Editorial: Federal security funding to be cut

Thursday, Jan. 5, 2006 | 7:31 a.m.

Las Vegas -- a destination that five of the Sept. 11 hijackers visited before their 2001 terrorist attacks -- has been cut from the Homeland Security Department's program that awards grants for counterterrorism measures.

Las Vegas was among 11 metropolitan areas deemed less likely than 36 others to face major terrorism threats, and therefore will not be eligible to compete for a chunk of the $765 million in grants set aside for the department's Urban Area Security Initiative. Cities use the grants to prepare for terrorist attacks, natural disasters and health crises.

Homeland Security officials say Las Vegas, which received an $8 million grant in 2005, and the other 10 metropolitan areas dropped from the grant cycle will receive their 2005 amounts this year to sustain and complete programs already started. But they could be dropped from the program entirely in the future.

According to the Associated Press, Sheriff Bill Young said on Tuesday the decision "defies any logic." Twelve of the world's 13 largest hotels are in Las Vegas, which has 1.7 million residents and hosts about 110,000 visitors a night, on average. Nevada Democratic Sen. Harry Reid noted that Las Vegas hosted more New Year's Eve revelers than New York City and added, "I guess they feel (Las Vegas) isn't important enough."

Our city seemed plenty important enough in December 2003 when federal security agents, fearing an attack, demanded that casinos and hotels turn over personal information on tourists. And the road over Hoover Dam still has security checkpoints at each end.

If an internationally visible attack on a symbol of Western capitalism and moral values is what terrorists are after, it is hard to imagine that Las Vegas, the top tourist destination and gambling center of the United States, wouldn't be a potential target.

But in the narrow scope through which Homeland Security officials view the world, Las Vegas is less threatened than Columbus, Ohio, which made the list. Young, in his remarks to the Associated Press, said that "to be removed from that list is a complete slap in the face." We agree. It is also, as Reid said, foolish, shortsighted and wrong.