Will the USCG Be Properly Funded?
(July 2002)
The White House has embarked on a full-scale effort to sell
the new federal cabinet level Department of Homeland Security. While the
Congress does not seem to oppose the creation of the new department, they will
no doubt reshape the make up as the project works its way through the system.
Once the Congress starts adding and subtracting from what will go into the
agency the process will become quite unpredictable. The stated purpose of the
new agency would be to be the repository or clearinghouse of all domestic
terrorism intelligence, merging some 22 agencies with 170,000 employees. At
first blush it would appear the agency would be driven by the US Customs and
Secret Service [both from Treasury] and the Transportation Security Agency
[from Transportation (DOT)].
It seems probable that the US Coast Guard will become the
performer of simple tasks with only little involvement in the think tank that
is being created. Port security in the U.S. has already become the
all-consuming issue of focus for the US Coast Guard. Many of us would agree
that this action is being done for good and just cause, as our nation is at
war, and their duty is clear. Since 9/11 their focus has been on protecting
our ports, as it should be. In certain respects the USCG focus on National
Security has been to the detriment of their other duties.
It should be apparent to all that they are struggling
mightily to perform all of their missions. Within the DOT the USCG has
encountered serious budget constraints. By now it has become clear to most
Coast Guard watchers that the USCG is not getting the funds necessary to
directly increase security in the nations ports. At least, not while
performing their other missions. The Coast Guard modus operandi seems to be to
encourage and/or demand that various industrial and commercial entities, port
authorities as well as state and local law enforcement take up these security
tasks with the USCG providing encouragement and oversight.
The recently enacted Department of Defense budget contained
approximately $20 billion for homeland defense. In two Fiscal Year (FY) 2002
supplemental appropriations the USCG got sufficient funds to restore monies
they spent augmenting their forces by bringing USCG Reservists onto active
duty through the end of this fiscal year, September 2002, and what amounted to
about a 5% increase in the FY 2002 budget. While that doesn't sound bad, one
needs to know more about the story. FY 2002 started October 1, 2001, less than
three weeks after 9/11. That USCG budget contained about a 15% reduction from
the USCG FY 2001 budget. Because the USCG's largest expenditures are for fuel
and wages, costs over which they have little or no direct year-to-year
control, a 15% reduction in many respects reflects a reduction of 35% or more
on expenditures that they can control on a short term basis. It means they
must reduce personnel and reduce every cost that they have any control over as
long as it doesn't destroy their overall mission performance.
Similarly, the same sort of budget reduction occurred in
1981 when the USCG was marked for effective elimination by a budget conscious
administration. It is questionable whether they ever completely recovered from
that assault. The tragedy of 9/11 occurred with the USCG already in a state of
crippled response capabilities. The 5% increase in budget only restores the
USCG budget to an approximately 10% reduction from the budget of the previous
year. Why isn't the USCG screaming to the high heavens about their financial
problem? Surely the Administration would not let this occur. After all, port
security has become a hot button for everyone in the nation. The problem is
that the USCG officials follow orders and do what they are told by their
civilian masters within the Administration. There is a law that requires
military officers of the Department of Defense to truthfully answer any
question put to them by the Congress. The same law does not apply to the U.S.
Coast Guard officials who must always state the Administration policy, even if
it requires that they shade the truth. Thus they are prevented from reporting
the dire straits in which the USCG presently finds itself.
What all of this means is that the USCG has been shifting
funds from where the funds are budgeted to where the funds are most
desperately needed. When asked the USCG will, of course, respond that the US
Coast Guard is adequately funded. Shifting the USCG to a new department will
alter the competitive budget process. The Coast Guard is currently competing
with FAA for funds as well as with mass transit and highway funding. One can
readily hazard a guess as to who gets the money. Changing Departments may
change the budget game but will it change the outcome? In the new agency they
would be competing with Secret Service, Customs, FEMA and other agencies
highly expert in the budget process. Last December the Senate passed a serious
Port Security Bill, S.1214. Since then there has been serious jurisdictional
wrangling about passage of the Senate bill and or other port security
legislation. Some of the concern seems to be over who will get the resources
to check incoming containers, Customs Service or the new DOT Transportation
Security Agency. If DOT prevails much of the funding will probably go toward
setting up a new Department level organization with the USCG performing the
grunt work with only a small portion of the funding. There are many bills in
Congress that alter the port security picture. The creation of a new Homeland
security Department will have a major impact on the overall issue. It appears
to many that the USCG future in DOT is very limited from a funding
prospective. Will it be any better in the new agency? It may be harder for the
USCG to obtain adequate funds from the new department than from the DOT. It is
far too early to tell. As always the USCG will do as it's told. It's too bad
that the USCG has not worked harder over the years to develop a more positive
support base from all the various U.S. maritime stakeholders. It's far too
early to predict how all of this will end.
