Security funding needs local support

At a time that Congress has taken a whack at Department of Homeland Security funding in the latest round of Port Security grants, it amazes me that the local residents are pushing back on the lighting issue.

In the meantime, the Fiscal 2012 port security funding to be doled out at end September has now been cut to $97.5m, some 42% of the Fiscal 2011 number. OK, Everett, Washington is not within the “High Risk” port category. But the local opposition is symptomatic of the huge chasm between the port business and the general public – which rates the economy as a top issue in this election year.

I don’t expect this gap to close anytime soon, but better security also means better productivity, which the good citizens in Washington state, and elsewhere, should keep in mind.

Meanwhile, half a world away, Janet Napolitano, Secretary of DHS, informed attendees at the recent Economic Forum, in Davos, that her agency is looking at security throughout global supply chains, a tall order certainly.

The strategy is two pronged; first, promoting the efficient and secure movement of goods and; second; to foster a global supply chain system that is prepared for and able to withstand evolving threats and hazards and bounce back quickly, following disruptions.

As part of the first goal, the US government says that it will seek to understand and resolve threats early on by integrating security processes into supply chain operations. The narrative gets better; it goes on to talk about data integration, alignment of Federal objectives, trusted traders, layered defenses, and cooperation with trading partners. It all sounds absolutely terrific.

Supply chain security at a macro level is on the agenda; still, I worry that the movers and shakers in Davos did not hear enough about how good security means good business (which makes cash matches more palatable).

More fundamentally, I am concerned about another gap, between what the Government says and what it does. Port Security Grants are 20% of what they were in the early 2000s. Maybe Madame Secretary should start at the water’s edge; visiting docks in Washington state and prowling around the waterfront, in the dark, in an effort to call voters’ attention to critical maritime security issues.