Jump to search Jump to main navigation Jump to main content Jump to footer navigation

Global Security Newswire

Daily News on Nuclear, Biological & Chemical Weapons, Terrorism and Related Issues

Produced by
NationalJournal logo

Federal Funds Have So Far Failed to Improve State Biological Defenses, Report Says

By David McGlinchey

Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Despite federal efforts to pump funding and life into nationwide bioterrorism preparedness programs, state governments have not effectively prepared for a bioterrorism attack, a nonpartisan public health advocacy group announced today (see GSN, Dec. 9).

Only two states — Florida and Illinois — have enough public health workers to distribute strategic vaccine stockpiles in the aftermath of a biological attack, according to the Trust for America’s Health.

Over the past two years, Congress has put almost $2 billion toward biological defenses but states have only marginally improved their readiness, according to the report, Ready or Not? Protecting the Public’s Health in the Age of Bioterrorism. State budget crunches, bureaucratic red tape and a public health workforce crisis are hurting the effort, said trust officials who spoke to reporters today.

“The money is not doing the job,” said Lowell Weicker, the president of the trust’s board of directors and a former U.S. senator and Connecticut governor.

The report uses 10 categories to assess each state’s readiness for a bioterrorist attack. The District of Columbia and 41 states scored a five or lower on the 10-point scale, which measures public health spending, availability of public health personnel and laboratories, bioterrorism planning and information sharing.

California, Florida, Maryland and Tennessee were the most prepared states, each registering a seven on the scale. Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, New Mexico and Wisconsin were the least prepared, with a score of two.

“We are not ready,” Weicker said.

The report also found that 32 states and the District of Columbia reduced public health funding from fiscal 2002 to fiscal 2003. Michigan (a 24-percent cut) and Massachusetts (a 23-percent cut) had the largest reductions.

“At the very time that federal money is going to the states … the majority of them are reducing their own budgets,” said trust Executive Director Shelley Hearne. She said it was disturbing that the cuts came in the midst of an overall push for stronger homeland security.

“We need accountability out there,” according to Hearne. There is, she said, a “lack of transparency and information that is available on what’s happening at the state level.”

Despite the generally negative findings, the report found some progress, according to Hearne. Communications between public health departments has markedly improved and every state has developed a plan to respond to bioterrorism. Even those plans, however, raised some questions.

“These are overarching game plans but are lacking in detail and specificity,” according to Hearne. She said that there is a “huge variability in the quality and detail of those plans.”

“Progress has been made but we have a lot further to go,” Hearne added.

Note to our Readers

GSN ceased publication on July 31, 2014. Its articles and daily issues will remain archived and available on NTI’s website.

NTI Analysis

  • Sub-Saharan Africa 1540 Reporting

    Oct. 20, 2015

    The UNSCR 1540 implementation process in sub-Saharan Africa has been slow. As of October 2011, 26 of the 48 states in the region have submitted 1540 national reports.

  • Latin America and the Caribbean 1540 Reporting

    Oct. 16, 2015

    This report is part of a collection examining implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540, which requires all states to implement measures aimed at preventing non-state actors from acquiring NBC weapons, related materials, and their means of delivery. It details implementation efforts in Central America, South America and the Caribbean to-date.

Country Profile

Flag of United States

United States

This article provides an overview of the United States’ historical and current policies relating to nuclear, chemical, biological and missile proliferation.

Learn More →