Unfunded mandates.

We hear the term and immediately cringe. We don’t like the federal government imposing policies and programs without a plan to pay for them, because the assumption has always been that state and local governments then must raise the revenue and foot the bill.

Unfunded mandates are most commonly connected with public education, with federal initiatives designed to improve student performance. But the ability of the federal government to legislate programs without funding is limitless.

Last year, as President Bush heralded the creation of greater homeland security measures he promised the federal government would do its part because homeland security is a national priority and responsibility. As a result, local and state agencies geared up to implement new protocols and programs to protect our borders and to respond to terrorist threats.

Emergency response is expensive, state and local governments are already overburdened and many emergency responders are volunteers, so it was with the promise of federal support that Maine forged ahead.

On Monday, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a memorandum to congressional delegates on funding. More correctly, a memorandum on lack of funding.

The Bush administration will either cancel or delay awards of first-responder grants.

According to the DOJ’s Office of Justice Programs, this new unfunded mandate is the result of budget problems at the federal level. Specifically, a delay in enacting the Commerce, Justice, State spending bill.

Although the administration insists it is “anxious” to implement the Justice Assistance Grant program to help emergency departments buy equipment and provide training, under current budget limitations “it is not possible.”

That’s a little like inviting guests to a fancy restaurant, ordering entrees and skipping out on the bill.

This is not a new pattern.

We’ve seen the federal government impose regulations on public education and not follow through with promised funding, as with special education. Under the new No Child Left Behind Act, government has the authority to punish non-performing programs by withdrawing federal dollars. Part of the reason some schools are non-performing is because they don’t have adequate federal support in the first place.

So, government imposes mandates, doesn’t fund them and threatens to withdraw what little support it does offer if states and municipalities don’t fully comply.

If that’s the Bush administration’s tactic for education, will it follow the same pattern when it comes to emergency response? Will Uncle Sam really require more training and better equipment for national security purposes, promise funding and then apologize when it can’t spare the dollars?

Apparently so.

And how is that protecting us?
jmeyer@sunjournal.com

Copy the Story Link