New York City's Terrorism Needs

[Klaus]

New York City's Terrorism Needs

Todays From NYTimes OP/ED

New York City has spent $1 billion on antiterrorism efforts since the Sept. 11 attacks. But the city says it has yet to receive a dollar of antiterrorism money from the federal government. Washington has provided millions to help clean up the damage. But an estimated $44 million in antiterrorism money now in the pipeline has apparently not reached New York, the city that bore the brunt of the most disastrous terrorism strike in American history.

What is worse is the way Tom Ridge at the Department of Homeland Security has been distributing the latest round of antiterrorism money. The original allotment was based on a formula that gave each state 0.75 percent, with the rest divided among the states according to their populations. Missing was any calculation of how vulnerable a city or state is to terrorism. It is a flawed formula, which seems to focus less on places directly threatened by terrorism than on areas that are of importance in next year's election. City officials figure that compared with New York City's $44 million, North Carolina will get $51 million, Ohio $64 million and Florida over $86 million. On a per capita basis, the latest allocation gives New York State residents about $3 per person, while Iowa gets $6 and Wyoming $22. Certainly these states need resources to combat terrorism, but it is hard to argue that they stand as high as New York, Washington or Los Angeles on Al Qaeda's potential hit list.

Indeed, Congress recently concluded that the earlier distribution had paid too little attention to actual threats. So it said that in the next round, more money should be awarded to areas in the greatest danger and gave Mr. Ridge the discretion to distribute it accordingly. About $700 million will be available in this round. A new allocation giving more weight to real threats should allot New York City at least 25 percent of the total and perhaps more.

Mr. Ridge, who has said he will rethink the original formula, should heed Congress and make certain that money aimed at terrorism is not being used to buy political good will.

 

[nbcrusader]

When there is a pot of money to be distributed, no one is ever happy.....

 

[melon]

Reason #545,345 why these next rounds of tax cuts are more harm than good. That $500 billion could go to better use in this recession.

Melon

 

[sharky]

When there is a pot of money to be distributed, no one is ever happy.....

But this is quite a legitimate complaint. I doubt there are as many National Guard walking through the streets of Des Moines as are walking through the streets of NYC. Mayor Bloomberg has already cuts BILLIONS from our budget to help pay for terrorist efforts, among other things this city needs. Terrorism is more of a threat here than it is in Kansas and the money should be divided based on population. A small base amount for each state and then an additional sum per person based on an area's population.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

now the question i have is did the times actually write this article or did they plagiarize it from some other newspaper?

on a side note, always good when op/ed pieces are presented as fact...

 

[kobayashi]

now the question i have is did the times actually write this article or did they plagiarize it from some other newspaper?

on a side note, always good when op/ed pieces are presented as fact...

i remember reading this a while ago.

i believe it was written by paul krugman, the times liberal economic columnist. so yes, i guess it was written by the times.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

well this is a newspaper that had a man reporting for them who was making up quotes in his articles, stealing lines from other papers/wire services, pawning them off as his own... and they kept promoting him for 4 years...

 

[kobayashi]

well this is a newspaper that had a man reporting for them who was making up quotes in his articles, stealing lines from other papers/wire services, pawning them off as his own... and they kept promoting him for 4 years...

this is true. but it is not fair to single out the times apart from other papers, as the occurance of such events, sadly, is increasing.
if anything, incidents like this speak to the growing sensational and 'me-first' atmosphere which is saturating newsrooms and sending journalistic principles to the wayside. the times now joins the ranks of the washington post, boston globe, the new republic, george magazine and the pulitzer prize committee as those who have been fooled in recent memory.

 

[sharky]

um...sorry but occurances like this are NOT increasing. This is just a high profile case -- as was the Stephen Glass case five years ago and the Cooke case in the '80s. Don't stereotype the rest of us.

as for the article, Klaus posted it with the word "op/ed" at the top. there is no deception that this is an op/ed piece and not an article.

 

[kobayashi]

sorry, i think i mis spoke. i meant that incidences of journalistic principles are increasingly becoming less important. as a result, the blair situation, and others like them, are more likely.

i think it has a lot more to do with pressures placed on editors than journalists.