|
|
July 30, 2004/Av 5 5764, Vol. 56, No. 45
Homeland insecurity
JONATHAN FRIENDLY
Jewish Renaissance Media
A proposed federal program to provide security aid to nonprofit agencies deemed to be at high risk of terrorist attack is making its way through Congress.
It is a misdirected response to a hypo-thetical problem - a piece of legislation that may allow some interest groups to claim they have done their best, but unlikely deter dedicated troublemakers.
In allowing direct aid to sectarian institutions, it also would breach the wall between government and religion.
The argument for the measure is that houses of worship, museums, concert halls and hospitals are likely targets, and that the costs of security improvements would cut into their budgets for serving the public. The organizations backing the legislation include the United Jewish Communities, the American Jewish Committee and the American Jewish Congress, along with lobbyists for museums, orchestras, theaters and the YMCA.
There is no question that museums, symphony halls and synagogues are potential targets - but no more so than oil refineries, subways and government buildings. Terrorism strikes in unexpected ways and at innocent places - a nightclub in Bali, a Navy destroyer, an American embassy. Concrete barriers around New York's Lincoln Center or metal detectors in a synagogue would simply force the attackers to strike elsewhere - a bus station, a Home Depot or a multiplex.
The bill would earmark $100 million a year in direct funding by the Department of Homeland Security help to organizations demonstrating "a high risk of terrorist attack" based on specific threats, prior attacks against similar organizations, and vulnerability and symbolic value of the site. The department could also make up to $250 million available for long-term loans for security enhancements.
The money would cover just a tiny fraction of the tens of thousands of institutions that could be eligible, nationwide. Security would be better served by allocating the money to local governments to strengthen their security plans the most critical needs of synagogues and other places of worship along with other potential targets.
The most dangerous part of the legislation, which cleared a Senate committee last week, is that it opens the door for direct federal aid to religious institutions. Public officials would have to decide which among competing houses of worship to fund, and that amounts inevitably to government establishment of religion. In our system, the synagogue must not be deemed more important than the Baptist meeting hall or the Catholic cathedral.
Senators Carl Levin of Michigan and Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey are on the right track in trying to block money to houses of worship. Terrorism aims to threaten our institutions and values. But appropriate oversight of how to protect them is just as important.
Jonathan Friendly is a contributing editor at Jewish Renaissance Media.
|
|
