New Democrat Update

COLORADO’S HOMELAND INSECURITY

Gov. Owens’ administration has finally released its anti-terrorism plan. “The Colorado Strategy for Homeland Security” admirably acknowledges a very real fact, “Colorado citizens must not delude themselves into thinking that the geographical location of our state insulates us from danger.” The initial step on the long road to solving any problem is to first acknowledge it.

On the other hand, the report does not provide a true roadmap on how to meet this very real challenge. It lacks substance, specifics, and time frames. In fact, the plan contains no measurable goals by which someone a year or two from now could measure its progress or lack thereof. Instead, the plan is filled with ambiguous feel-good goals like "enhancing communications between state and local governments." No one will ever be able to truly evaluate if and when a vague objective like that has been meaningfully accomplished. As an accountable plan of action, one private sector professional graded it a "D," concluding it is a political document.

The strategy rightly acknowledges the need for a central clearinghouse agency that will focus on “information sharing to enhance the ability of state and local responders to preempt and prevent terrorist attacks.” Again, there is no way to know if and when the project is successful. No mention is made of how it will be funded or even when it will be completed.

The plan also ignores the need for developing a tighter and more reliable personal identification system, key to any effective homeland security strategy. Five of the six hijackers on the plane that crashed into the Pentagon, received driver licenses under weak issuance standards. Driver licenses have allowed terrorists to operate vehicles, open bank accounts, perform financial transactions and train to fly airplanes.

As the most commonly used form of personal identification, reformed and improved driver licenses - a function clearly under the control of state government - can significantly reduce the likelihood of identity fraud. Colorado’s 10-year renewal system will not get the job done for a simple reason - the older a license gets, the less reliable and useful it is.

Maybe worst of all, the strategy insists that an authentic homeland security infrastructure can be achieved within existing budgets and through improved internal coordination. That sadly fails the laugh test. Until the Owens’ administration gets out of its deep denial that a worthwhile state strategy can be implemented “on the cheap,” Colorado will only make very limited, marginal progress.

Owens’ unwillingness to make the tough budgetary choices (see below) means very few state resources will be available for homeland security. With federal assistance levels considerably below what anyone would have expected in the aftermath of 9/11, Washington will not be much help, especially since much of the funding will be allocated to more visible targets (New York, DC, Los Angeles, etc.), not Denver or any other part of Colorado.

This refusal to lead is resulting in an Owens’ administration much more concerned about political maneuvering, than a homeland security strategy. First, it is hard to imagine that this governor, so politically close to the Bush administration, will publicly criticize meager federal funding or even privately pressure Washington for increased support.

Second, given his head-in-the-sand approach to the state’s budget crisis, Owens is banking on a hope that no one will bring up the issue. In the event someone does, the administration will allege “political motivation,” while hiding behind the convenient and overly-abused cloak that releasing any substantive information will only aid and abet potential terrorists.

The Colorado DLC speaks from personal experience. After deciding to develop a state homeland security plan based on New Democrat values, we tried to do what anyone should always do first - determine what has been accomplished and what remains to be done. When the DLC project started in March, the state’s homeland security plan had still not materialized (missing its announced deadline of January 31). Numerous telephone inquiries proved to be unproductive, due to the state Office of Preparedness, Security, and Fire Safety’s repeatedly unreasonable responses that any disclosure would endanger “public safety.”

As a result, on April 16, the Colorado DLC filed an open records request to assess the status of the state’s homeland security efforts, as well as to clarify what is and what is not public information. Sensitive to public safety concerns, the request’s intention was to ask for information in ways that would disclose how well we are protected without asking for operational details. For example, the request asks for “Evidence of designation of distribution centers for medicines and vaccines.” In other words, do or do they not exist? It is not necessary or needed for our work to know the locations of these centers or how they are staffed, etc. (which might be useful to potential terrorists).

That next Monday, the request was denied, along with a politically-inflammatory and inappropriate letter (which was aggressively distributed to the media by the governor’s press office) from Owens’ chief of staff. Interestingly enough, the homeland security plan was released to the media and public two days later.

All of this silly, relentless political game-playing and posturing only masks what is really important. Colorado desperately needs a public policy debate on what level of security is adequate, how much we are willing to pay for it and from where the money must come. Thus far, this governor is ducking these very important questions.

Until we have that discussion, and until we implement some real solutions, not one of us will be safe enough.

SOME BUDGETARY COMMON SENSE

This year’s budgetary shortfall is causing Gov. Owens and the legislature to engage in some incredible creative accounting tricks. Such tunnel-vision fails to consider the real priorities of services, miss cost-saving opportunities, and neglect eliminating overlap and waste across state government. It also masks the real problems, postpones the day of reckoning and makes future budgeting even more difficult.

Perhaps the most egregious trick is a dishonest one. The legislature insists on transferring user fees, supposedly dedicated to covering part or all of the cost of a related function, and using them to “balance” the budget. Among other special-purpose funds, for example, legislators have undermined the cleanup of hazardous waste sites, taking away almost $1.5 million from fees consumers pay to recycle old car tires. The funny-money transfers total tens of millions of dollars this session alone.

User fees typically are charged to the people who use that service. The main idea is that only those who use the service should have to pay for it, eliminating unfair subsidies from non-users. Interestingly enough, the legislature is doing the exact opposite - taking fees from specific users and subsidizing the rest of the budget!

Some transfers have been so large that their funds have been depleted, causing the legislature to hike the related fees. To many, that looks like a back-door way of increasing taxes, for which the Colorado constitution requires voter approval. Expect a lawsuit.

State Rep. and New Democrat Michael Garcia (D-Aurora) is pushing a proposed constitutional amendment to stop this fiscal recklessness and dishonest government. If Republican legislators are willing to consider the proposal, these shell-game transfers would be prohibited. Future legislatures would have to be much more honest about the state budget.

The legislature should give Coloradans an opportunity to vote on this proposal. This modest but very important step will restore some fiscal integrity back into the budgetary process. The sooner, the better!