DHS’s reasoning – I think there’s less to this than one would want to imply at first blush:
?The overall grant money was half a billion dollars less this year than Congress had allocated last year.
?There were also more cities to fund this year than in previous years. We are only as strong as our weakest link and therefore needed to take a national perspective in allocating these funds.
?Congress provided a smaller pie and we had more slices to distribute.
?We are not at all saying that New York is any less at risk. In fact New York City, received over 18 % of the total UASI funds this year, more than any other community.
?Their percentage share is roughly the same as last year. In addition, New York City has received more than $520 million through the UASI program since FY 2003.
?We understand the risk better in the rest of the country than ever before. New York has made major strides in preparedness; however there are other urban areas across the country which were also in need of planning and disaster preparedness resources which had traditionally not been provided funding in the past.
NYC has received more than $528 million through the Urban Areas Security Initiative since 2003, approximately 19% of all funds provided through that program since its inception; NYC’s 2006 allocation is consistent with historical allocations as a percentage of total funds awarded through the program.
?In 2006, the New York Urban Area received $124.5 million, or nearly 18% of the total.
?In 2005, the New York Urban Area received $207.6 million, or approximately 25% of the total.
?In 2004, the New York Urban Area received $46.7 million, or approximately 7% of the total.
?In 2003, the New York Urban Area received $149.7 million, or approximately 25% of the total.