Chuck Schumer: “we had the high-needs formula, which really didn't do justice to the areas that had the highest needs. We came up with…”

“we had the high-needs formula, which really didn't do justice to the areas that had the highest needs. We came up with this high-needs formula. Frankly, the first year it worked quite well and quite fairly. The bottom line is that, of the high-needs allocation the first year, which I believe was $700 million, New York City, the city that has been the focus of both terrorist attacks, received $225 million. While still on a per capita basis, we were not getting what we thought was a fair share, it certainly came a lot closer. But what has happened is two things. First, on the high-needs formula, other localities came in and asked for money. They said they are a high-needs area. The number of cities last year that were under the high-needs rubric expanded. The first year it was a handful, the next year it was 30, and last year it was 50. So now lots of localities are competing for this high-needs money. That is fine. I am not one to begrudge that. I think we are not doing enough on homeland security, and this is one place we should be spending more dollars. We are not trying to take away money from the high-needs area. I remind my colleagues that the amendment we are offering will apply to a larger number of cities than first proposed. But the bottom line is very simple; that is, once the high-needs funding was spread among many cities, the cities of the greatest need, such as New York and Washington, did not get the dollars they needed.”