagues for joining me this morning
for this very important hearing.
Most of all I want to thank our witnesses. You truly have
given us extraordinarily helpful testimony. I also want to take
this opportunity to thank you on behalf of this panel for the
extraordinary work that you are doing, each and every day in
your communities. We are very grateful to you. It is why I
wanted to hear first from those who are on the front lines as
we seek to tackle this issue. You have given us a number of
very practical suggestions, and I am confident that working
together we can come up with legislation that will achieve our
goal of making sure that the money that we are appropriating
does get to you, and helps you in a way that makes our Nation
more secure. We want to make sure that our folks who are on the
front lines receive the equipment, the training, the staffing,
and the planning that they need to be as effective as possible.
So your suggestions were excellent, and we will continue to
work with you, and I thank you very much for taking the time to
be here today.
Finally, I also want to thank my staff, which has worked
very hard in putting together this hearing, and to announce
that our next hearing on the issue of homeland security and
first responder funding is scheduled to take place on Thursday,
May 1. At that time we will hear from Secretary Ridge--you have
given us a lot of issues to raise with him--as well as State
and local governments, and that will help address the issue of
how do we make sure the money flows down to the local level and
to local fire, police and emergency medical personnel, who
really need it. So we are looking forward to that hearing as
well.
The record for this hearing will remain open for 15 days
for the submission of additional statements or questions.
Before I adjourn the hearing, I just want to turn to my two
colleagues to see if they have any closing remarks?
Senator Carper. I think, Madam Chairman, you have given a
fitting benediction to a most informative and extraordinarily
helpful hearing, and to that benediction I would simply just
say amen.
Chairman Collins. Thank you. This meeting is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:43 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR LIEBERMAN
Madam Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing on the
challenges facing the first responders on whom we depend to protect our
homeland.
This hearing comes almost 19 months after the September 11, 2001,
terrorist attacks awakened our nation to the absolute necessity of
fully supporting the men and women who are on the front lines of this
struggle. That day demonstrated that when our country is attacked, it
is the police, fire fighters, and emergency management technicians who
will be the first to the scene of a disaster, risking their own lives
to save others.
But the attacks and subsequent events have also demonstrated that,
in some crucial ways, those heroic first responders are not getting the
support they need and deserve from the Federal Government. We now know
that many of our first responders have not received the training or
equipment they need, that they cannot communicate with one another
during emergencies, and that in many places, their ranks are simply not
strong enough--in part because many reservists and Guardsmen were
called up to help fight the war in Iraq--to do the job we have asked
them to do.
This is shameful. It must end. We've made some slight progress in
the past few months--some of the resources promised many months ago are
finally available. But from sea to shining sea, first responders
continue to tell us that we still have not provided nearly enough to
make sure that they are well trained, staffed, and equipped to meet the
challenges they face.
Right now, too many first responders are being forced to tread
water and wait for the Federal lifeline. The city of Los Angeles has
identified more than $70 million in overtime expenses it has incurred
since the September 11 attacks. The city has already spent nearly $200
million beefing up security at its airport and shipping port, as well
as upgrading police, fire, and health departments. Even so, Jack Weiss,
an L.A. City councilman, says that the city is as vulnerable now as it
was 17 months ago.
New York City's Police Department, faced with a more complex and
demanding job than ever, is operating with 4,000 fewer men and women
than 2 years ago. And many of the officers and supervisors who would be
first to respond to an incident still have not received any special
equipment or training to respond to an attack with unconventional
weapons.
The story is the same in Massachusetts, where a survey by The
Boston Globe found that the 10 largest police departments have 424
fewer officers than they did a year ago and will lose at least 50 more
by July 1 as a result of State budget cuts in local aid.
In Arkansas, the Governor has stated that there is no way they can
do the job of protecting homeland security with current resources, or
without more Federal aid than is currently in the pipeline. The biggest
single need, he identified, is to upgrade emergency communications for
first responders because in a terrorist attack, or even a natural
disaster like a tornado or flood, the various jurisdictions that would
respond don't have the ability to communicate.
In my own State of Connecticut, New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr.,
President of the National League of Cities, says the city has only been
able to outfit about 10 percent of its 300 firefighters with protective
equipment for responding to a chemical or biological attack. What are
we waiting for?
The International Association of Firefighters, whom we will hear
from today, has consistently told us that the nation's fire departments
need more troops, better technology, and more training to adequately
protect our people. The National Association of Police Organizations
tells a similar story--stating that homeland security funding must be
increased to alleviate officer layoffs and overtime, and improve
technology to combat terrorism. Remember, terrorism isn't our police
officers' only job. They also need to keep fighting domestic crime.
The bottom line, Madam Chairman, is that, with State and local
budgets in their biggest crisis since World War II, police and fire
departments are being cut back just as the threats they need to meet
are growing. That's like turning off the air conditioner for the summer
time. Yet the administration has consistently opposed efforts to
provide the level of assistance our local first responders need,
choosing instead to provide massive new tax cuts to those who need them
least. And even the increases in funding that have been proposed are
misleading--as they come at the cost of existing law enforcement
assistance programs.
We have to do better. I've put forward a plan for $7.5 billion in
new funding for our first responders beyond the President's budget for
this coming year. That will enable communities across the country to
start upgrading communications equipment, improve information sharing,
enhance training, expand their ranks, and rise to the challenges we
face. Will the Administration put our dollars where the danger is, or
will it continue to talk tough without providing the real resources our
communities need to do the job?
Madam Chairman, in addition to providing more funds, we also have
to ensure that the funding we provide is delivered with a minimum of
red tape and delay. There's been a lot of talk these past few months
about duct tape; but what we say and do about red tape is just as
important to the fight against terrorism. This hearing, and others we
will have to look closely at the way these programs work, will help us
learn directly from those they are intended to help how we can make
them better. The current array of programs is clearly too cumbersome,
too confusing, and in many ways inefficient. We need to understand what
works and what doesn't. And we need to make sure that we fix what is
broken while leaving alone that which is working well.
So I want to thank you for holding this hearing and thank our
witnesses for sharing their expertise with us. Our country is facing an
unprecedented challenge--and we have to put aside old ways of thinking
and provide the resources necessary to meet the challenges that we
face. We have to work diligently and improve these funding programs
where they need to be improved, to ensure that they meet the objectives
that we have set. This hearing is an important step in that direction.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7739.076