Homeland insecurities

We believe there are three pressing issues the federal government must address to help secure America over the next few months. The election season will be rife with potential targets, and our ongoing war on terror will require much-needed definition and assistance. \nFirst, President Bush must swiftly nominate a new, permanent director for the Central Intelligence Agency. Having only an acting director over the next few months in this tumultuous time is unacceptable.\nWe don't mean to suggest that the subsequent approval and confirmation of this new director should be correspondingly swift. Certainly the future nominee's qualifications, credentials and proposals are topics for a healthy debate. \nWe believe it is imperative that this new director have reform on the mind. He or she should not arrive at the office on day one with a Cold War mentality. \nSecondly, Congress must approve the fiscal year 2005 homeland security appropriations bill. The bill, which will fund the Homeland Security Department from this October until next September, has passed the House of Representatives and must be considered for passage in the Senate.\nThe Senate, however, has shamefully devoted the majority of its time over the past few weeks to "urgent" legislation, like reforming class action lawsuits and creating a constitutional amendment that would define marriage (and, as far as we can tell, neither of these have anything to do with actually protecting our citizens from serious harm). \nHomeland security is underfunded and poorly managed. The current formula for most anti-terror grants -- grants which give each state a flat amount and then extra money based on population -- are grossly lopsided between high- and low-risk areas. Highlighted by New York mayor Michael Bloomberg at the 9-11 Commission heartings, per capita spending for New York is roughly $5.47 per New Yorker, whereas per capita spending for Wyoming is roughly $38.30 per Wyomingite.\nThirdly, the government must turn a serious amount of attention toward election security. There are many instances over the next few months of political campaigning that could be considered potential targets: the Democratic and Republican conventions, in Boston and New York, respectively, and the presidential debates, taking place this election cycle in large cities like St. Louis, Miami and Cleveland, Ohio. \nWe must also turn our attention to homeland security for the fast-approaching Nov. 2 election itself. Terrorist bombings in Spain, just days before the country's national election in March, were widely credited with altering the outcome of the contest. \nWe simply cannot tolerate allowing Americans to feel the least bit intimidated about casting a ballot or influenced by threats of violence not to vote their consciences. Election Day is the bedrock foundation of our democracy, something we must preserve and protect.\nWe must plan for the worst. It is the only way we can provide the best to our citizens. The government must address these common-sense concerns not only to make Americans feel safer but also to make us safer.\nThe IDS Editorial Board voted 11-0 on this issue.