Senate fight looms over revising security grant formula

Senators are preparing for a likely floor fight after the holiday break over how best to distribute billions of dollars in homeland security grants, with lawmakers from states that have large urban areas uniting against those from small or more rural states.

Senators are divided over how much each state should be guaranteed in politically popular grants managed by the Homeland Security Department.

The issue has been thrust on the front burner as the Senate heads toward floor debate on a bill that would implement unfulfilled recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

The bill, approved Thursday by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, would guarantee that each state receives 0.45 percent of total funding under the state homeland security grant program. Under current law, each state now gets 0.75 percent of available funding.

Drafted by Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairman Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and ranking member Susan Collins, R-Maine, the bill could come to the Senate floor as early as next week.

All senators want to reduce guaranteed state minimums to allow more money to be distributed based on risk and threat assessments, as recommended by the 9/11 Commission.

But how low to go will be the focus of the fight.

Lieberman and Collins say their approach would provide more money to states based on risk than the current funding formula, while helping every state achieve all-hazard capabilities so they can prepare for and respond to both terrorist attacks and natural disasters.

"I believe we've struck a balance here," Lieberman said.

But just as the Lieberman-Collins bill was reported out of committee, a bipartisan group led by Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and John Cornyn, R-Texas, introduced another bill that would give each state only 0.25 percent of state homeland security grants.

The formula mirrors the funding formula in the 9/11 Commission bill passed by the House last month and supported by the Bush administration.

Not surprisingly, the Feinstein-Cornyn bill is co-sponsored by senators from states that have large urban areas, such as Democratic Sens. Charles Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Barack Obama of Illinois, and Robert Menendez and Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey.

Their calculation: The more money available to be distributed based on risk, the more money their states and urban areas will get.

"We must ensure that homeland security funding goes where it's needed most," Cornyn said. "It's critical that we more effectively protect our nation's citizens, vulnerable infrastructure and places where an attack could devastate the economy. So I hope our colleagues will support this bill to greatly improve the way homeland security resources are allocated."

And the group appears ready for a fight. "We will look at all of our options to pass this bill, including a floor amendment if necessary," said an aide to Feinstein.

Thursday's markup of the Lieberman-Collins bill provided both a preview of the coming battle on the Senate floor and a hint of a potential outcome.

Although the committee voted 16-0, with Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., abstaining, to report the bill, senators argued over an amendment from Obama to give each state only 0.25 percent of available homeland security grants.

But Obama's amendment ultimately was defeated by a 10-7 vote. Senators from small and more rural states lined up against it, led by Lieberman and Collins.