While not surprising, it is nevertheless discouraging to learn how ineffective federal efforts have been to prepare for another terrorist attack.

Most discouraging, perhaps, is the fact that billions of federal tax dollars have been spent inefficiently or, more accurately, wasted, because politicians and lobbyists have viewed the billions of dollars of homeland security funding as just another piggy bank.

Stories of air-conditioned garbage trucks in New Jersey, bullet-proof vests — for the dogs — in a canine corps in Ohio, Segway electric scooters for bomb squad personnel in California and other questionable expenditures across the nation demonstrate a lack of seriousness when it comes to homeland security grants.

Members of the former 9/11 panel, a bi-partisan group of former politicians and other public officials, issued a final report card on the nation's preparedness for another terrorist attack. The result: mostly failing grades.

Former New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean, chairman of the commission, called it "scandalous" that first responders still cannot talk to one another on the same radio frequency. That technical issue cost lives in the frantic rescue efforts immediately following the 9/11 attacks, and will likely cost lives again. Some reports indicate that Congress is working on legislation dealing with the issue.

The 9/11 Public Discourse Project, the group formed after the dissolution of the formal 9/11 commission, gave a failing grade to congressional allocation of $14 billion in anti-terrorism spending. In what has become, unfortunately, a typical attitude, most people in Congress and around the country have adopted a "pork barrel" approach to homeland security funding. Millions, if not billions, of dollars are being wasted by politicians at all levels of government wanting to bring home their share of the "bacon."

Stories have emerged of small, rural communities receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars of homeland security funds, when it is clear that terrorists could not find the towns on a map. Congress is still fighting over the anti-terrorism funding formula with small or mostly rural state pressing for continued funding while it is clear that more likely targets are larger, more urban areas.

When Wyoming gets more money, per capital, than California, it's clear the funding formula is tied to politics rather than practical, realistic risk assessment.

Congress has been debating a more risk-based formula for funding, but so far no agreement has been reached.

If the 9/11 terrorist attacks were not enough for politicians in Washington, in state capitals and in local communities to set aside parochial interests and pork-barrel greed, then it has to be asked, "What

will

it take for homeland security spending to be taken seriously?"

Homeland security is a massively complicated undertaking and no matter how well it was handled no one could declare the United States safe. But, it is unfortunate that 9/11 follow-up group has had to hand out so many failing grades on America's efforts to improve deterrence and readiness in the face of terrorist attacks.