When 'Homeland Security' Makes Us Less Secure
From William Lucy, President
In the wake of 9/11, America was put on red alert. We had been attacked, and felt very vulnerable. The threat of bioterrorism and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq made us even more vulnerable — and more vigilant. Amid the fear and alarm, the Department of Homeland Security was born. But at what price?
A tremendous price in terms of public services. Many of them are connected to security at home because the states and cities have had to foot the bill under severe financial constraints, with minimal help from the federal government.
AFSCME worked very hard to get $20 billion in federal aid to state governments. But with President Bush's third tax cut slicing into total state tax collections by as much as $3 billion over the next two years, that aid is not enough. And the final bill deleted $4 billion in assistance for cities. A $455-billion federal deficit for FY '03, coupled with a budget gap of $21.5 billion for the states, can only spell disaster.
Bush's outrageous tax cuts for the wealthy are really service cuts for all of us, because states, counties and cities must then take money from essential services to try to patch together the vastly underfunded homeland security program. A recent study by the Council on Foreign Relations says that the federal government has to increase its homeland security spending fivefold and that states and cities need more money for homeland security — and need it faster.
PRISON POWDER KEGS. As we scramble to fund homeland security, one of the areas taking huge hits is our prison system. As many as 19 states are looking at narrowing budget gaps by cutting funding to their corrections departments. Governors in Florida, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Utah and Virginia are closing entire prisons. New York, Texas and Nevada have downsized prison space by shutting housing units. Oregon's budget crisis halted prison construction. Two prison openings have been postponed in Pennsylvania to save $15 million, and officials plan to close a state facility.
Ohio has identified 17 prisons as in "dangerous condition," either overcrowded or understaffed. Five of those are judged "critical." And the Loraine Correctional Institution is approaching 300 percent of its capacity!
These powder kegs are at pre-Lucasville levels — meaning they could explode into a prison riot like the horrendous one that erupted in Ohio in 1993. The Ohio Civil Service Employees Association/AFSCME Local 11 recommended closing private prisons instead, or combining a public and private institution to save $6 million, but they were told no. Meanwhile, the union has lost 372 positions from its bargaining unit.
Utah is closing its Lone Peak facility; Virginia, the Brunswick and Southampton Correctional Centers. In Florida, hundreds of prison jobs are in jeopardy.
In New Hampshire, short staffing — with more cuts proposed — has led to the state prison escape of a murderer and a man who attempted to kill police officers. And when Kentucky gave early release to 883 inmates, one was soon charged with rape, two with robbery and two others with kidnapping. Clearly, cuts in services that affect state penal systems can be deadly, endangering whole communities.
The Council on Foreign Relations' study said we should spend $98 billion more than scheduled, in order to prepare personnel at home for terrorist attacks from outside our country. But if we keep downsizing and closing prisons, the more deadly attacks may actually come from within.
