Sept. 26, 2006
COMMENTARY: The Best Security Money Can Buy
By Dan K. Thomasson
Scripps Howard News Service
Washington, DC (SHNS) -- An incident occurred here the other day that
reveals just how illusory true security can be even in an age of paranoia
where every precaution, no matter how expensive, is taken to ward off the
terrorist who lurks around every corner.
A wild eyed, drug impaired man in an SUV crashed through a police barricade,
dashed up the East Front steps of the U.S. Capitol and led police on a
three-story chase that ended when a civilian employee corralled him and
handed him over to a small army of Capitol policemen. It turned out the man
had a loaded handgun stuck in the waist of his trousers, but thankfully had
made no effort to use it.
Now anyone outside the Beltway might consider this a minor affair that ended
without injury or loss of life, a result that seems increasingly rare at a
time when firearms are nearly as common as pocketknives used to be and even
the tiniest fracas can end in death. The system worked here. Right? Wrong.
That opinion fails to take into account the fact that just since the Sept.
11, 2001, attack on America, U.S. taxpayers have been billed a cool $2
billion to secure the well being of those who represent them in Congress.
That money has been spent to boost the Capitol police force to a whopping
1,600 officers, more than Cleveland and other major American cities, and
armed them with the most modern weapons and surveillance and security
equipment available-- all to protect some 535 members of the House and
Senate and their staffs in a 20-block area, including the Supreme Court and
the Library of Congress.
Yet someone addled by narcotics can drive brazenly through a guarded
construction site entrance -- Congress has been building an underground
visitors center seemingly forever -- rush unimpeded up the Capitol steps and
into the hallowed halls of the national legislature with the alacrity of the
most accomplished lobbyist, trailing Lord only knows how many police
officers until finally subdued by an office worker. Does the name Mack
Sennett come to mind? Perhaps Keystone Kops would be more familiar.
By the way, the police officers omitted in their initial report that an
untrained civilian had literally picked up the culprit and shoved him into
their hands. Who can blame them? When that news emerged, the already furious
-- and probably somewhat frightened -- senators and representatives became
almost apoplectic. After all, it hadn't been that long since a crazed man
led police on a similar but more deadly chase through the Capitol, killing
two police officers.
The most notoriety the force has had in the previous year or so has come
from its altercations, not with those who threaten security, but those who
it is supposed to protect. A guard failed to recognize a longtime member of
Congress who had forgotten her identity badge, and then skirted security
anyway, setting off a scuffle for which she later apologized. Rep. Patrick
Kennedy, son of Sen. Edward Kennedy, was taken into custody briefly for
impairment after he drove his car into a barrier. Older officers drove him
home, infuriating some of the force's younger members who seemed to believe
their integrity had been compromised.
In this latest incident it turns out that the culprit entered a Capitol door
that had been left unguarded despite warnings and that the police SUV that
was supposed to be preventing access to the grounds through the construction
site was turned the wrong way. It was not positioned across the entrance but
perpendicular to it so that the man's truck just sideswiped it out of the
way.
Well, so much for professionalism. Where's Barney Fife when we need him?
In the old days, the Capitol force was a patronage haven whose officers were
supposed to be as inconspicuous as possible. Their first responsibility was
not to offend the hundreds of thousands of constituents who tour the Capitol
every year. Security in the legislative chambers and offices in the Capitol
proper was augmented by District of Columbia police. All that changed,
however, long before 9/11. Enhanced security began developing during the
civil unrest of the Vietnam era and a fortune has been spent since just on
limiting vehicle access.
But the old adage about the more things change seems to apply here. If any
true terrorists were watching, they might not need much encouragement. The
incident is likely to bring even tighter restrictions and more expenditure.
There's nothing like standing guard after the door already has been
breached. But then no security is perfect, even the best money can buy.
Dan K. Thomasson is former editor of the Scripps Howard News Service.