Mitre’s skepticism is well founded. On a recent day, this reporter drove straight into the truck lanes of the Port of Baltimore–which U.S. Customs officials say is one of the nation’s best protected–without being stopped, then spent two hours wandering, unnoticed, among stacked shipping containers. “You just happened to pick a day when a lot of our normal people were out,” port spokeswoman Darlene Frank explained.
Two years into the era of “homeland security”–a fairly new concept for Americans–many experts and local officials say the nation remains deeply vulnerable to a domestic attack. Most worrisome, critics say, is the huge gap between the reassurances coming out of Washington and what’s actually happening–or not–on the ground. Efforts like port protection remain grossly underfunded (President Bush dedicated no money at all for seaports in his ‘03 and ‘04 budgets), and U.S. borders disturbingly porous.
True, America is more alert since 9/11. At Customs posts along the northern border, new software from a Reston, Va., company called ObjectVideo automatically detects human movement. Customs, which is now part of Tom Ridge’s vast empire, has also set up inspection sites in 19 major ports abroad in an effort to “move borders out.” But at airports, despite recent federal warnings about shoulder-fired missiles, “we haven’t even secured the perimeters,” says Rep. Bill Pascrell, a member of the Homeland Security committee. “And some 20,000 airport workers still haven’t been screened. The government is doing a worse job than Argenbright was,” Pascrell adds, referring to the airline-security company that once handled most airports but was dismissed after 9/11. Nor do the Feds check up on most truckdriv-ers who pass through ports daily.
Intelligence about the real threats out there also seems as sketchy as it was before 9/11. Ridge told NEWSWEEK that some success so far can be measured in the quiet since the terror and anthrax attacks of nearly two years ago. “We know from [terror suspect] detainees they have at least postponed certain operations because they noted there was security,” he said, refusing to give specifics.
Still, Ridge admits that, even now, the intel he gets is simply not good enough to clue in a particular city or region to a specific threat. Already billions in the red from paying for overtime and new equipment, cities are rebelling against Washington’s demands to deploy more police and emergency officials during high terror alerts. “We get something that says there have been threats against water resources. Does that mean in northeast Ohio? Does it mean in Seattle?” asks Mayor Don Plusquellic of Akron, Ohio. “You cannot cry wolf 99 times and expect the 100th time people will respond.”
Late last week, the Department of Homeland Security issued the latest of about 40 warnings since it came into existence on March 1, pegged this time to the danger of an attack on the 9/11 anniversary. But the department, worried about its eroding credibility, seems determined now to keep the alert level at a low “yellow,” barring a precise and very dire national threat.
Even his critics give Ridge good marks for trying. Cash-strapped, the secretary said the mostly privatized seaports, as well as shippers and airlines, have to think about protecting themselves. “We need to determine whether or not the profit centers of this country are going to be responsible in large measure for their own security,” he said. Ridge has little patience for the chronic complaints from “local responders”–mainly cities–about underfunding. “You would be amazed at how many [federal] dollars they haven’t drawn down yet,” he said. Critics counter that funding has been not just meager but irrational, with low-risk areas getting as much as high-vulnerability zones. Ridge, who last spring said he would reassess each region’s needs on the basis of risk, now admits, “I’m not sure we’re ever going to come up with a formula.” Whether he does or not, the only real test of his efforts is likely to be another terror attack.
