|
Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy
Hearing Before The Subcommittee On
Terrorism, Technology & Homeland Security
“Terrorism: Emergency Preparedness”
October 26, 2005
I thank Senator
Kyl for convening today’s hearing and commend his efforts to address
the critical issue of terrorism preparedness.
I want to welcome each of
our witnesses, particularly my friend Slade Gorton.
Terrorism was not a top priority of the Bush Administration when it
took office in January 2001. Problems ranged from an understaffed
foreign translation program, woefully inadequate information
systems, and cultural attitudes that frustrated information-sharing
across agencies. Just one day before the September 11, 2001,
terrorist attacks, the serving Attorney General rejected the FBI’s
request to include more money for counterterrorism in his budget
proposal. After the attacks of 9/11, the Administration resisted
this Committee’s efforts to examine what led to the tragedy. The
Administration fought attempts by Congress to establish a Department
of Homeland Security. It tried to block the formation of the 9/11
Commission, and then it put roadblocks in the way of the
Commissioners as they worked to fully investigate under its mandate.
Unfortunately,
this Administration has displayed a clear pattern by misreading the
warning signs of impending disaster, whether in the form of a
terrorist attack or a natural disaster, often with dire consequences
for Americans. We recently saw the Administration’s failure to plan
for, and quickly react to, Hurricane Katrina. It has been shocking
and sobering to see how woefully unprepared our government was to
help the victims of this disaster. The government failed to react
despite reports that were prepared on exactly the point at hand – a
hurricane in New Orleans that caused the levees to breach. The
chaotic response raises serious concerns about the adequacy of our
preparedness to respond to terrorist attacks, despite the many
billions of dollars spent by the Department of Homeland Security
since 9/11.
Terrorism experts
warn about the
possibility of a catastrophic bioterrorist attack, yet we learned
last fall that we are not prepared to meet the biological threat
that comes every year – influenza. I hoped that the Bush
Administration would learn a lesson from the 2003 shortage of flu
vaccines. Instead, health providers across the country, including
in my home state of Vermont, were forced to ask healthy people to
forgo their flu shot. If the government’s top health officials can
not prepare for the seasonal flu – an annual occurrence – what does
that portend about their ability to prepare for biological terrorist
attacks?
The President
only recently addressed the threat of avian flu spreading to the
United States, but the Administration’s track record gives me little
confidence that an outbreak in our country would be handled
effectively. I am particularly troubled by the President’s proposal
to use the military to enforce quarantines and travel restrictions
in the event of an avian flu outbreak. Putting the military in the
lead role in domestic disaster situations negates fundamental
attributes of the National Guard, its experience in working with
local and state first responders and its familiarity with local
communities.
It would be
comforting if we could at least tell Americans that their Government
was doing everything possible and practical to keep them safe.
Unfortunately, we cannot truthfully tell them that. As we sit here
today, there is much left undone in securing our nation. The 9/11
Public Discourse Project, a public education campaign founded by the
members of the 9/11 Commission, issued a report in September on our
government’s progress towards improving emergency
preparedness and response. The report evaluates
five recommendations issued by the 9/11 Commission in July 2004.
The progress of each recommendation received a status ranking; four
received a “minimal progress” ranking and the fifth received a
ranking of “unsatisfactory.” Commissioners Kean and Hamilton issued
a statement with the report in which they warned that “Congress and
the Executive branch need to step up to the plate. They need to
respond with a necessary sense of urgency to adopt the reforms we
recommend on emergency preparedness and response.”
While I share the concerns of the 9/11 Commissioners, I am hesitant
to fully embrace one of their recommendations on emergency
preparedness. The Commission recommends basing
federal homeland security funding
strictly on an assessment of risks and vulnerabilities. I strongly
believe that every state – rural or urban, small or large – has
basic domestic security needs and deserves to receive federal funds
to meet those needs. Instead of pitting large states against small
states, as the Administration has done by shortchanging overall
resources for first responders, the needs of both should be
recognized and addressed. These funds help police, fire and rescue
squads meet the homeland security responsibilities the federal
government is asking them to meet.
The attacks on
9/11 were a horrible tragedy for our nation. They should have also
served as a wake up call. Four years later we remain unprepared for
another major terrorist attack. Our inadequate response to natural
disasters highlights how vulnerable we are to a major act of
terrorism. Rather than hope that an attack does not occur, we
should act as if an attack is inevitable and strive to be fully
prepared. Our main focus must remain on preventing terrorism, but
we cannot dismiss the possibility that we will someday confront
another day like 9/11.
# # # # #
|