The U.S. House on Monday passed a bill that would authorize the use of certain federal grants for improving medical responses to a chemical or biological strike.
“Experts have repeatedly noted that the threat of a WMD attack is real,” said Representative Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.), the bill sponsor, in released comments. “We must take steps now to ensure the necessary emergency plans, medication and equipment are available to protect the public, including first responders, in the event of an incident.”
The Medical Preparedness Allowable Use Act modifies the 2002 Homeland Security Act by specifying permission to use Urban Area Security Initiative and State Homeland Security Grant Program funding for improving medical surge capacity and public health procedures, “including the development and maintenance of an initial pharmaceutical stockpile.” That is to include “medical kits and diagnostics sufficient to protect first responders, their families, immediate victims, and vulnerable populations from a chemical or biological event,” the proposed modification states.
The legislation awaits consideration in the Senate.
A major past source of grants for improving local and state medical readiness to responding to a biological or chemical incident — the Health and Human Services Department — in recent years has reduced substantially the amount of funding it hands out, according to a 2012 Aspen Institute report ordered by the Homeland Security Department. The cuts in HHS funding have resulted in the “negation of much of the progress made since 9/11 and degradation of capabilities through the National Disaster Medical System,” the Aspen study said.
The Urban Area Security Initiative is aimed at improving the readiness of high-density metropolitan areas to respond to any potential terror attack. The State Homeland Security Program provides assistance to state government efforts in implementing terrorism-response plans and improving readiness levels. The Homeland Security Department’s Federal Emergency Management Agency administers both programs.
- 1 High Court Vacancy Spells Trouble for Congress
- 2 Why Four Justices Were Against the Supreme Court’s Huge Gay-Marriage Decision
- 3 The Winners and Losers From the South Carolina Republican Debate
- 4 Can Obama Unilaterally Raise the Minimum Wage?
- 5 FBI’s Facial-Recognition Technology Has Achieved ‘Full Operational Capability’
What We're Following See More »
Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”
“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.