- OKLAHOMA CITY - During
the first big test of Oklahoma's new homeland defense plan, Gov. Frank
Keating and other top state officials huddled in a Capitol ''war room''
here to confront a horrific terrorism scenario: a smallpox outbreak in
Tulsa.
-
- The mock crisis was barely underway this month when the
officials hit a roadblock. Before considering how to examine the spread
of the highly contagious virus or whether to order a massive quarantine,
officials spent 40 minutes debating colors. The Oklahomans weren't sure
whether they should, or even could, have the U.S. government change the
status of its new color-coded security alert system from yellow (which
indicates there is a significant threat of a terrorist strike) to orange
(which means there is a higher risk of attack).
-
- ''It seems pretty basic, but they didn't know where to
go with it,'' says Michael Forgy, a manager in the Justice Department's
Office of Domestic Preparedness. He says the officials should have dealt
with life and death issues more quickly.
-
- Besides highlighting the widespread confusion over the
federal alert system, the Oklahoma drill symbolizes some of the problems
that are frustrating state officials as they tackle a formidable task:
Piecing together homeland defense programs in the wake of the Sept. 11
terrorist attacks.
-
- Across the USA, state officials involved in such efforts
are concerned about what they view as a lack of guidance from Washington.
Typically, they also have little money, small staffs and widely varying
views about what should be done first.
-
- Seven months after President Bush tapped former Pennsylvania
governor Tom Ridge to head the new national Office of Homeland Security
and encouraged states to follow the federal government's lead, every U.S.
state and territory has appointed its own security chief. But beyond that,
the nation's new homeland defense programs are mostly talk. And many state
officials say privately that Ridge's office hasn't moved quickly enough
to help them set priorities.
-
- Among the complications cited most often by state officials:
-
- * With a sluggish economy forcing most states to slash
programs to balance their budgets, there isn't much money available for
significant homeland security initiatives, or even to pay for office staff
and equipment.
-
- In many cases, states have decided not to commit any
of their own money until the U.S. government begins distributing the $3.5
billion it has promised to state and local security programs. The federal
dollars won't start flowing until at least October.
-
- There are no guarantees that the federal money will address
some of the states' most pressing needs. This month, Keating says, Oklahoma
officials were shocked to learn that Congress had not allocated any money
for a radio communications system they say is critical to their plans to
link local, state and federal authorities during crises. Much of the federal
money is aimed at training those who would respond to biological, chemical
or nuclear attacks.
-
- * Several states are hesitant to create new layers of
bureaucracy for homeland defense because of the tight budgets, while others
are uncertain about what authority such departments should be given.
-
- In Texas, officials' resistance to form a new agency
has put security planning in the hands of state Land Commissioner David
Dewhurst, who doubles as the state's homeland security director. Dewhurst
says he is running Texas' effort with five staff members he ''borrowed''
from the land office.
-
- The state has provided about $50,000 this year for the
start-up effort. Dewhurst says that should be just enough to cover travel
expenses for his staff to inspect a huge state that is rich in potential
terrorism targets. High on the list of his concerns are the state's two
nuclear power plants and the world's second-largest petro-chemical plant.
-
- Dewhurst says that protecting such critical resources
in Texas will cost at least ''several hundred million'' dollars. He says
he's counting on the U.S. government to pay most, if not all, of the tab.
-
- 'No budget, no staff'
-
- In Oklahoma, the Legislature has been debating whether
to form a new homeland security agency. The state's experience in dealing
with the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 put it ahead of most others in learning
how to respond to major crises, but officials acknowledge that long-term
planning is difficult without an established security office.
-
- ''I have no budget, no staff, no authority and complete
responsibility,'' says Department of Public Safety Commissioner Bob Ricks,
who also is the state's interim homeland security director. ''The Legislature
hasn't given me anything.''
-
- Ricks adds that he isn't certain whether state lawmakers
will allow him to keep the security director's post permanently or whether
they will appoint someone else.
-
- ''There is a lot of confusion out there about what kind
of experience is suitable for this job,'' says state Sen. Dick Wilkerson,
a Democrat from Atwood. ''It's just such a huge job. I don't believe any
state or political apparatus has recognized how important this effort is.''
-
- Wilkerson acknowledges that the state has provided Ricks
''with barely a penny to work with.''
-
- ''We're cutting budgets at every level,'' Wilkerson says.
''It's going to be real hard to find several million dollars to make this
work. In the end, do you take money from schools or roads?''
-
- * Although Ridge has promised to release a federal homeland
security strategy this summer, some state officials and security analysts
fear that public support for expensive security initiatives could wane
unless governments move more quickly to establish such plans.
-
- ''The mission of this national effort and how it will
integrate the states isn't entirely clear to me at all,'' says Dennis Reimer,
director of the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism, a non-profit
organization in Oklahoma City.
-
- ''I don't think we've come nearly as far as we need to,''
he says. ''There is a danger of losing the momentum to pull together a
plan to protect our people. We need to get on with it.''
-
- Forgy at the Justice Department agrees. ''There is a
sense that (the states are) stepping off in different directions,'' he
says. ''There is no standardization. Washington doesn't seem to have the
best grip on it yet.''
-
- Ridge opens a two-day meeting today in Washington with
all state security directors as part of his continuing effort to form a
national strategy. Ridge spokeswoman Susan Neely says it is premature for
states to express ''anxiety'' over a lack of progress by the U.S. government.
-
- ''Time is against us to a certain degree,'' Neely says.
''But we have a long way to go. Every state has been asked to formulate
plans of their own. Every state has different needs. There is no way for
us to sit in Washington and know what is best in every state.''
-
- State models vary widely
-
- For now, homeland security planning among the states
is a patchwork process in which a few states seem to be marching toward
a comprehensive anti-terrorism strategy, and many others appear to be marking
time.
-
- The models vary widely.
-
- North Carolina has not created a homeland security office
but has assigned anti-terrorism duties to various law enforcement agencies,
set aside $30 million from a ''rainy day'' fund so that agencies can improve
security and created a state registry for companies that deal in biological
agents that could be used in attacks.
-
- In Louisiana, however, there is no new state money to
support the start-up of a homeland security office. Training and emergency
response planning is being done ''in-house and out of hide,'' says Michael
Brown, assistant director of the state's Office of Emergency Preparedness.
-
- Brown says Louisiana officials delayed their security
planning because ''we waited on the federal government to provide some
direction. When we didn't get it, we pressed our own concept forward''
to form a statewide emergency response plan.
-
- What authorities have found since is that the need for
manpower, equipment and money vastly outstrips the available resources.
Asked how prepared Louisiana is to deal with a local crisis, Brown says,
''I won't even hazard a guess.''
-
- In Georgia, which security officials say is one of the
better-organized states, Gov. Roy Barnes has authorized $1 million to launch
a new intelligence-gathering and analysis operation. But the state can't
afford the centerpiece of its security plan: Recruiting and training regional
crisis response teams to cover the state's 159 counties.
-
- State officials still are examining how much the program
would cost.
-
- ''It all can be done,'' said Maj. Tommy Brown, executive
officer to Georgia Homeland Security Director Richard Hightower, who also
is the state's public safety commissioner. ''The biggest problem is getting
some direction on when the money is going to come and what it will cover.''
-
- There is little question that federal support will determine
whether local homeland initiatives succeed. Less clear is whether the U.S.
government's system for funding security efforts will be an improvement
from similar initiatives that bogged down before federal money could reach
the states.
-
- This month, several funding problems were highlighted
in an internal Justice Department audit of domestic preparedness grants
totaling $243 million.
-
- The audit found that the Justice grants program, separate
from the Office of Homeland Defense, had failed to disburse more than half
of its available money since 1998.
-
- In most cases, Justice officials said, states did not
submit the correct applications for the funds. The money had been set aside
to buy protective clothing for emergency workers, decontamination kits
and equipment to detect materials used in biological assaults.
-
- 'Frankenstein' syndrome
-
- Eileen Preisser, a professor of homeland and national
security at the New Mexico Institute of Mines and Technology, warns that
the varied progress among the states in establishing security plans has
created a ''Frankenstein monster syndrome.''
-
- ''The states are grabbing what they can and sewing it
all together,'' she says. ''What happens, though, when you need it to work
and it all collapses or spins out of control?''
-
- Preisser, on loan to the U.S. government as an adviser
on homeland security and technology matters, says federal authorities have
provided states with few guidelines to ensure that officials are at least
giving emergency workers similar levels of training.
-
- ''I have a lot of respect for Tom Ridge,'' Preisser says.
''But until his office blesses some kind of national strategy, we're going
to have people going off in all different directions.''
-
- As for the nation's overall preparedness to deal with
a major terrorist incident, Preisser estimates a 50% chance of a successful
response if the incident took place near where medical and emergency response
teams are plentiful.
-
- Beyond ''those centers of excellence,'' Preisser says,
the chances of overall success drop to about 10% in the event of a bioterrorist
attack. ''I hate to say it,'' she says, ''but we're not prepared like we
should be.''
|
