Constant Vigilance
Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit
So the Bush Administration has done it again. Amazingly, they keep making decisions that set them against seemingly everyone else in the political universe all at once. The latest is the potential dramatic cut in funding for homeland security in the FY 2009 budget.
Let’s give them a little bit of a break off the bat here a minute. The information was leaked to the media; it wasn’t released through official channels. And since its release the administration has said these numbers are not the finalized budget.
It’s interesting the shots they are taking from all the different angles. So far I have read articles from virtually every group affected by this planned budget. But here’s the real sticking point — and what kills most of these arguments — most of them are decrying the president for cutting the funding to their specific group and holding up why it is vitally important the funding is retained for them.
See, they don’t mention the other guys. They don’t mention how counter terrorism efforts are the work of the entire group, not just its disparate parts. Fire, EMS, ports and transit agencies are all intricately linked together when looking at protecting our nation from terrorism.
How many transit agencies work hand-in-hand with their local police, fire and EMS departments to protect not only their riders, but the communities their buses and trains pass through? There are numerous agencies where the local police force is the transit agency’s security.
The problem here is complacency I think. Webster defines complacency as “self-satisfaction accompanied by unawareness of actual dangers or deficiencies.” I would think at this moment you could almost put “see also Bush Administration” under there as well.
Does the current administration really understand how vulnerable our infrastructure is to a terrorist attack? I may catch flack for this, but I don’t really believe they do. Travel around to enough transit agencies and you can see why the security funding isn’t just necessary, it’s vital. And I am sure the ports are the same way.
The self-satisfaction largely comes into play when you look at airlines. Since 9/11 airport security has been beefed up and it looks to have worked. That is always pointed to in regards to our public safety, but is it going to take an attack on some other vital part of our infrastructure before we beef up its security? Why does it seem the current administration is dead set on making security funding a reactive measure instead of a proactive one?
Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Friday.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
I believe that the reduction is not about Homeland Security at all. I think that the Bush administration is trying to cut funding anywhere they can because we’ve spent so much on this stupid war already.
December 7th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
The Bush Administration became privy to Peaking Oil early in this century, and it has scared them way more than they dare let on. Mass Transit can verify this with an Editorial Board conference call to Mssrs. Matthew Simmons, and James R. Woolsey. Others, see “theoildrum.com”, and Richard Heinberg’s book.
The modus operendi of most Governments is to fix things after they break, much less before a crisis. Infrastructure is the last thing anyone wants to spend tax money on. Where does that come from? Maybe the electorate has had someting to do with this… Read our lips. “No New Taxes”
There is a social commentator, James H. Kunstler, who has authored two books, “The End Of Suburbia”, & “The Long Emergency”. Most people seeing this column read the actual writngs of Mr. Jandt, and maybe discuss them in their peer group. Some read the letters, a minuscule take time to comment. So few will trouble themselves to read some titles referenced in “Comments”.
That leaves Mr. Jandt & Mass Transit Editors with the job of taking a critical look at Kunstler’s books, which deal with a culture, us, the USA. We are a people that have made some very questionable assumptions about our energy supply, our infrastructure, and staked our future on the “The Dream” - THE GOOD LIFE- we think it can go on forever. Not! Oil security is getting too expensive, even without well depletion catching up with new sources.
We got into uncharted territory about fifty years ago, when we set out on a rubber tire journey that required a steady annual increased dependency on imported oil to build our economy, year by year. Of late, not only have we got into a very crucial area, needing some 2/3 of motor fuel from foreign suppliers, but we have also counted on more & more borrowed $$ to keep going.
Homeland security is more than guarding against attack. We must rethink our commercial & societal cohesion based on a soon to be passe’ energy source. Not overnight, mind you, but plateauing, so that growth is stymied, and we begin a long period of time just trying to maintain what we have already built. I.E., a “Long Emergency”.