Public Divided on Homeland Security

by Phil Leggiere

Thursday, 18 September 2008

Poll shows polarization in public opinion about homeland security. In the plethora of election season polls tracking every twist and turn of the presidential horse race, homeland security issues have been conspicuously absent this year. Partly for the obvious reason that global economic volatility has, at least for now, replaced terrorism as the most immediately pressing concern and anxiety, partly because of the lack of emphasis candidates have placed thus far in sharpening policy differences on homeland security. One poll, however, released this week by Associated Press and GfK Roper Public Affairs & Media , provides an interesting snap-shot of the American public’s current perspectives on the success of current US homeland security policy. Its results, in addition to documenting an America sharply polarized by party, also highlight the challenges the next administration, once the frenzy of the lection season ends, will face in mobilizing the public on counterterror policy. Click here to see poll. In the poll 516 respondents were asked for their opinion about which factors were more or less important in preventing a follow-up terror attack on US soil since 9-11. Although in aggregate 64% of those polled cited actions by the federal government as a major reason the US has not been attacked since 9-11, there was a dramatic divergence between Republican and Democratic respondents. While a vast majority of eighty-nine percent of Republicans agreed the US government’s policies during the Bush administration have been a major reason there's been no follow-up attack, only a very slight majority of fifty-three percent of Democrats believed federal activity has been a primary positive factor. Divergences in perspective on other factors were similarly polarized. For instance, seven out of ten Republicans saw the war in Iraq as a major factor in preventing terror in the US. Only a tiny minority of 20% of Democrats concurred. In fact nearly half, or 47% of Democrats believed the war in Iraq had no positive impact whatsoever on slowing or stopping terror. By contrast less than one in ten, or 8 % of Republicans felt the same way. Even in areas where sentiments were somewhat more convergent significant polarization remained. For example on the question of whether increased public vigilance of American citizens since 9-11 has been a major factor, the percentage difference between the two groups remained wide, 60% for Republicans versus 40% for the Democrats. In addition 54% of Republicans as compared to only 35% of Democrats believed efforts by state and local law enforcement as major deterrents. As striking as the party polarization was in responses, what also stands out in the poll is the wide diversity of perspectives on homeland security policy. When all respondents were aggregated only one factor (US government action) was cited as a major reason for the lack of an attack by a majority of all sources. All other opinions about what was working in counter-terror currently were shared by only a minority of respondents. The poll documents and dramatizes a growing paradox in American political life largely ignored by pundits. Though the American public, liberal or conservative, Democratic or Republican, overwhelmingly support proactive efforts to insure homeland security, in terms of specific policy there’s a gnawing and apparently growing erosion of consensus about the most appropriate means to pursue that end going forward. Re-establishing a workable, and sustainable, consensus in a polarized county needs to be a priority item for the next administration.