3. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING ANALYSIS
Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
America has engaged in a broad, determined effort to
thwart terrorism, identifying and pursuing terrorists
abroad and implementing an array of measures to secure
our citizens and resources at home. The Administration
has worked with the Congress to reorganize
the Federal Government, acquire countermeasures to
biological weapons, enhance security at our borders,
transportation systems, critical infrastructure and local
communities, and strengthen America’s preparedness
and response capabilities. To build upon these accomplishments,
the President signed landmark legislation
to reorganize America’s intelligence agencies and implement
other recommendations of the 9/11 Commission,
the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act
of 2004. These are elements of our national homeland
security strategy—to prevent terrorist attacks within
the United States, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism,
and minimize the damage from attacks that
may occur—involving every level of government, the
private sector, and individual citizens. Since September
11th, homeland security has remained a major policy
focus for all levels of government, and one of the President’s
highest priorities.
To underscore the importance of homeland security
as a crosscutting Government-wide function, section
889 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 requires a
homeland security funding analysis to be incorporated
in the President’s Budget. This analysis addresses that
legislative requirement. It covers the homeland security
funding and activities of all Federal agencies, not only
those carried out by the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), and discusses State, local, and private sector
expenditures. In addition, not all activities carried
out by DHS constitute homeland security funding (e.g.,
Coast Guard search and rescue activities), so DHS estimates
in this section do not represent the entire DHS
budget.
Federal Expenditures
The Federal spending estimates in this analysis utilize
funding and programmatic information collected on
the Executive Branch’s homeland security efforts. 1
Throughout the budget formulation process, the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) collects three-year
funding estimates and associated programmatic information
from all Federal agencies with homeland security
responsibilities. These estimates do not include the
efforts of the Legislative or Judicial branches. Information
in this chapter is augmented by a detailed appendix
of account-level funding estimates, which is available
on the Analytical Perspectives CD ROM.
To compile these data, agencies report information
using standardized definitions for homeland security.
The data provided by the agencies are developed at
the ‘‘activity level,’’ which is a set of like programs
or projects that make up a coherent effort, at a level
of detail sufficient to analyze total governmental spending
on homeland security.
To the extent possible, this analysis maintains programmatic
and funding consistency with previous estimates.
Some discrepancies from data reported in earlier
years arise due to agencies’ improved ability to extract
terrorism-related activities from host programs and refine
their characterizations. 2 As in the Budget, where
appropriate, the data is also updated to reflect agency
activities, Congressional action, and technical re-estimates.
In addition, the Administration may refine definitions
or mission area estimates over time based on
additional analysis or changes in the way specific activities
are characterized, aggregated, or disaggregated. Activities
in many of the mission areas are closely related.
For example, information gleaned from activities in the
intelligence and warning category may be utilized to
inform law enforcement activities in the domestic
counterterrorism category. Augmentation of pharmaceutical
stockpiles, categorized as emergency preparedness
and response, may address agents that represent
catastrophic threats.
Total funding for homeland security has grown significantly
since the attacks of September 11, 2001. For
2006, the President’s Budget includes $49.9 billion for
homeland security activities, a $3.9 billion (8.6 percent)
increase over the 2005 level, excluding DHS’ Project
BioShield. 3 The 2006 level is more than $29 billion
above, or approximately 240 percent, of the 2002 level
of $20.7 billion. Excluding mandatory funding, the Department
of Defense, and DHS’ Project BioShield, the
2006 Budget proposes a gross discretionary increase
of $2.9 billion (8.3 percent) over the 2005 level. The
Budget also proposes to increase aviation security fees
to allow the Government to recover most of the cost
of Federal aviation screening operations. Including this
38 ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES
fee proposal, the net non-defense discretionary increase
from 2005 to 2006 is 3.1 percent.
A total of 33 agencies comprise Federal homeland
security funding. Of those, five agencies—the Departments
of Homeland Security (DHS), Defense (DOD),
Health and Human Services (HHS), Justice (DOJ) and
Energy (DOE)—account for approximately 92 percent
of total Government-wide homeland security funding in
2006:
Table 3–1. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING BY AGENCY
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Budget Authority 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted *
2006
Request
Department of Agriculture ..................................................................................................................................................... 411.1 ...................... 599.9 703.7
Department of Commerce ..................................................................................................................................................... 124.6 ...................... 166.7 183.2
Department of Defense ......................................................................................................................................................... 7,024.0 ...................... 8,570.1 9,513.5
Department of Education ...................................................................................................................................................... 8.0 ...................... 23.8 22.7
Department of Energy ........................................................................................................................................................... 1,364.0 ...................... 1,562.0 1,665.8
Department of Health and Human Services ......................................................................................................................... 4,062.2 ...................... 4,230.3 4,406.7
Department of Homeland Security ........................................................................................................................................ 22,832.7 90.7 24,870.7 27,332.5
Department of Housing and Urban Development ................................................................................................................. 1.7 ...................... 2.0 1.9
Department of the Interior ..................................................................................................................................................... 82.9 ...................... 65.0 57.1
Department of Justice ........................................................................................................................................................... 2,164.9 15.5 2,677.8 3,103.6
Department of Labor ............................................................................................................................................................. 52.4 ...................... 56.1 47.9
Department of State .............................................................................................................................................................. 696.4 ...................... 824.1 938.1
Department of Transportation ............................................................................................................................................... 283.5 ...................... 181.7 191.5
Department of the Treasury .................................................................................................................................................. 90.4 ...................... 101.1 110.5
Department of Veterans Affairs ............................................................................................................................................ 271.3 ...................... 280.4 298.9
Corps of Engineers ............................................................................................................................................................... 101.5 ...................... 89.0 72.0
Environmental Protection Agency ......................................................................................................................................... 131.0 ...................... 106.8 184.3
Executive Office of the President ......................................................................................................................................... 35.0 ...................... 29.5 22.4
General Services Administration ........................................................................................................................................... 78.9 ...................... 65.2 79.8
National Aeronautics and Space Administration ................................................................................................................... 207.0 ...................... 218.0 205.0
National Science Foundation ................................................................................................................................................ 340.0 ...................... 342.2 344.2
Office of Personnel Management ......................................................................................................................................... 3.0 ...................... 3.0 3.8
Social Security Administration ............................................................................................................................................... 143.4 ...................... 159.4 177.5
District of Columbia ............................................................................................................................................................... 19.0 ...................... 15.0 15.0
Federal Communications Commission ................................................................................................................................. 1.0 ...................... 1.6 3.5
Intelligence Community Management Account ..................................................................................................................... 1.0 ...................... 72.4 55.8
National Archives and Records Administration ..................................................................................................................... 16.0 ...................... 17.1 20.2
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ........................................................................................................................................... 66.8 ...................... 59.2 61.0
Postal Service ........................................................................................................................................................................ .................... ...................... 503.0 ....................
Securities and Exchange Commission ................................................................................................................................. 5.0 ...................... 5.0 5.0
Smithsonian Institution .......................................................................................................................................................... 78.3 ...................... 75.0 86.6
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ......................................................................................................................... 8.0 ...................... 8.0 8.7
Corporation for National and Community Service ................................................................................................................ 22.8 ...................... 17.0 20.4
Total, Homeland Security Budget Authority ..................................................................................................................... 40,727.7 106.2 45,998.2 49,942.9
Less Department of Defense ............................................................................................................................................ –7,024.0 ...................... –8,570.1 –9,513.5
Non-Defense Homeland Security Budget Authority excluding BioShield .................................................................... 33,703.7 106.2 37,428.1 40,429.5
Less Fee-Funded Homeland Security Programs .............................................................................................................. –3,289.1 ...................... –3,941.0 –5,889.5
Less Mandatory Homeland Security Programs ................................................................................................................ –1,940.2 ...................... –2,225.1 –2,302.0
Net Non-Defense Discretionary, Homeland Security Budget Authority excluding BioShield ................................... 28,474.4 106.2 31,262.0 32,237.9
Plus BioShield ................................................................................................................................................................... 885.0 ...................... 2,508.0 ....................
Net Non-Defense Discretionary, Homeland Security Budget Authority including BioShield .................................... 29,359.4 106.2 33,770.0 32,237.9
Obligations Limitations
Department of Transportation Obligations Limitation ....................................................................................................... 139.8 ...................... 57.7 54.6
* Excludes $16M in supplemental appropriations provided to the Coast Guard in 2005.
The growth in Federal homeland security funding is
indicative of the efforts that have been initiated to secure
our Nation. However, it should be recognized that
fully developing the strategic capacity to protect America
is a complex effort. There is a wide range of potential
threats and risks from terrorism. To optimize limited
resources and minimize the potential social costs
to our free and open society, homeland security activities
should be prioritized based on the highest threats
and risks. Homeland security represents a partnership
among the Federal Government, State and local govern39
3. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING ANALYSIS
ments, the private sector, and individual citizens, each
with a unique role in protecting our Nation.
The National Strategy for Homeland Security provides
a framework for addressing these challenges. It
guides the highest priority requirements for securing
the Nation. As demonstrated below, the Federal Government
has used the National Strategy to guide its
homeland security efforts. For this analysis, agencies
categorize their funding data based on the critical mission
areas defined in the National Strategy: intelligence
and warning, border and transportation security, domestic
counterterrorism, protecting critical infrastructures
and key assets, defending against catastrophic
threats, and emergency preparedness and response. In
all tables, classified funding for the Intelligence Community
is combined with the Department of Defense
and titled ‘‘Department of Defense.’’
The National Strategy is a dynamic document; it includes
actions that agencies use and must build upon
to measure progress. In some cases, progress may be
easily measured. In others, Federal agencies, along with
State and local governments and the private sector,
are working together to develop measurable goals. Finally,
in some areas, Federal agencies and partners
must continue to develop a better understanding of
risks and threats—such as the biological agents most
likely to be used by a terrorist group or the highestrisk
critical infrastructure targets—in order to develop
benchmarks.
This chapter highlights some significant results from
OMB’s Performance Assessment Rating Tool (PART),
as well as some major performance metrics and milestones.
These are not an exhaustive list of homeland
security PART results, measures, or milestones; nor are
they exempt from the performance measurement challenges
highlighted above. However, they do illustrate
the Government’s efforts in building a more robust architecture
to measure homeland security performance.
The following table summarizes funding levels by the
National Strategy’s mission areas; more detailed analysis
is provided in subsequent mission-specific analysis
sections.
Table 3–2. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING BY NATIONAL STRATEGY MISSION
AREA
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted
2006
Request
Intelligence and Warning ........................................ 242.2 ...................... 349.8 431.9
Border and Transportation Security ....................... 15,840.8 90.7 17,550.2 19,285.8
Domestic Counterterrorism ..................................... 3,379.3 12.3 3,944.5 4,468.7
Protecting Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets .. 12,279.1 2.5 14,939.4 15,632.2
Defending Against Catastrophic Threats ............... 2,974.2 0.7 3,399.2 3,898.3
Emergency Preparedness and Response ............. 6,002.6 ...................... 5,765.2 6,121.6
Other ........................................................................ 9.6 ...................... 49.8 104.5
Total, Homeland Security Budget Authority 40,727.7 106.2 45,998.2 49,942.9
Plus BioShield ..................................................... 885.0 ...................... 2,508.0 ....................
Total, Homeland Security Budget Authority,
including BioShield ...................................... 41,612.7 106.2 48,506.2 49,942.9
National Strategy Mission Area: Intelligence and
Warning
The intelligence and warning mission area covers activities
to detect terrorist threats and disseminate terrorist-
threat information. The category includes intelligence
collection, risk analysis, and threat-vulnerability
integration activities for preventing terrorist attacks.
It also includes information sharing activities among
Federal, State, and local governments, relevant private
sector entities (particularly custodians of critical infrastructure),
and the public at large. It does not include
most foreign intelligence collection—although the resulting
intelligence may inform homeland security activities—
nor does it fully capture classified intelligence
activities. In 2006, the bulk of the funding for intelligence
and warning is in DHS (61 percent in 2006),
primarily in the Information Analysis and Infrastructure
Protection (IAIP) Directorate and the Secret Service,
DOJ (21 percent in 2006), primarily in the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Intelligence
Community Management Account (13 percent in 2006).
2006 funding for intelligence and warning activities
would increase by 23 percent over the 2005 level.
The major requirements addressed in the intelligence
and warning mission area include:
• Unifying and enhancing intelligence and analytical
capabilities to ensure officials have the information
they need to prevent attacks; and
• Implementing the Homeland Security Advisory
System and other information sharing and warning
mechanisms to allow Federal, State, local, and
private authorities to take action to prevent attacks
and protect potential targets.
The recently-passed Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004, supported by executive
orders on information sharing, management of the in40
ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES
Table 3–3. INTELLIGENCE AND WARNING FUNDING
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted
2006
Request
Department of Agriculture ....................................... 0.8 ...................... 6.3 22.3
Department of Homeland Security ......................... 236.0 ...................... 226.4 262.4
Department of Justice ............................................. 2.0 ...................... 44.2 90.9
Department of the Treasury ................................... 2.5 ...................... 0.6 0.6
Intelligence Community Management Account ...... 1.0 ...................... 72.4 55.8
Total, Intelligence and Warning ...................... 242.2 ...................... 349.8 431.9
telligence community, and the National
Counterterrorism Center, will improve the Nation’s intelligence
and warning capabilities. The new Director
of National Intelligence (DNI) is empowered to set collection
and analysis priorities, which will help ensure
that homeland security requirements are addressed.
The DNI is also empowered to ensure that information
sharing takes place across the intelligence community.
These changes implement the recommendations of the
9/11 Commission, and should allow the intelligence
community to ‘‘connect the dots’’ more effectively, develop
a better integrated system for identifying and
analyzing terrorist threats, and issue warnings more
rapidly.
In addition, the newly created National
Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) is specifically chartered
to centralize U.S. Government terrorism threat
analysis and ensure that all agencies receive relevant
analysis and information. The NCTC will serve as the
primary organization in the U.S. Government for analyzing
and integrating all intelligence pertaining to terrorism
and counterterrorism (excepting purely domestic
terrorism); operate as the central and shared knowledge
bank on known and suspected terrorists and international
terror groups; and ensure that agencies, as
appropriate, have access to and receive the all-source
intelligence support needed to execute their
counterterrorism plans or perform independent, alternative
analysis. NCTC is tasked to coordinate
counterterrorism operations on a global basis and develop
strategic, operational plans for the Global War
on Terrorism. The NCTC will use this capability to
allocate requirements to the agencies with the assets
and capabilities to address them. NCTC will not direct
operations, leaving mission execution to the appropriate
agencies. This structure will ensure that the chain of
command remains intact and prevent bureaucratic
micromanagement of counterterrorism missions. Taken
together, the creation of the NCTC and recent legislation
and executive orders will ensure that
counterterrorism assets are better allocated and coordinated
to produce improved indications and warning intelligence
to benefit homeland security.
These structural changes complement ongoing efforts
to improve information sharing. The Information Systems
Council (ISC) established by Executive Order
13356, ‘‘Strengthening of Terrorism Information to Protect
Americans,’’ was directed to establish an interoperable
terrorism ‘‘environment’’ to automate information
sharing among the homeland security, law enforcement,
and intelligence communities. The ISC recently reported
to the President a plan to improve sharing of
terrorism information through the establishment of an
interoperable terrorism information sharing ‘‘environment.’’
The proposed plan includes a vision for the future
of the environment, including additional functions
and capabilities, and a four-phase plan for moving forward,
including near-term solutions to address gaps.
The environment will enable the interchange of information
between appropriate Federal, State, and local
authorities and the private sector while protecting the
privacy rights and civil liberties of Americans.
As discussed above, the DNI and the NCTC will continue
to utilize the unique assets and capabilities of
other Government agencies—some of which are reorganizing
to improve these capabilities and better interface
with the new intelligence structure. After 9/11, the FBI
created an Office of Intelligence to establish intelligence
requirements and coordinate information collection and
sharing. The 2005 Department of Justice Appropriations
Act and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act directed the FBI to re-designate the Office
of Intelligence as the Directorate of Intelligence.
The new Directorate supervises all national intelligence
programs of the FBI, oversees field intelligence operations,
and is developing an FBI intelligence career
service. The 2006 Budget provides $117 million in new
funding for FBI to enhance its intelligence programs.
Performance measures that will be used by the FBI
program include the percentage of intelligence products
meeting all standards and the percentage of investigations
that are intelligence-based.
The Department of Homeland Security’s Information
Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate
(IAIP) will also contribute to the new intelligence structure.
By maintaining and expanding its partnership the
NCTC, IAIP will continue to coordinate its activities
with other members within the newly reorganized intelligence
community. IAIP was established as part of
DHS to fill a unique role: mapping threat information
against our nation’s vulnerabilities and working with
the Federal, State, and local government officials and
private sector custodians of critical infrastructure to
mitigate those vulnerabilities. IAIP’s Office of Information
Analysis, which is the Department’s intelligence
division, centralizes analysis and information about
41 3. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING ANALYSIS
Table 3–4. BORDER AND TRANSPORTATION SECURITY FUNDING
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted
2006
Request
Department of Agriculture ....................................... 147.9 ...................... 163.1 164.2
Department of Homeland Security ......................... 14,941.7 90.7 16,560.6 18,207.3
Department of Justice ............................................. 20.1 ...................... 34.5 20.8
Department of State ............................................... 663.9 ...................... 778.2 878.4
Department of Transportation ................................. 67.2 ...................... 13.9 15.1
Total, Border and Transportation Security ... 15,840.8 90.7 17,550.2 19,285.8
threats to homeland security. IAIP is also the focal
point for disseminating information to states and local
entities. For example, IAIP is connected to homeland
security directors of States and territories through the
Homeland Security Information Network (HSIN). All
fifty States and major urban areas are now connected
to HSIN. In 2006, HSIN will be rolled out to major
counties as well. In addition, IAIP’s analysis informs
the Secretary as he administers the Homeland Security
Advisory System.
National Strategy Mission Area: Border and
Transportation Security
This mission area covers activities to protect border
and transportation systems, such as screening airport
passengers, detecting dangerous materials at ports
overseas and at U.S. ports-of-entry, and patrolling our
coasts and the land between ports-of-entry. The majority
of funding in this mission area ($18.2 billion, or
94 percent, in 2006) is in DHS, largely for the U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Transportation
Security Administration (TSA), and the Coast
Guard. Other DHS bureaus and other Departments,
such as State and Agriculture, also play significant
roles. The President’s 2006 request would increase
funding for border and transportation security activities
by 10 percent over the 2005 level.
Securing our borders and transportation systems is
a complex task. Security enhancements in one area may
make another avenue more attractive to terrorists.
Therefore, our border and transportation security strategy
aims to make the U.S. borders ‘‘smarter’’—targeting
resources toward the highest risks and sharing information
so that frontline personnel can stay ahead of potential
adversaries—while facilitating the flow of legitimate
visitors and commerce. The creation of DHS,
which unified the Federal Government’s major border
and transportation security resources, facilitates the integration
of risk targeting systems and ensures greater
accountability in border and transportation security.
Rather than having separate systems for managing
goods, people, and agricultural products, one agency is
now accountable for ensuring that there is one cohesive
border management system.
In 2005 and 2006, the Administration will focus on
implementing Homeland Security Presidential Directive
(HSPD) 11, Comprehensive Terrorist-Related Screening
Procedures. Although resources related to screening are
spread throughout mission areas, the majority are captured
in border and transportation security because of
the sizable Federal efforts to screen people, cargo, and
conveyances as they cross U.S. borders or travel
through U.S. transportation systems. A cohesive screening
system is a key element of a smart border strategy.
Internally, DHS will modify its own organizational
structure to consolidate screening programs previously
spread throughout the Department’s components. The
new Screening Coordination and Operations Office
(SCO) will manage the two DHS centerpiece screening
programs: US-VISIT, which screens international travelers
arriving at our ports of entry; and the Secure
Flight program, which conducts automated screening
of all domestic aviation passengers. At least nine other
existing programs will also be consolidated, including
the Free and Secure Trade (FAST) and the Transportation
Worker Identification (TWIC) card programs.
DHS is also leading the HSPD-11 interagency effort
to implement a coordinated approach to terrorist-related
screening in immigration, law enforcement, intelligence,
counterintelligence, border and transportation
systems, and critical infrastructure. This effort covers
diverse areas, from information sharing to screener
training. SCO will play a central coordinating role. The
2006 Budget includes more than $800 million in discretionary,
fee-funded, and mandatory resources to support
SCO.
Key to the Federal government’s screening of international
visitors is the US-VISIT program, which will
be incorporated into SCO. US-VISIT is designed to expedite
the clearance of legitimate travelers while identifying
and denying clearance to those who may intend
to do harm. In 2004 and 2005 the first phases of USVISIT
were successfully deployed. The 2006 Budget includes
a $50 million increase for accelerated deployment
of US-VISIT at land border ports of entry and
for enhancing border personnel’s access to immigration,
criminal, and terrorist information. Through 2006, over
$1.4 billion will be appropriated to support this initiative.
In the area of aviation security, the Administration
continues to strengthen multiple layers of security implemented
in the wake of the September 11th attacks.
The Federal Government will continue to improve the
42 ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES
airport screening system to ensure that it provides effective
security with less bother to travelers. TSA will
refine its training programs and screening procedures
to ensure a balance among security needs, screening
efficiency, and traveler privacy. While maintaining the
more than 10,000 screening devices at 448 airports,
TSA will also begin to upgrade equipment and address
technology gaps, such as screening for explosives on
higher risk passengers and property. TSA will receive
an increase of more than $400 million over 2005 for
aviation security. Improved domestic and international
passenger prescreening systems and processes will be
fully implemented in 2006 to ensure that higher risk
passengers receive scrutiny before boarding aircraft.
The Budget also proposes to set aviation security fees
at a level that allows the Government to recover most
of the cost of Federal aviation screening operations.
Outside of passenger and baggage screening, DHS
has recently proposed a comprehensive set of air cargo
security requirements. The rulemaking process should
be completed this year. The Budget will support a
strong air cargo prescreening and regulatory enforcement
program in CBP and TSA, and air cargo technology
research and development program in the DHS
Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate. In addition,
the S&T Directorate will continue its R&D program
on the viability of countermeasures that could be placed
on commercial aircraft to defend against the threat of
shoulder-fired missiles. The Budget provides $110 million
to test these systems to determine operational,
safety, and reliability issues.
The security of our seaports is critical since terrorists
may seek to use them to enter the country or introduce
weapons or other dangerous materials. With 95 percent
of all U.S. cargo passing through the Nation’s 361 ports,
a terrorist attack on a seaport could be economically
devastating. The Maritime Transportation Security Act
(MTSA) and its implementing regulations, issued by
DHS in October 2003, require ports, vessels, and facilities
to conduct security assessments. In 2006, the Coast
Guard will continue implementation of MTSA to ensure
compliance with port and vessel security standards and
regulations.
The 2006 Budget provides more than $2 billion for
port security across DHS, including $1.9 billion in discretionary
funding for Coast Guard port security activities
such as Maritime Safety and Security Teams and
harbor patrols for ports with liquefied natural gas terminals.
In addition, the Coast Guard budget funds operations
to strengthen intelligence collection and surveillance
capabilities in the maritime environment, both
of which contribute to the broader Coast Guard effort
to enhance Maritime Domain Awareness.
To secure our borders while also maintaining openness
to travel and trade, CBP utilizes a risk-based,
layered security approach. Overall funding for CBP
homeland security activities in 2006 would increase by
more than $150 million over the 2005 level, with enhancements
supporting additional inspectors at portsof-
entry, additional Border Patrol agents, inspection
equipment, enhancements to tracking and targeting
databases, and information technology upgrades. Further,
through its Container Security Initiative (CSI),
CBP has addressed an area of identified risk—the security
of international shipping containers. CSI screens
cargo containers at foreign ports before the containers
are placed on ships bound for the United States. The
2006 Budget requests $138 million for CSI.
A major focus across mission areas for 2006 is the
effort to upgrade our radiological and nuclear detection
capability. The 2006 Budget provides $178 million to
CBP (along with an increase for radiological and nuclear
detection research, discussed below) to defend
against radiological and nuclear threats by deploying
current non-intrusive inspection technologies and piloting
next-generation radiation detection technologies.
The 2006 PART on the Inspection Technology program
found that while the program is lacking in specific targets
to measure long-term success, it has a very clear
program purpose and sound management.
To ensure detention and removal of illegal aliens
present in the U.S., the 2006 Budget also supports a
$176 million increase for the Detention and Removal
Program. This includes funding to expand the program
to apprehend alien fugitives and to increase efforts to
ensure that aliens convicted of crimes in the U.S. are
deported directly from correctional institutions after
their time is served. A 2005 PART found this program
moderately effective because DHS Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) has reorganized its operations
and engaged in significant strategic and performance
planning efforts to identify ambitious goals to improve
program performance.
The State Department is the second largest agency
contributor to border and transportation security. The
Bureau of Consular Affairs Border Security program
consists of visa, passport and American Citizen Services
programs. The State Department Border Security program
underwent a PART analysis in 2004, 2005 and
2006 budgets, and was found to be effective. The analysis
determined that State, working in coordination
with the other border and transportation security agencies,
has effectively targeted programs and funding, established
achievable annual and long term goals as well
as developed thoughtful policies that not only secure
processes related to screening of all travelers to the
US but also facilitate legitimate travel. The 2006 Budget
includes funding in State for technology related to
increased interviews, screening, and information sharing
between Federal agencies on visa applicants; the
development and production of new machine-readable
biometric U.S. passports; and for increased interoperability
of border security and counterterrorism systems
between State, DHS, and FBI.
43 3. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING ANALYSIS
National Strategy Mission Area: Domestic
Counterterrorism
Funding in the domestic counterterrorism mission
area covers Federal and Federally-supported efforts to
identify, thwart, and prosecute terrorists in the United
States. The largest contributors to the domestic
counterterrorism mission are law enforcement organizations:
the Department of Justice (largely for the FBI)
and DHS (largely for ICE), accounting for 53 and 45
percent of funding for 2006, respectively. The President’s
2006 request would increase funding for domestic
counterterrorism activities by 13 percent over the 2005
level.
Table 3–5. DOMESTIC COUNTERRORISM FUNDING
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted
2006
Request
Department of Homeland Security ......................... 1,703.7 ...................... 1,867.0 2,008.8
Department of Justice ............................................. 1,608.4 12.3 1,999.0 2,372.7
Department of Transportation ................................. 21.0 ...................... 20.0 22.0
Department of the Treasury ................................... 45.2 ...................... 54.9 61.0
Social Security Administration ................................ 1.0 ...................... 3.7 4.2
Total, Domestic Counterterrorism .................. 3,379.3 12.3 3,944.5 4,468.7
Since the attacks of September 11th, preventing and
interdicting terrorist activity within the United States
has become a priority for law enforcement at all levels
of government. The major requirements addressed in
the domestic counterterrorism mission area include:
• Developing a proactive law enforcement capability
to prevent terrorist attacks.
• Apprehending potential terrorists.
• Improving law enforcement cooperation and information
sharing to enhance domestic
counterterrorism efforts across all levels of government.
Over the past three years, FBI has transformed its
organization and established priorities to ensure that
protecting the U.S. from terrorist attack is its primary
focus. To support this transformation, resources have
been shifted from lower priority programs,
counterterrorism analytical capability has been enhanced,
additional field investigators have been hired,
and headquarters oversight and management of terrorism
cases has been strengthened. Overall, FBI resources
in the domestic counterterrorism category have
increased from $0.9 billion in 2002 to over $1.7 billion
in 2006, with the 2006 Budget providing an increase
of approximately $300 million over the 2005 level. The
increase will support a range of activities, such as
counterterrorism investigations and countering cyber
crime. To specifically promote information sharing efforts,
it includes an additional $17 million for FBI to
upgrade its Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification
System. This will enhance system capacity,
speed, and capabilities, and will promote information
sharing between the FBI, DHS, and other agencies.
By merging existing immigration and customs enforcement
functions into ICE, the Department of Homeland
Security created one of America’s largest law enforcement
agencies. The Nation is better prepared to
apprehend potential terrorists because DHS has combined
the information and resources to identify and
investigate illegal activities—such as smuggling, identity
theft, and money laundering, and trafficking in
dangerous materials. The 2006 PART found that the
investigative arm of ICE, the Office of Investigations,
has made significant progress in the integration of
former customs and immigration investigators, and has
started to reap the benefits of additional investigative
authorities. However, the program must institute
stronger financial and management controls to ensure
appropriate expenditure and budgeting of resources and
to hold managers and agency partners accountable for
performance results. The 2006 Budget provides an increase
of $34 million to expand these enforcement activities.
The interagency Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) is
a hub for domestic counterterrorism activity. TSC was
established in September 2003 pursuant to HSPD-6 in
order to consolidate terror screening watch lists and
to support Federal screeners worldwide. In its first
year, TSC has created a single point for terrorist
screening data; established a round-the-clock call center
for officials encountering suspects; coordinated response
for Federal, State, and local law enforcement; and instituted
a formal process for tracking encounters. TSC
staff, who include participants from DOD, DHS, DOJ,
State, and other agencies, currently field nearly 100
calls per day from Federal, State, and local law enforcement
representatives. The 2006 Budget provides $104
million for TSC, a $75 million increase over 2005, to
enable TSC to meet its increasing responsibilities, particularly
in support of the DHS Secure Flight program.
44 ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES
National Strategy Mission Area: Protecting Critical
Infrastructure and Key Assets
Funding in the protecting critical infrastructure and
key assets mission area captures the efforts of the U.S.
Government to secure the Nation’s infrastructure, including
information infrastructure, from terrorist attacks.
Protecting the Nation’s key assets is a complex
challenge because an estimated more than 85 percent
are not Federally-owned. DOD reports the largest share
of funding in this category for 2006 ($8.7 billion, or
56 percent), and includes programs focusing on physical
security and improving the military’s ability to prevent
or mitigate the consequences of attacks against personnel
and bases. DHS has overall responsibility for
prioritizing and executing infrastructure protection activities
at a national level and accounts for $2.8 billion
(18 percent) of 2006 funding. A total of 26 other agencies
report funding to protect their own assets and to
work with States, localities, and the private sector to
reduce vulnerabilities in their areas of expertise. The
President’s 2006 request increases funding for activities
to protect critical infrastructure and key assets by $0.7
billion (5 percent) over the 2005 level.
Securing America’s critical infrastructure and key assets
is a complex task. The major requirements include:
• Unifying disparate efforts to protect critical infrastructure
across the Federal Government, and
with State, local, and private stakeholders.
• Building and maintaining a complete and accurate
assessment of America’s critical infrastructure and
key assets and prioritizing protective action based
on risk.
• Enabling effective partnerships to protect critical
infrastructure.
• Reducing threats and vulnerabilities in cyberspace.
Table 3–6. PROTECTING CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND KEY ASSETS
FUNDING
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted
2006
Request
Department of Agriculture ....................................... 36.9 ...................... 150.7 129.3
Department of Defense .......................................... 6,543.8 ...................... 7,916.9 8,700.8
Department of Energy ............................................ 1,256.4 ...................... 1,456.1 1,481.0
Department of Health and Human Services .......... 162.8 ...................... 168.3 170.3
Department of Homeland Security ......................... 2,128.3 ...................... 2,585.9 2,820.0
Department of Justice ............................................. 409.2 2.5 455.8 566.1
Department of Transportation ................................. 180.1 ...................... 137.0 141.2
Department of Veterans Affairs .............................. 239.2 ...................... 242.9 262.3
National Aeronautics and Space Administration .... 207.0 ...................... 218.0 205.0
National Science Foundation .................................. 313.0 ...................... 315.2 317.2
Social Security Administration ................................ 142.1 ...................... 155.0 172.6
Postal Service ......................................................... .................... ...................... 503.0 ....................
Other Agencies ....................................................... 660.4 ...................... 634.6 666.3
Total, Protecting Critical Infrastructure and
Key Assets .................................................... 12,279.1 2.5 14,939.4 15,632.2
IAIP is the focal point for DHS infrastructure protection
efforts, and is responsible for prioritizing and addressing
requirements at a national level. IAIP maintains
the National Asset Database, which catalogues
critical infrastructure and key assets. IAIP leverages
tactical intelligence with a risk-based strategy that
identifies critical infrastructures in targeted areas, assesses
the vulnerabilities of that infrastructure, and
recommends protective measures. IAIP conducts site
visits and assessments of more than 1,000 sites each
year, and has used this information to develop site
security guidelines for nuclear power plants and chemical
facilities. Security guidelines are also being developed
for all infrastructure sectors, covering spent nuclear
fuel, petroleum refineries, natural gas facilities,
and railroads, for example. In addition, IAIP trains
State and local officials and infrastructure owners to
improve security in the areas immediately surrounding
critical sites. The 2006 Budget provides $530 million
for IAIP activities in the protecting critical infrastructures
and key assets mission area. In addition, the
Administration proposes $600 million for Targeted Infrastructure
Protection (TIP) grants. Awarded through
the Office of State and Local Government Coordination
and Preparedness, TIP grants and assistance will supplement
state and local infrastructure protection efforts,
especially detection and security investments.
Cyberspace security is a key element of infrastructure
protection because the internet and other computer systems
link infrastructure sectors. The consequences of
a cyber attack could cascade across the economy, imperiling
public safety and national security. To address
this threat, DHS has established the National Cyber
Security Division (NCSD) to identify, analyze and reduce
cyber threats and vulnerabilities, coordinate incident
response, and provide technical assistance. Since
its formal establishment in 2003, NCSD has worked
with the private sector to improve security of the Na45
3. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING ANALYSIS
tion’s information infrastructure. For example, it coordinated
the response and mitigation of the Blaster worm
and SoBig virus. NCSD has also established the U.S.
Computer Emergency Response Team (US-CERT). USCERT
supports watch and warning capability responsible
for tracking incident and trend data, ranking associated
severity, and generating real-time alerts. $73
million is requested for the NCSD in 2006.
HSPD-7, signed in December 2003, established a national
policy to protect critical infrastructures and key
resources from attack, ensure the delivery of essential
goods and services, and maintain public safety and security.
Under HSPD-7, DHS is responsible for coordinating
Federal critical infrastructure protection efforts.
To provide a consistent structure to integrate critical
infrastructure protection, DHS has an interim National
Infrastructure Protection Plan. Under the plan’s framework,
DHS will coordinate the infrastructure protection
efforts of other Federal departments and agencies. A
number of agencies rely on specialized expertise and
long-standing relationships with industry in conducting
infrastructure protection activities.
Recognizing that each infrastructure sector possesses
it own unique characteristics, a sector-specific agency
has been designated to oversee infrastructure protection
efforts for each sector. Consequently, sector-specific
agencies are pursuing infrastructure protection efforts
in concert with DHS. For example, the Department of
Energy is coordinating protection activities within the
energy sector. The Department of Agriculture is protecting
agricultural resources, a source of essential commodities,
through research and testing programs. There
are 13 critical infrastructure sectors and nine sectorspecific
agencies.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the
water sector-specific agency under HSPD-7, guides the
protection of water infrastructure through training and
technical support for water utilities and grants for
State water security coordinators. In 2006, EPA will
address the HSPD-9 requirement to lead the development
of surveillance and monitoring systems for water
quality. EPA will introduce Water Sentinel, a program
to develop and demonstrate cost-effective, real-time
sampling and analysis capabilities at critical points in
a water system for early detection of disease, pest, or
poisonous agents. The Administration’s request for $44
million in 2006 will fund Water Sentinel as a pilot
program in five major cities.
National Strategy Mission Area: Defending
Against Catastrophic Threats
The defending against catastrophic threats mission
area covers activities to research, develop, and deploy
technologies, systems, and medical measures to detect
and counter the threat of chemical, biological, radiological,
and nuclear (CBRN) weapons. The agencies
with the most significant resources in this category are
HHS ($2.0 billion, or 51 percent, of the 2006 total),
largely for research in the National Institutes of
Health, and in DHS, mostly for the Directorate of
Science and Technology (S&T) ($1.2 billion, or 31 percent,
of the 2006 total), to help develop and field technologies
to counter CBRN threats. The President’s 2006
request would increase funding for activities defending
against catastrophic threats by 15 percent over the
2005 level.
The major requirements addressed in this mission
area include:
• Developing countermeasures, including broad
spectrum vaccines, antimicrobials, and antidotes.
• Preventing terrorist use of CBRN weapons
through detection systems and procedures, and
improving decontamination techniques.
A key element in addressing these requirements is
developing and maintaining adequate countermeasures
for a CBRN attack. This not only means stockpiling
countermeasures that are currently available, but developing
new countermeasures for agents that currently
have none and next-generation countermeasures that
are safer and more effective than those that presently
exist. Also, unlike an attack with conventional weapons,
a CBRN attack may not be immediately apparent.
Working to ensure earlier detection and characterization
of an attack helps protect and save lives.
Table 3–7. DEFENDING AGAINST CATASTROPHIC THREATS FUNDING
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted
2006
Request
Department of Agriculture ....................................... 168.2 ...................... 222.7 317.2
Department of Commerce ...................................... 60.0 ...................... 73.4 84.7
Department of Defense .......................................... 146.8 ...................... 178.2 158.9
Department of Energy ............................................ .................... ...................... 7.5 62.8
Department of Health and Human Services .......... 1,754.1 ...................... 1,901.8 1,971.5
Department of Homeland Security ......................... 774.0 ...................... 936.1 1,212.1
Department of Justice ............................................. 27.9 0.7 33.5 43.0
National Science Foundation .................................. 27.0 ...................... 27.0 27.0
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................ 16.2 ...................... 19.0 21.2
Total, Defending Against Catastrophic
Threats ........................................................... 2,974.2 0.7 3,399.2 3,898.3
46 ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES
The Federal Government is addressing these requirements.
The DHS Biological Countermeasures Office
budget request is $385 million in 2006, a $22 million
increase over 2005. This program received an effective
PART rating, demonstrating significant accomplishments
for a new program. Within the Biological Countermeasures
Office, new vaccine research funds will target
specific vaccines that can be used to defend our
food supply from the intentional or accidental introduction
of foreign animal diseases into the country. These
vaccines will help protect the Nation from the catastrophic
economic consequences that a major disease
outbreak would cause. Funds are also requested for
a National Agrodefense Facility that will be able to
analyze pathogens in large animals. The 2006 Budget
also includes $59 million for the Department of Agriculture
to complete a state-of-the-art animal disease
research and diagnostic facility at Ames, Iowa.
The Budget continues to invest in efforts to decrease
the time between an attack and implementation of Federal,
State and local response protocols. The Science
and Technology Directorate will expand and enhance
the BioWatch environmental monitoring program,
which samples and analyzes air in over 30 metropolitan
areas to continually check for dangerous biological
agents. The program is designed to provide early warning
of a large-scale biological weapon attack, allowing
the distribution of life-saving treatment and preventative
measures before the development of serious and
widespread illnesses.
The Administration maintains HHS’ investment in
developing medical countermeasures to CBRN threats,
investing nearly $1.8 billion, an increase of $56 million
over 2005 and $1.7 billion over the level prior to September
11th (this includes funding for programs focused
on chemical and radiological and nuclear countermeasures
referenced below). HHS will continue to improve
human health surveillance with $79 million dedicated
to the BioSense program (collecting information
from hospitals, emergency departments, and laboratories
to identify ‘‘real-time’’ trends), increasing laboratory
capacity, and augmenting the number and quality
of border health and quarantine stations. The Food and
Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture
will also conduct surveillance to ensure the security
of the food supply. Information collected from
these programs will be disseminated to the National
Biosurveillance Integration Center at DHS.
In addition, the Administration proposes to double
the amount of spending on chemical agent R&D conducted
by DHS, including $36 million in additional
spending on non-traditional chemical agent threats, enhancing
our ability to detect and counter these weapons.
This funding level includes the creation of a stateof-
the-art materials testing facility that will be housed
with the Department of Defense chemical countermeasures
programs. The National Institutes of Health
will also devote $50 million to research chemical agent
countermeasures.
To protect against a nuclear or radiological weapon
entering the country, a new Domestic Nuclear Detection
Office (DNDO) is being created in the Department of
Homeland Security. The DNDO will be responsible for
developing and deploying a comprehensive system to
detect and report any attempt to import a nuclear explosive
device or radiological material. This Office will
have oversight of all research and development for detection,
identification, and reporting of radiological and
nuclear materials. It will also be responsible for establishing
response protocols to ensure that the detection
of a nuclear explosive device or radiological material
leads to timely and effective action by military, law
enforcement, emergency response, and other appropriate
government assets.
The Administration is requesting $262 million in
DHS R&D funds for advanced detection devices to minimize
the likelihood that a radiological or nuclear device
could enter the United States; this more than doubles
the amount provided in 2005. This R&D program will
be integrated with our overseas non-proliferation and
border security efforts to keep these devices out of the
hands of terrorists and outside the borders of this country.
The DNDO will also work with CBP on its pilot
program to deploy next-generation radiation detectors.
Finally, the Office will work with State and local grant
recipients to best deploy their radiation detection assets
to work in concert with Federal detection efforts.
National Strategy Mission Area: Emergency Preparedness
and Response
The Emergency Preparedness and Response mission
area covers agency efforts to prepare for and minimize
the damage from major incidents and disasters, particularly
terrorist attacks that endanger lives and property
or disrupt government operations. The mission area encompasses
a broad range of agency incident management
activities, as well as grants and other assistance
to States and localities. DHS maintains the largest
share of funding in this category ($2.7 billion, or 45
percent, for 2006), mainly for preparedness grant assistance
to State and local first responders. HHS, the second
largest contributor ($2.2 billion, or 37 percent, in
2006), also assists States and localities to upgrade public
health capacity. A total of 24 other agencies include
emergency preparedness and response funding. A number
maintain specialized response assets that may be
called upon in select circumstances, and others report
only funding for their agency’s internal preparedness
capability. Excluding BioShield, in the President’s 2006
Budget, funding for emergency preparedness and response
activities would increase by $0.4 billion (6 percent)
over the 2005 level. The major requirements addressed
in this mission area include:
• Establishing measurable goals for national preparedness
and ensuring that Federal funding supports
these goals
• Ensuring that Federal programs to train and
equip States and localities meet national pre47
3. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING ANALYSIS
Table 3–8. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE FUNDING
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted
2006
Request
Department of Defense .......................................... 333.3 ...................... 469.0 651.4
Department of Energy ............................................ 107.6 ...................... 98.4 122.1
Department of Health and Human Services .......... 2,145.3 ...................... 2,160.2 2,264.9
Department of Homeland Security ......................... 3,049.0 ...................... 2,655.8 2,725.8
Other Agencies ....................................................... 367.3 ...................... 381.9 357.5
Total, Emergency Preparedness and
Response ....................................................... 6,002.6 ...................... 5,765.2 6,121.6
Plus BioShield ................................................ 885.0 ...................... 2,508.0 ....................
Total, Emergency Preparedness and
Response including BioShield ................... 6,887.6 ...................... 8,273.2 6,121.6
paredness goals in a coordinated and complementary
manner.
• Encouraging standardization and interoperability
of first responder equipment, especially for communications.
• Building a national training, exercise, and evaluation
system.
• Implementing the National Incident Management
System.
• Preparing health care providers for a mass casualty
event.
• Augmenting America’s pharmaceutical and vaccine
stockpiles.
Many of the key elements of the national emergency
response system are already in place. During 2004, separate
Federal response plans were integrated into a
single all-discipline National Response Plan. To ensure
that Federal, State, and local investments translate
into improvements in preparedness, we must continue
to identify capability gaps, establish national preparedness
goals, and improve response and recovery efforts
at all levels of government. A related challenge is ensuring
that investments in State and local preparedness
are focused on new response capabilities, and not supplanting
normal operating expenses. DHS is leading
an interagency effort to better match Federal resources
with achieving national preparedness goals.
From 2001 through 2005, the Federal Government
has allocated $18.2 billion in State and local terrorism
preparedness grant funding from the Departments of
Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, and
Justice, increasing spending from an annual level of
approximately $300 million in 2001 to $4.8 billion in
the 2006 request. The funding growth has been directed
to Federal assistance for State and local preparedness
and response activities, including equipping and training
first responders and preparing the public health
infrastructure for a range of terrorist threats. The Federal
Government has also taken steps to rationalize
and simplify the distribution of State and local assistance;
better target funds based on risks, threats, vulnerability
and need; and develop and implement national
preparedness goals. In addition, DHS’ new Office
of Interoperability and Compatibility is developing a
strategic plan to standardize public safety communications
equipment and protocols.
In 2005, DHS will begin to implement the National
Response Plan and develop national preparedness
goals. DHS will leverage the existing network of State
and local responder training facilities by focusing more
effort on ‘‘training the trainer.’’ DHS will organize 150
terrorism preparedness exercises during 2005, and provide
grant funding to support approximately 400 exercises
at the State and local level. The 2006 Budget
continues to provide coordinated terrorism preparedness
training and equipment for State and local responders
across the various responder agencies. The
2006 request includes $3.6 billion for terrorism preparedness
grants, training, and exercises to be administered
by the Office of State and Local Government Coordination
and Preparedness within DHS, and proposes
a significant restructuring in the grant allocation process
to better address threats and needs. The Budget
also supports a range of Federal response capabilities,
including providing $110 million for the Department
of Energy’s Nuclear Emergency Support Team and
other emergency response, management, and operations
assets. The capabilities of these teams range from providing
radiological assistance in support of State and
local agencies to responding to major incidents worldwide.
In 2005 and 2006 a new catastrophic incident response
planning initiative will be undertaken. This
planning effort will span across Federal agencies, as
well as State and local governments. In addition to
this planning initiative, the budget includes $80 million
in the Departments of Homeland Security and Health
and Human Services to strengthen the nation’s capabilities
to respond to a mass casualty event.
The Budget reflects ongoing investment for Project
BioShield. BioShield is designed to stimulate the development
of the next generation of countermeasures by
allowing the Federal Government to buy critically needed
vaccines and medications for biodefense as soon as
experts agree they are safe and effective enough to
be added to the Strategic National Stockpile. This pro48
ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES
4 OMB does not collect detailed homeland security expenditure data from State, local,
or private entities directly.
5 Source: National Association of Counties, ‘‘Homeland Security Funding—2003 State
Homeland Security Grants Programs I and II.’’
6 Source: Conference Board, ‘‘Corporate Security Management’’ 2003
gram provides an incentive to manufacture these countermeasures.
BioShield is a shared responsibility, joining
the intelligence capabilities of DHS with the medical
expertise of HHS.
The Budget includes $600 million for the Strategic
National Stockpile to maintain and augment the supply
of vaccines and other countermeasures that can be
made available within 12 hours in the event of a terrorist
attack or other public health emergency. This
now includes funding for storage and maintenance of
products purchased through BioShield, and $50 million
for the purchase of supplies under the medical surge
capacity initiative. HHS has the lead role in preparing
public health providers for catastrophic terrorism. For
2005, HHS will provide $483 million to continue improvements
for hospital infrastructure and mutual aid
through the Health Resources and Services Administration,
and $797 million for States through the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention for upgrades to
State and local public health capacity. This investment
will bring the total assistance provided by HHS to
States, local governments and health care providers
since 2001 to more than $7 billion.
Non-Federal Expenditures 4
State and local governments and private-sector firms
also have devoted resources of their own to the task
of defending against terrorist threats. Some of the additional
spending has been of a one-time nature, such
as investment in new security equipment and structures;
some additional spending has been ongoing, such
as hiring more personnel, and increasing overtime for
existing security personnel. In many cases, own-source
spending has supplemented the resources provided by
the Federal government.
Many governments and businesses are placing a high
priority on, and providing additional resources for, security.
On the other hand, many entities have not increased
their spending. A survey conducted by the National
Association of Counties in the spring of 2004
found that as a result of the homeland security process
of intergovernmental planning and funding, three out
of four counties believed they were better prepared to
respond to terrorist threats. Moreover, almost 40 percent
of the surveyed counties had appropriated their
own funds to assist with homeland security. Ownsource
resources supplemented funds provided by states
and the Federal Government. However, the same survey
revealed that 54 percent of counties had not used
any of their own funds. 5
There is also a diversity of responses in the businesses
community. In a survey conducted by the Conference
Board in 2003, just over half of the companies
reported that they had permanently increased security
spending post-September 11, 2001. About 15 percent
of the companies surveyed had increased their security
spending by 20 percent or more. Large increases in
spending were especially evident in critical industries,
such as transportation, energy, financial services, media
and telecommunications, information technology, and
healthcare. However, about one-third of the surveyed
companies reported that they had not increased their
security spending after September 11th. 6
In light of the range of spending responses to the
new security environment and the inherent difficulty
of obtaining survey results that are representative of
the entire universe of States, localities, and businesses,
it is not surprising that estimates of non-Federal security
spending also differ widely. Estimates by two private
consulting firms for 2004 reveal that States and
localities may have spent as little as $8 billion (according
to International Horizons Unlimited) or as much
as $15 billion (according to Deloitte Consulting). The
business sector may have spent about $5 billion (International
Horizons Unlimited) or as much as $46 billion
(Deloitte Consulting).
The estimates by International Horizons Unlimited
were published in September 2003. They are on a Federal
fiscal year basis. The Deloitte Consulting estimates
were published in June 2002. They are on a fiscal year
basis appropriate to the reporting entity. For State and
local governments, both sets of estimates attempted to
remove spending funded by Federal grants to avoid
double counting spending that was reported by the Federal
Government.
Additional Tables
The tables in the Federal expenditures section above
present data based on the President’s policy for the
2006 Budget. The tables below present additional policy
and baseline data, as directed by the Homeland Security
Act of 2002.
49 3. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING ANALYSIS
Estimates by Agency:
Table 3–9. DISCRETIONARY FEE-FUNDED HOMELAND SECURITY ACTIVITIES BY
AGENCY
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted
2006
Request
Department of Energy ............................................ 1.2 ...................... 1.2 1.5
Department of Homeland Security ......................... 2,335.0 ...................... 2,875.0 4,688.0
Department of Labor ............................................... 14.9 ...................... 17.6 14.2
Department of State ............................................... 649.0 ...................... 763.3 866.0
General Services Administration ............................ 72.8 ...................... 58.6 72.9
Social Security Administration ................................ 143.4 ...................... 159.4 177.5
Federal Communications Commission ................... 1.0 ...................... 1.6 3.5
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................ 66.8 ...................... 59.2 61.0
Securities and Exchange Commission ................... 5.0 ...................... 5.0 5.0
Total, Discretionary Homeland Security Fee-
Funded Activities ......................................... 3,289.1 ...................... 3,941.0 5,889.5
Table 3–10. MANDATORY HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING BY AGENCY
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted
2006
Request
Department of Agriculture ....................................... 119.0 ...................... 135.0 137.0
Department of Commerce ...................................... 9.5 ...................... 8.4 8.6
Department of Education ........................................ .................... ...................... 2.7 ....................
Department of Energy ............................................ 11.0 ...................... 11.0 11.0
Department of Health and Human Services .......... 13.9 ...................... 14.2 15.9
Department of Homeland Security ......................... 1,783.7 ...................... 2,051.2 2,125.5
Department of Labor ............................................... 3.2 ...................... 2.6 4.0
Total, Homeland Security Mandatory
Programs ....................................................... 1,940.2 ...................... 2,225.1 2,302.0
50 ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES
Table 3–11. BASELINE ESTIMATES—TOTAL HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING BY AGENCY
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2005
Enacted*
Baseline
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Department of Agriculture .............................................................................................................................. 601 617 632 651 668 686
Department of Commerce .............................................................................................................................. 167 172 177 185 188 194
Department of Defense ................................................................................................................................. 8,566 8,865 9,137 9,423 9,722 10,032
Department of Education ............................................................................................................................... 25 22 23 23 23 24
Department of Energy ................................................................................................................................... 1,562 1,595 1,618 1,655 1,690 1,728
Department of Health and Human Services ................................................................................................. 4,229 4,323 4,423 4,522 4,624 4,730
Department of Homeland Security* ............................................................................................................... 24,887 25,714 26,169 26,903 27,663 28,456
Department of Housing and Urban Development ......................................................................................... 2 2 2 2 2 3
Department of the Interior .............................................................................................................................. 65 68 69 71 73 76
Department of Justice ................................................................................................................................... 2,679 2,778 2,879 2,976 3,079 3,190
Department of Labor ..................................................................................................................................... 55 56 57 59 61 62
Department of State ...................................................................................................................................... 824 840 859 876 894 914
Department of Transportation ........................................................................................................................ 182 190 197 206 214 223
Department of the Treasury ........................................................................................................................... 102 107 110 115 118 124
Department of Veterans Affairs ..................................................................................................................... 281 291 301 312 324 336
Corps of Engineers ........................................................................................................................................ 89 91 93 95 97 99
Environmental Protection Agency .................................................................................................................. 107 109 113 117 119 124
Executive Office of the President .................................................................................................................. 30 31 31 32 32 33
General Services Administration .................................................................................................................... 65 66 67 68 70 71
National Aeronautics and Space Administration ........................................................................................... 218 223 226 232 237 241
National Science Foundation ......................................................................................................................... 342 349 357 364 371 379
Office of Personnel Management .................................................................................................................. 3 3 3 3 3 3
Social Security Administration ........................................................................................................................ 160 163 166 170 173 177
District of Columbia ....................................................................................................................................... 15 15 16 16 16 17
Federal Communications Commission ........................................................................................................... 2 ................ ................ ................ ................ ................
Intelligence Community Management Account ............................................................................................. 72 73 75 77 78 80
National Archives and Records Administration ............................................................................................. 17 17 18 18 18 19
Nuclear Regulatory Commission .................................................................................................................... 59 62 64 66 68 71
Postal Service ................................................................................................................................................ 503 513 524 534 546 558
Securities and Exchange Commission .......................................................................................................... 5 5 5 5 5 6
Smithsonian Institution ................................................................................................................................... 75 79 82 87 90 94
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ................................................................................................. 8 8 8 8 9 9
Corporation for National and Community Service ......................................................................................... 17 17 17 19 19 19
Total, Homeland Security Budget Authority ............................................................................................. 46,014 47,464 48,518 49,890 51,294 52,778
Less Department of Defense ..................................................................................................................... –8,566 –8,865 –9,137 –9,423 –9,722 –10,032
Non-Defense Discretionary Homeland Security Budget Authority, excluding BioShield .................. 37,448 38,599 39,381 40,467 41,572 42,746
Less Fee-Funded Homeland Security Programs ...................................................................................... –3,942 –4,052 –4,140 –4,228 –4,318 –4,412
Less Mandatory Homeland Security Programs ........................................................................................ –2,225 –2,303 –2,057 –2,079 –2,099 –2,122
Net Non-Defense Discretionary Homeland Security Budget Authority excluding BioShield ............ 31,281 32,244 33,184 34,160 35,155 36,212
Plus BioShield ........................................................................................................................................... 2,508 ................ ................ ................ 2,175 ................
Net Non-Defense Discretionary Homeland Security Budget Authority including BioShield ............. 33,789 32,244 33,184 34,160 37,330 36,212
Obligations Limitations
Department of Transportation Obligations Limitation ................................................................................ 19 19 19 20 21 22
* FY 2005 Enacted estimates include supplemental funding, but baseline estimates assume that these are one-time events.
51 3. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING ANALYSIS
Estimates by Budget Function:
Table 3–12. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING BY BUDGET FUNCTION
(budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Agency 2004
Enacted
2004
Supplemental
2005
Enacted *
2006
Request
National Defense .................................................... 8,960 80 12,171 12,830
International Affairs ................................................. 697 ...................... 821 938
General Science Space and Technology .............. 583 ...................... 617 608
Energy ..................................................................... 109 ...................... 102 112
Natural Resources and the Environment ............... 342 ...................... 289 345
Agriculture ............................................................... 398 ...................... 582 664
Commerce and Housing Credit .............................. 103 ...................... 649 162
Transportation ......................................................... 8,350 11 8,620 10,463
Community and Regional Development ................. 2,789 ...................... 2,743 3,069
Education, Training, Employment and Social
Services .............................................................. 151 ...................... 164 168
Health ...................................................................... 4,152 ...................... 4,276 4,473
Medicare .................................................................. 11 ...................... 8 9
Income Security ...................................................... 6 ...................... 5 6
Social Security ........................................................ 143 ...................... 160 177
Veterans Benefits and Services ............................. 272 ...................... 281 300
Administration of Justice ......................................... 12,937 16 13,769 14,843
General Government .............................................. 727 ...................... 742 775
Total, Homeland Security Budget Authority ..... 40,730 107 45,999 49,942
Less National Defense, DoD ............................. –7,025 ...................... –8,566 –9,513
Total, Homeland Security Budget Authority
excluding BioShield ......................................... 33,705 107 37,433 40,429
Less Fee-Funded Homeland Security Programs –3,289 ...................... –3,942 –5,888
Less Mandatory Homeland Security Programs –1,941 ...................... –2,225 –2,303
Net Discretionary, Homeland Security Budget
Authority excluding BioShield ........................ 28,475 107 31,266 32,238
Plus BioShield ..................................................... 885 ...................... 2,508 ....................
Net Discretionary, Homeland Security Budget
Authority including BioShield ......................... 29,360 107 33,774 32,238
* Excludes $16 million in supplemental appropriations provided to the Coast Guard in 2005.
52 ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES
Table 3–13. BASELINE ESTIMATES—HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING BY BUDGET FUNCTION
(Budget authority, in millions of dollars)
Budget Authority 2005
Enacted*
Baseline
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
National Defense ........................................................................................................................................... 12,171 12,555 12,914 13,291 13,681 14,087
International Affairs ........................................................................................................................................ 821 837 856 873 891 911
General Science Space and Technology ...................................................................................................... 617 630 643 656 670 683
Energy ............................................................................................................................................................ 102 106 97 100 102 107
Natural Resources and the Environment ...................................................................................................... 289 296 305 313 319 331
Agriculture ...................................................................................................................................................... 582 598 612 630 646 664
Commerce and Housing Credit ..................................................................................................................... 649 662 676 694 709 726
Transportation ................................................................................................................................................ 8,636 8,907 9,204 9,480 9,766 10,063
Community and Regional Development ........................................................................................................ 2,743 2,800 2,858 2,918 2,981 3,044
Education, Training, Employment and Social Services ................................................................................ 163 164 169 178 183 189
Health ............................................................................................................................................................. 4,276 4,371 4,471 4,572 4,676 4,782
Medicare ........................................................................................................................................................ 8 8 9 9 9 10
Income Security ............................................................................................................................................. 5 6 6 6 6 7
Social Security ............................................................................................................................................... 160 163 166 170 173 177
Veterans Benefits and Services ..................................................................................................................... 281 291 301 312 324 336
Administration of Justice ............................................................................................................................... 13,769 14,307 14,454 14,897 15,353 15,840
General Government ..................................................................................................................................... 742 763 777 791 805 821
Total, Homeland Security Budget Authority ............................................................................................. 46,014 47,464 48,518 49,890 51,294 52,778
Less National Defense, DoD ..................................................................................................................... –8,566 –8,865 –9,137 –9,423 –9,722 –10,032
Net Discretionary, Homeland Security Budget Authority, excluding BioShield .................................. 37,448 38,599 39,381 40,467 41,572 42,746
Less Fee-Funded Homeland Security Programs ...................................................................................... –3,942 –4,052 –4,140 –4,228 –4,318 –4,412
Less Mandatory Homeland Security Programs ........................................................................................ –2,225 –2,303 –2,057 –2,079 –2,099 –2,122
Net Discretionary, Homeland Security Budget Authority ....................................................................... 31,281 32,244 33,184 34,160 35,155 36,212
Plus BioShield ........................................................................................................................................... 2,508 ................ ................ ................ 2,175 ................
Net Discretionary, Homeland Security Budget Authority, including BioShield ................................... 33,789 32,244 33,184 34,160 37,330 36,212
* FY 2005 Enacted estimates include supplemental funding, but baseline estimates assume that these are one-time events.
Detailed Estimates by Budget Account:
An appendix of account-level funding estimates, organized
by National Strategy mission area, is available
on the Analytical Perspectives CD ROM.
