top of page

Florida and South Dakota Decline Millions in Federal Funding for Cybersecurity

In a surprising turn of events, the states of Florida and South Dakota have rejected millions of dollars in federal funding aimed at bolstering their cybersecurity infrastructure. As the only states in the United States to refuse this funding, their decisions have sparked heated debates about the significance of this move. In this blog post, we will delve into the reasons behind their decisions, explore the potential ramifications, and evaluate whether this marks a groundbreaking shift or a missed opportunity.

Late last year, the federal government set aside a $1 billion grant for state, local, and territorial governments to fortify their cybersecurity defenses against the rising tide of cyber threats. This substantial amount of funding was aimed at empowering governments to enhance their cyber staff and infrastructure, enabling them to combat cybercrime effectively.

In the case of Florida, their decision to reject the federal funding was motivated by several factors. Firstly, the state believed that the requirements of the funding application were invasive and bureaucratic, leading to a sense of dissatisfaction. Secondly, Florida argued that the funding was unnecessary as they had already implemented their own $30 million grant program, specifically aimed at strengthening cybersecurity capabilities at the local government level. Additionally, Florida had allocated funds for cybersecurity training, increased pay for cybersecurity personnel, and conducted a risk assessment of critical infrastructure.

Similarly, South Dakota declined the federal funding based on administrative burdens and the temporary nature of the funding structure. The state had already allocated $30 million to establish a cybersecurity applied research lab at Dakota State University. Like Florida, South Dakota believed that the federal funding imposed significant administrative requirements that could be better avoided. They preferred a more long-term approach to cybersecurity investment.

The decisions of Florida and South Dakota have raised questions about the significance and impact of declining federal funding for cybersecurity. On one hand, these states may be viewed as pioneers, taking bold strides in asserting their independence and finding alternative means to address cybersecurity challenges. By implementing their own grant programs and strategic initiatives, they demonstrate a commitment to tailoring solutions to their specific needs.

However, critics argue that rejecting federal funding might have unintended consequences. With cyber threats evolving at an alarming pace, the need for robust cybersecurity measures across the country is more critical than ever. By declining significant financial assistance, Florida and South Dakota risk potential vulnerabilities that could have been mitigated with additional resources. Moreover, concerns arise regarding the potential disparities in cybersecurity capabilities between states that accepted the funding and those that did not.

The decisions made by Florida and South Dakota to turn down federal funding for cybersecurity have sparked a lively debate within the cybersecurity community. While some view their actions as a step towards self-reliance and tailored solutions, others question the wisdom of forgoing substantial financial assistance in the face of evolving cyber threats. As technology continues to advance, it is crucial for states to find the right balance between independence and collaboration to ensure the security of their citizens and critical infrastructure.


1. "Florida, South Dakota Reject Millions in Federal Funding for Cybersecurity Issues." MSSP Alert, 2022. (

2. "Federal Grant Programs for State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial Governments." Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), 2022. (

3. "Congress Approves Massive Cybersecurity Funding for State, Local Governments." The Hill, 2021. (

4. "Florida's Efforts to Strengthen Cybersecurity." Florida Department of State, 2022. (



bottom of page